exhort all men To keepe themselues from idols this sinne being direct against the honor of God and nothing else but spirituall fornication Let vs therefore see whether the Papists may not be touched with the aforesaid crimes of teaching hereticall and false doctrine and of long continuance in schisme superstition and idolatry That the Papists teach false doctrine and heresie the acts of the conuenticle of Trent of Florence and Constance compared with the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and faith of the auncient fathers will plainely declare For as Tertullian said of old heretikes so may we say of them That their doctrine compared with the Apostolicke doctrine doth by the diuersitie and contrarietie thereof declare that it proceedeth from no Apostle or Apostolicke man Ipsa doctrina eorum cum Apostolica compar at a ex diuersitate contrarietate sua pronunciabit neque Apostoli alicuius autoris esse neque Apostolici saith he The Apostle teackech vs That the Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect They say that the Scriptures are but a péece of the rule of faith and very imperfect without traditions S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. compareth the scriptures of the Prophets to a candle shining in a dark place they teach that scriptures are darke and obscure God commaundeth vs to heare his beloued Sonne Mat. 3. they commaund vs not to heare Christ speaking in scriptures to vs but to heare the Pope and his carolike crue which they endue with the name of the Church The Apostle saith That no other foundation could be laid beside that which is alreadie layd which is Christ Iesus These fellowes say the Church is built vpon the Pope and that he is the foundation of the Church although we find plainely that there was no such Pope for many ages in the Church Christ said Reade the Scriptures these say directly to the vulgar sort reade not Scriptures in vulgar tongs without licence S. Iohn teacheth vs that sinne is whatsoeuer is contrary to the law these teach that many sins there are not repugnant to Gods law viz. such things as are contrary to the Popes law The Apostle Paul saith that concupiscence is sinne these affirme the contrary He saith originall sinne passed ouer al they deny it He saith no man is iustified by the workes of the law they teach flat contrary The law directly prohibiteth the making of grauen images to the end to bow down to them and to worship them These notwithstanding make the images of the holy Trinitie bow downe to them and worship them The Apostle Coloss. 2. speaketh against the worship of Angels They regard him not but in humblenesse of mind inuocate and worship Angels notwithstanding Our Sauior instituting the holy Sacrament of his body and bloud sayd Accipite manducate take and eate and drink ye all of this They say sacrifice and worship and drink not all of this To rehearse all their contradictions to the word of God and to the Apostles doctrine were too long for this short discourse let these therefore serue for an introduction Of their heresies I haue before spoken Pius the fourth hath set forth a new forme of faith of which that may be said which Hilarie speaketh to Constantius Quicquid apud te praeter fidem vnā est perfidia non fides est Whatsoeuer this wicked Pope hath set forth beside the faith of Christ the same is perfidiousnes and not faith Of this qualitie is his doctrine of Romish traditions of superstitious ceremonies of the blasphemous Hasse of purgatorie of indulgences of the fiue new deuised sacraments and such like doctrines That the Papists are by schisme rent from the Catholike and vniuersal Church of Christ it may be proued by diuers particulars First Christs Church hath but one head that is Christ Iesus But the Romish Church hath as many heads as Popes and heads that teach doctrine both diuers and contrary to Christ our sole head Secondly Christ his Church hath no other spouse but Christ Iesus But the adulterous Romish synagogue acknowledgeth the Pope to be her spouse and therefore must needes haue as many spouses as Popes and be not Virgo but Polygama that is one that hath many husbands or spouses Thirdly the Catholike Church is built vpon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ being the corner stone and hath beside this no other foundation But the Romish Church acknowledgeth the Pope to be her foundation Whereupon it followeth that she is sometime without foundation at least during the vacancie of the popedome and hath as many diuers foundations as Popes Fourthly the synagogue of Rome doth acknowledge the Pope to be her law-giuer and iudge that he hath power not onely to bind mens consciences but also to saue and destroy which doth shew that she deuideth her selfe from Christes Catholicke Church which for many ages after Christs time had no such conceit Fifthly the same doth rely no lesse vpon traditions not written and vpon the Popes determinations in matters of faith then vpon the written word of God which the Catholike Church doeth not Sixthly this synagogue consisteth of a Pope and his Cardinals together with a rabble of Monkes Fryers and sacrificing priests But in the prime Catholicke Church there was no such state nor orders of men to be found Finally the members of the Romish synagogue are not onely deuided from the Catholike Church in doctrine sacraments externall gouernement and fellowship but also one frō another the Thomists differing from the Scotists the Monkes from begging Friars the regular orders from secular Priests one Doctor from another and one Pope oft-times from another If then Schismatickes be no true members of the Church as their Doctors teach then are not the Romanists of the Church Againe if they differ from the Catholike Church and among themselues then haue they long continued in Schisme The nature and propertie of superstition doth shew the Papists to be also most superstitious For if it be the nature and propertie of superstition either to giue religious honor and worship to such things as are not capable of it or else to worship God after humane deuises and otherwise then he hath commanded then do they grossely offend in superstitiō But it is most notorious that they grosly offend in both those points For first they inuocate Angels On the feast of Michael the Archangell they say Holy S. Michael defend vs in battell that we perish not in the fearefull iudgement They pray also to the Angell that kéepeth them whom they know not and this adoration of Angels in the Romane Catechisme is allowed if not commaunded Secondly they worship the Virgin Marie and call her the mother of grace and port of saluation Bernardin doth call her the mediatrix betwixt God and vs and the helper of our iustification and saluation They pray vnto her for helpe per amorem vnigeniti filij tui as if Christ were a
without communion and the externall propitiatory sacrifice of the Masse and the hanging vp the Sacrament in the Pire and the diuine adoration giuen to it vpon tradition But all these obseruations are impious and contrary to Scriptures Some traditions are now abolished as the prohibition of Saterdayes fast the rite of standing when we pray betweene Easter and Whitsontide the formes of prayer in old time vsed in celebration of the sacrament of the Lords supper and diuers others whereof some are mentioned by Basil lib. de Spir. san c. 27. Bellarmine also lib. 4. de verbo Dei c. 2. confesseth that some traditions were temporarie But it is impious to say that the holy Scriptures are temporary or at any time to be abolished Diuers traditiōs are no where found but in the Legends Missals and Portesses and such books of smal account and credit as for example the ceremonies rites of the Masse the prayers of the canon the formall adoration of Saints and Angels the incredible narrations of S. Clement S. Nicholas S. Christopher S. George S. Catherine S. Dominicke S. Francis and infinite other Saints which no man may receiue with like affection as he receiueth holy Scriptures but he shall infinitly disgrace the Scriptures and shew him selfe to be no Catholike Furthermore if the Papists build their faith vpon traditions then is their faith humane as hauing no ground but the testimonie of this man and that man that speaketh of traditions Their faith is also most weake and fantasticall as being built vpon the lies reported in Legends and the fantasticall ceremonies contained in the Missall and Breuiary The holy Scriptures are called the old and new testament and the Apostle Ephes. 6. calleth the word of God the sword of the Spirit Writing to Timothy he saith holy scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect and absolute and wise vnto saluation But howsoeuer the blind Papists fauor their traditions yet I hope they will be ashamed to cal their fardle of traditions Gods eternal testament or the sword of the spirit or to say that traditions are able to make the man of God perfect or wise to saluation Finally no holy father did euer make Ecclesiastical traditions not written nor contained in Scriptures but only commended by the Church of Rome or kept by custome or taken vp by fancie and recorded only in humane writings of equall authoritie with canonicall scriptures Infidelitatis argumentum est c. saith Basil It is an argument of infidelity and a most certaine signe of pride if a man wil reiect any thing that is written or bring in any thing not written The like sayint he hath Moral 72. c. 1. 86. 22. Neither is it like that he should speake of traditions repugnant to scriptures as some do answer For euery Christian man knoweth that nothing is to be receiued contrarie to Scriptures and to admonish men of that had bene superfluous Si quid dicatur absque scriptura saith Chrysostome hom in Psal. 95. auditorum cogitatio claudicat nunc annuens nunc hasitans If any thing be spoken without proofe of scripture the mind of the hearers resteth in suspence now yeelding now denying Neither doth he speake onely of a mans owne inuention but also of all other mens reports or deuises without ground of scripture In his thirteenth homily vpon the second Epistle of S. Paul to the Corinthians he calleth Scriptures a most exact rule What néed then haue we of the additions of traditions not written if scriptures be a most exact rule Diabolici spiritus est saith Theophilus lib. 2. paschal aliquid extra scripturarum sacrarum authoritatem putare diuinum It is a signe of a diuellish spirit to thinke that any thing is diuine which is without the authoritie of holy scriptures What reason then hath Bellarmine to call traditions the word of God not written Hierome in his commentaries vpon the 23. of Mathew speaking of a certaine tradition Quod de scripturis authoritatem non habet eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur That which is not confirmed by authoritie of scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned that it is proued And writing vpon the first chap. of the prophet Aggey he saith That the sword of God doth strike all those things which men of their owne accord do find out and feine as it were Apostolicall traditions without the authoritie and testimony of scriptures Ubi de re obscurissima disputatur sayth Augustine lib. 2. de peccatorum merit remiss c. 36. non adiuuantibus diuinarum scripturarum certis clarisque documentis cohibere se debet humana praesumptio nihil faciens in alteram partem declinando Where we contend about some most obscure question there mans presumption ought to stay it selfe declining to neither side if the certaine and cleare documents of scripture helpe vs not The next ground of the late Romish faith is layd vpon the old latine vulgar translation For whosoeuer receiueth not the scriptures as they are contained in the old vulgar latine translation is pronounced accursed by the conuenticle of Trent Againe the same conuenticle purposing to declare what Latine edition or translation of scriptures is authenticall determineth that the old latin vulgar translation shall be authenticall so that no man vpon any pretence dare or may reiect it Vt nemo illam reijcere quouis praetextu audeat vel praesumat Canus in his theologicall common places as he calleth them doubteth not to affirme that the Iewes haue corrupted the Hebrew text of the old testament and this diuers other papisticall writers haue also supposed The glosse vpon the chapter vt veterum dist 9. affirmeth plainely that both Iewes and Greekes haue corrupted the copies of scriptures in those tongues But the old vulgar Latine translation most Papists now bold to be sincere incorrupt and pure and allow as authenticall Bellarmine in his second booke De verbo Dei cap. 2. saith that albeit the scriptures in Hebrew be not altogether corrupted yet they are not sound and pure but haue certaine errors Likewise lib. 2. ca. 7. speaking of the Greeke text of the new Testament he sayth that the same is not sound nor without errors and that it is not safe alwayes to correct the Latine by the Greeke But in the same booke cha 10. with all his force he endeuoreth to defend the old Latine translation as authenticall The which is not onely a plaine declaration of the weaknesse of the Romish faith that is built vpon so corrupt grounds but also of the absurd and vnreasonable procéeding of our aduersaries The prophet cryeth out against the Iewes that forsooke God the fountaine of liuing water and digged to themselues pits or cisternes that could hold no water Is it not then admirable that any should be so blind as to forsake the originall textes of Scripture and to flie to the corrupt cisternes of the Latine vulgar translation Hilary vpon the 118.
they are vncertaine what they shall beleeue But the Pope may both erre in denying Scriptures and adding to Scriptures To answer this the Papists are driuen to affirm that the Pope cannot erre in these determinations But this sheweth the vncertaintie of their faith that dependeth vpon one little rotten goutie Pope whose learning is not worth two chips and whose pietie is lesse then his learning Fourthly if the Popes consignation be necessary to make Papists beleeue Scriptures then is their faith most vncertaine and rather humane then diuine Especially considering that of this Popes consignation of Scriptures there is not one word in Scriptures But that is their doctrine Fiftly the doctrine and practise of the Church of Rome being the rule of faith the Romish faith must néeds proue vncertaine and variable The consequence of this proposttion is proued for that both schoole-men differ from schoole-men and late writers from the auncient and also Popes from Popes as I haue shewed in my bookes De pontif Rom. That the rule of faith is as I haue said it may be auerred by Stapletons words Sixthly if saith be grounded vpon traditions as well as vpon Scriptures then haue the Papists no certaine faith The consequence is plaine for that diuers ancient traditions are new ceased and neither Caesar Baronius nor any man is able to set downe which are authentical traditions which not Finally if the faith of Papists rest vpon the Popes determinations or else vpon the supposed Catholicke Churches decrees then is their faith a goutie fraile and rotten faith or rather a most doubtfull opinion For neither are they certaine who is lawfull Pope nor that his determinations are vnfallible nor is it an easie matter to know which are the Catholicke Churche's determinations the Papists themselues contending and varying continually about them These arguments do shew that the Papists haue either a vaine faith or else no faith at all And this Robert Parsons notwithstanding his obstinacie and peruersenesse must needs confesse For simple Papists haue only these meanes whereby to direct themselues viz. Scriptures Fathers or their owne Priests Scriptures they neither heare read in a tongue knowne nor do they much regard them The Fathers they vnderstand not The priests do often tel lies and too farre they dwell from the Pope to know of him the truth To omit to talke of ruder persons and to talke of spruce Robert Parsons gladly would I know of him how he is assured that the religion he teacheth is true Scriptures he denieth to be the rule of faith and will not beléeue them to be authenticall without the Popes determination The Pope is but one man If then he rely wholy on the Popes determination his faith is nothing but a foolish fancie grounded vpon one man If vpon the Church yet he knoweth not the Church but by his owne reason and sence as I thinke he will confesse Rule of faith he acknowledgeth none but the vniuersall Church which is not onely absurd but maketh much against him Absurd it is for that the Church is ruled and is not the rule no more then the Carpenter is his rule It maketh against him for that it is more difficult to know the Catholicke Church of all times and places then Scriptures or any proofe of faith else For to know that it is necessary to be well seene in the historie of all times Churches and countries And if he refer himselfe to others and beléeue humane histories his faith is still grounded on men This being the case of Papists and of their agent Robert Parsons we may estéeme our selues happie that are deliuered from this great vncertaintie and taught to build our faith vpon Christ Iesus and the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets Other foundation can no man lay beside that which is laid that is Christ Iesus saith the Apostle And Eph. 2. Ye are built saith he vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone We know that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God We beléeue that the Scriptures are a perfect rule and therefore rightly called canonicall The Apostle speaking of the rule of faith 2. Cor. 10. Gal. 6. and Phil. 3. meaneth no other rule but that which was to be found in holy Scriptures The Fathers also procéeded by the rule of Scriptures both where they sought direction for themselues and also where they brought arguments against Heretikes Ireney lib. ◠aduers. Haeres cap. 1. calleth the Gospell deliuered in Scriptures the foundation and pillar of our faith Tertul. writing against Hermogenes saith He abode not in the rule of faith And why Inter Scriptur as enim Dei colores suos inuenire nö potuerat He could not find hi◠colours or fancies in Scriptures Athan. saith Orat. 2. contr Arian that Heretikes are to be stoned with arguments out of Scriptures Out of Scriptures that Arians in the Councell of Nice other Heretikes in other Synods were confuted And generally antiquitie doth call Scriptures the canon or rule of faith Agréeably therefore to Scriptures and Fathers the Church of England in the beginning of Quéene Elizabeths raigne acknowledged the canon of Scriptures and thence tooke the articles of our Christian faith And therefore I call Scriptures and that which is necessarily deduced out of Scriptures the rule of faith not separating the rule from scriptures as Parsons 1. Encontr cap. 15. of his Warn-word doth cauill but in the rule comprehending whatsoeuer is either expressed in termes or by necessarie consequence deduced out of scriptures And this I did to auoide the causls of the aduersary which inferre because this word Trinitie or consubstantiall or baptisme of children is not found in Scriptures that scriptures are not a solide and entire rule of faith Against this Parsons in his Warn-word 1. Encontr c. 15. alleageth first certaine names of Fathers then certaine words out of Ignatius his Epistle ad Phil. Irenaeus lib. 3. 4. aduersus Haeres Tertullian de Praescript aduersus Haeretic and Uincentius Lirinensis But he spendeth his labour in vaine and abuseth his Reader For none of these Fathers speake of other matters then such as are to be proued out of Scriptures as the places themselues shew Ireney by Tradition proueth God to be the Creator and the mysterie of Christ his incarnation But Parsons will not deny this to be contained in Scriptures Tertullian de Praescript aduers. Haeret. disputeth against the heresies of the Valentinians and Marcionites drawing arguments from the Apostles preaching and tradition But that was because they denyed and corrupted Scriptures For no man can deny but that their heresies are clearely conuinced by Scriptures Quod sumus hoc sunt That we are that they are saith Tertullian speaking of Scriptures That is likewise the meaning of Vincentius Lirinensis de Haeres cap. 27. for that depost of which he talketh is nothing but the Christian faith contained in scriptures But if
Parsons will prooue his rule of faith he must shew a faith grounded vpon tradition that is not deduced out of Scriptures Nay if he will not be contrarie to himselfe he must shew that not the Apostles tradition as he saith in his Warn-word 1. Encoun cap. 15. but the Catholike church is the rule of faith as he holdeth Ward-word Encontr pag. 6. He doth also obiect against vs diuers alterations of religion in England in king Henry the eight his raigne and in king Edwards dayes and then asketh by what authoritie our rule of faith was established But first he might as well haue spoken of that alteration made in Q. Maries dayes when the impieties of Popish religiō were established by act of Parliament Secondly the alterations in religion made in England of late time make no variation in the rule of faith that is alwayes one but in the application and vse of it Thirdly albeit by act of Parliament the articles of religion were confirmed wherein the canon of scriptures and the substance of our confession is set downe yet was that rather a declaration of our acceptance then a confirmation of the rule of faith that in it selfe is alwayes immoueable Our rule of faith therefore is certaine albeit not alwaies in one sort approued or receiued by men But that rule of Popish faith neither in it self nor in the approbatiō of Parliaments or Churches is certaine or immoueable Finally he asketh a question of Sir Francis in his Ward-word p. 5. how he knoweth his religion to be true And saith he hath only two meanes to guide himselfe in this case and that is either Scriptures or the preaching of our Ministers But this question as I haue shewed toucheth himselfe that buildeth his faith vpon the Pope nearer then Sir Francis who groundeth himselfe his faith only vpon the holy Scriptures and is assured of his faith not by these two meanes onely but by diuers others For beside Scriptures he hath the help of the Sacraments of the Church of Gods spirit working within him of miracles recorded in scriptures of auncient Fathers of the practise of the Church of the consent of nations of the confession of the aduersaries of the suffering of Martyrs and testimonies of learned men and such like arguments In this question therefore Robert Parsons shewed himselfe to be a silly Frier and to haue had more malice then might In time past also we were as shéepe going astray and out of the vnion of the Catholike and Apostolike Church Diuers of our auncestors worshipped the crosse and the images of the Trinitie with diuine worship Some like bruite beasts fell downe before Idols crept to the crosse and kissed wood and stone Others worshipped Angels the blessed Uirgin and Saints praying vnto them in all their necessities trusting in them saying Masses in their honour and offering incense and prayers to their pictures and images For so they were taught or rather mistaught by popish Priests The Komish synagogue in the very foundations of religion was departed from the Apostolike and Catholike Church The schoolemen brought their proofes out of the Popes Decretals and Aristotles Metaphysickes Est Petr's sedes saith Bellarmine in Praefat ante lib. de Pont. Rom. lapis probatus angularis pretiosus in fundamento fundatus The See of Peter is an approued corner stone precious and laid in the foundation The same man lib. 2. de Pont. Rom. cap. 31. calleth the Pope the foundation of the Church Sanders calleth him the Rocke Alij nunc à Christo saith Stapleton relect princip doctr in Praef. eorúmue doctrina praedicatio determinatio fundamenti apud me locū habebūt That is Others now beside Christ and their doctrine preaching and determination shall be esteemed of me as a foundation This he saith where he talketh of the foundation of religion and the Church But the catholike Churth had no foundation beside Christ Iesus and his holy word and Gospell taught by the Prophets and Apostles The Apostle Gal. 1. denounced him accursed that taught any other Gospell then that which he had preached The holy Fathers proued the faith by holy Scriptures and not by popish Decretals and philosophicall Principles Concerning Christs bodie the Komanists taught that the same is both in heauen and in the Sacrament albeit we neither could see it there nor feele it But the scriptures teach vs that his bodie is both palpable and visible and is now taken vp into heauen So likewise teach the Fathers Vigilius in his fourth booke against Eutyches speaking of Christs bodie When it was on earth saith he surely it was not in heauen and now because it is in heauen certainely it is not on earth They haue also brought in new doctrine concerning Purgatorie and indulgences and which is no more like to the auncient catholike faith then heresie and noueltie to Christian religion They teach that whosoeuer doth not satisfie in this life for the temporall punishment of mortall sinnes committed after baptisme and remitted concerning the guiltinesse must satisfie for the same in Purgatorie vnlesse it please the Pope by his indulgences to release him Of the tormentors of soules in Purgatorie and of the nature qualitie and effect of indulgences they talke idlely and vnlike to the schollers of Catholikes The Catholicke doctrine concerning the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords supper they haue quite changed in Baptisme adding salt spittle hallowed water exorcismes blowings annointings light and other strange ceremonies In the Lords supper taking away the cup from the communicants and not deliuering but hanging vp or carying about the Sacrament and worshipping it as God and finally beleeuing holding transubstantiation They haue also deuised other sacraments and taught that they containe grace and iustisse They were wont to kisse the Popes toe and to receiue his dunghill decrētals worshipping Antichrist and intitling him Christs Uicar All which nouelties superstitions and heresies by her Maiesties godly reformation are abolished who hath restored the auncient Cathalike and Apostolike faith which the Popes of Rome for the most part had altered suppressed She hath also by her authoritie brought vs to the vnitie of the Catholike faith and by good lawes confirmed true Christian religion Before our times there was no settlement in matters of Religion Durand denieth Diuinitie to be Scientia Thomas and Richard Middleton hold that it is Writing vpon the master of Sentences the school-mē striue about the words vti and frui dissenting not only from their master but also from one another They differ also much about the distination of diuine attributes Vtrum sit realis formalis an rationis tantùm This saith Dionysius a Charterhouse Monke is one of the chiefe difficulties of Diuines and about it betweene famous Doctors is great dissention and contention AEgidius doth lance Thomas and others runne vpon both AEgidius in lib. 1. sent dist 2. would haue the persons of the Trinitie to be distinguished by a certaine thing
sheweth himselfe to be past shame to talke against mariage when himselfe was begotten by a filthie priest and his consorts wallow in all beastly abhominations Wherefore let the aduersaries storme and rage as much as they list yet will we say and may say it most truly that both the Church of God and the State hath receiued great blessings by Quéene Elizabeths late happie gouernment And if nothing else yet the vaine opposition of enemies and traitors may perswade vs that it is so For not onely their mislikings do fhew that both the Church and State was well ordered for otherwise they would haue bene better pleased but also their vaine ianglings and contradictions they being not able to obiect any thing which soundeth not to her Maiesties honeur and high commendations confirme the same CHAP. XIII Parsons his cursed talke of cursings of England by chaunge of Religion and gouernment vnder Queene Elizabeth examined THe Prophet Dauid speaking of the foolish and wicked men of his time saith that their throate is an open sepulchre and afterward that their mouth is full of cursing and bitternesse The which we sée verified in the Pope and his impious sect For their throates are wide as the graue and swallow the wealth of Europe They also degorge out of them all the wickednesse and villanie they can deuise against the godly Pius Quintus and Sixtus Quintus accurse the Quéene Robert Parsons following their steppes raileth vpon her in diuers libels In his Warn-word that is a complement of his foolery he sayth We receiued no blessings by her but rather cursings Here therefore we are to answer the barking of this cursed hel-hound and of his accursed companions In the first encounter of his Wardword p. 4. he saith We are deuided from the general body of catholickes in Christendome But this should haue bene proued if he would haue any man to giue him credit For we alleage that the Papists from whom we are deuided are no Catholikes beleeuing the new doctrines of the late conuenticles of Lateran Constance Florence Trent other Friers priests which neither were receiued of all men nor in all times nor in all places which is the true propertie of Catholicke doctrine Next we offer to proue that we are true Catholikes séeing the doctrine of our faith is Apostolicall and vniuersally approued of all true Christians and for the most part confessed by the Papists vntil of late time If then this be a principall curse to be deuided from Catholickes then doth the same fall on Parsons his own head and vpon his trecherous consorts and not vpon vs. Secondly he saith that we of England are deuided from Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinists abroad and from Puritanes Brownists and other like good fellowes at home But this common Iergon of Papists is already answered For neither do we acknowledge the names of Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinists nor can he shew that the Church of England is deuided from the Churches of France Germanie or Suizzerland or that one Church oppugneth another If any priuate man do maintaine priuat opinions in doctrine as diuers Germaines French and English do or else if there be any difference among vs concerning ceremonies and gouernment that doth no more make a schisme in our church then the diuers rites of Spanish French and Italians and diuers opinions in al points of religion betwéen old and new Romish Doctors maketh a schisme in the Romish Church For generally we all agree in substance of faith in rites ceremonies refer euery Church to their libertie In England publikely there is more vniformitie in doctrine prayers ceremonies then in the Romish Church albeit some priuat men whom Parsons vseth to call Puritanes dissent in some points As among the Papists there are diuers that allow not all which they hold commonly But saith he in his Warne-word Encont 1. c. 15. the French Germaines and Scottish do not agrée with the English in the rule of faith as is proued in the foure fiue and sixe and sequent chapters But if he had found any differences he would not haue spared to set them down In the chapters mentioned he sheweth not that we differ in any article of faith or substantiall point of religion but rather in rites ceremonies and some diuers interpretations of some words of Scripture Thirdly he would make his reader beléeue that we haue no certaintie in religion and that as he foole-wisely imagineth because we haue no certaine rule whereby to direct our consciences And this he handleth both in his Wardword 1. Encontr and Warnw. 1. enc c. 15. 16. and other places skipping like an ape vp an downe without rule order or reason But while he talketh of the rule of faith he is direct contrary to himselfe For in his Wardw. p. 6. he sayth that the vniuersal Church was the direct rule and squire which we ought to follow and in the Warnw. Enc. 1. c. 15. nu 10. he teacheth that it is the summe and corpes of Christian doctrine deliuered at the beginning by the miracles and preachings of the Apostles Where I omit to tell Robert Parsons that it is absurd to make the same thing to be a rule and a squire the rule being direct and the squire being square It is also ridiculous though I do not tell him of it to say that Christs doctrine was deliuered by miracles for it was deliuered by writing and preaching and confirmed by miracles But I cannot forbeare to tell him that there is great difference betwéene the Catholike Church and the Catholike doctrine How then can these two make one rule Next he taketh exception to my words where I say that the Church of England hath a certaine rule to follow in matters of faith as if the canon of scriptures and those conclusions which are to be drawne out of them were no certaine rule or else as if traditions that are no where certainly described or set downe were a more certaine and authenticall rule then scriptures and necessary deductions out of them Fourthly he giueth out that we despaire of all certaine rule or meane to trie the truth which is a most desperate and impudent kind of dealing For directly I told him before and now I tell him againe that our rule is most certaine being nothing else but the canonicall Scriptures and the conclusions necessary drawne out of them Nay this rule may in part be confirmed by Parsons his owne confession For if the corps of Christian doctrine preached by the Apostles be the rule of faith as he saith VVarnw 1. encont c. 15. where are we to find it but in holy Scriptures He holdeth percase that it is to be found in the Popes bosome But if he say so in schooles he shal not want a greater plaudit then he had when hauing ended his comicall dealings in Bayliol colledge he was rung and hissed out of the house For who knoweth not that scabs and villany are
and the rocke vpon which the Church is built Bellarmine lib. 2. de pontif Rom. cap. 31. talking of the Popes titles saith that he is called a foundation and that he is fundamentum aedificij Ecclesiae the foundation of the building of the Church In his Preface before his bookes de Pontif. Rom. speaking of these words of Isay Ecce ponam in fundamentis Sion lapidem lapidem probatum angularem saith that these words not vnfitly may be applyed to the Pope as if he were that corner stone that is placed in the foundations of Sion Stapleton likewise in his Preface before the relection of his doctrinall principles affirmeth desperately that God speaketh in the Pope and that the foundation of Christian religion is necessarily placed in his authoritie teaching vs. It was much to say that he was any way the foundation of religion But to make him a necessarie foundation was a greater presumption then I find in his fellows His words are these In hac docentis hominis authoritate in qua Deum loquentem audimus religionis nostrae cognoscendae fundamentum necessariò poni cernimus Neither can any of them well deny but that the Pope is the rocke vpon which the Church is built and against which the gates of hell cannot preuaile séeing generally they proue the Popes authoritie out of Christs words to Peter Mat. 16. For if these words be not meant of the Pope but of Christ whom Peter confessed then are they fondly alleaged for iustification of the Popes authoritie In summe all their practise sheweth that the Pope to them is summa summarum and the corner stone and chiefe foundation of the popish Church For alleage Scriptures they quarrell about the interpretation and admit no sence but that which the Pope alloweth although his glosses and interpretations be neuer so contrarie to the text Againe alleage Councels they enquire if the Pope haue allowed them Alleage Fathers speaking against the Pope they reiect them But alleage the Popes determination there they stop like restie iades and will not be drawne further So the Pope and his resolutions are the foundations nay they are all in all with Papists But this is not onely contrarie to the words of Scripture Isay 8. and 28. Mat. 16. and 1. Cor. 3. and Ephes. 2. where Christ is made the corner stone and sole foundation of the Church but also contrarie to all Fathers and good interpreters of Scriptures The same is also most absurd and contrarie to reason For first if the Pope were the foundation of the Church then should there be as many foundations as Popes Secondly the Church should be built vpon foundations diuers from Christ. Thirdly the foundations of the Church should differ one from another one Pope centradicting and crossing another Fourthly the Popes being sometimes reprobates and damned hell should preuaile against the foundation of the Church which is most absurd Fiftly the Church during the vacation should be without foundatiō and a woman being Pope the Church should be built vpon a woman Finally the Church should be built vpon men subiect to infirmities errors and mutations and not vpon Christ Iesus the vnmoueable rocke The Conuenticle of Trent talking of the bookes of the old and new Testament and of traditions as well concerning faith as manners doth receiue both with equall affection and reuerence as it were either deliuered vnto vs either by the mouth of Christ or by the holy Ghost and kept by continual succession in the Catholike church Omnes libros tam veteris quà m noui testamenti cùm vtriusque vnus Deus sit author nec non traditiones ipsas tum ad fidem tum ad mores pertinentes tanquam vel ore tenus à Christo vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatas continua successione in Ecclesia catholica conseruatus pari pietatis affectis ac reuerentia suscipit ac veneratur Those likewise among the Papists that procéede Doctors or take any degrée in schooles do professe that they most firmely admit and embrace the traditions of the Apostles and the Church and other ecclesiasticall obseruances and constitutions Apostolicas ecclesiasticas traditiones reliquasque eiusdem Ecclesiae obseruationes constitutiones firmissimè admitto saith euery one of them Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 1. beginning to speake of traditions hitherto saith he we haue disputed of the written word of God now we will begin to speake briefly of the word of God not written accompting traditions to be the word of God as well as holy scriptures Aliud hodie religionis Christianae fundamentum saith Stapleton habemus non quidem à Christo aliud sed ab ipsis literis Euangelicis Apostolicis aliud That is we haue now another foundation of Christian religion not diuers from Christ but diuers from the Euangelicall and Apostolical scriptures So either he excludeth scriptures from being the ground of Christian religion or else maketh vnwritten traditions equall vnto them Afterward in his Analysis prefixed before his Doctrinall principles deliuering to his disciples the grounds of Christian religion he vouchsafeth the scriptures no place among them But first if by the books of the old testament they vnderstand all the bookes contained in the old latine vulgar translation of the Bible then they admit the third and fourth bookes of Esdras and all additions to the originall text to be canoniall scriptures which contradicteth their owne decrées concerning the canon of Scriptures Secondly it is absurd to make vnwritten traditions equall with the holy Scriptures For these are certainly knowne to procéed from God But of vnwritten traditions the aduersaries can bring no proofe but from men Now who is so presumptuous as to match the testimonies of men with the word of God Augustine in his 48. epistle to Vincentius speaking of the fathers writings saith they are to be distinguished from the authoritie of the canon And in his eight epistle which is to Hierome he saith that vnto the Scriptures alone this prerogatiue is to be giuen that none of them containeth any errors All other authors he wold haue censured and examined by them being not free from errours The holy Scriptures are alwayes consonant and agréeable to themselues But traditions do not onely contradict one another but also are repugnant to holy Scriptures Polycrates as Eusebius lib. 5. Eccles. hist. c. 23. reporteth maintained the obseruance of the feast of Easter according to the practise of the Churches of Asia to be according to the Apostles traditions Victor and the Church of Rome thought contrary Some maintained the fast vpon the Sabbath others denied it and both held by tradition Siue hodiè Christus natus est c. whether Christ was borne or baptized as this day saith Hicrome serm de nat to 3. there is a diuers opinion in the world and according to the diuersitie of traditions there are diuers iudgements The Romanists do found their communion vnder one kind and their Masses
do euery where vse this word Minister of Christ or minister of the Gospell in good part as for example in these words Rom. 15. That I should be the Minister of Iesus Christ towards the Gentiles And 1. Cor. 3. VVho is Paul then and who is Apollo but the Ministers by whom ye beleeued And 2. Cor. 11. They are the Ministers of Christ. And Col. 1. He is a faithfull Minister of Christ. Is he not then an impious fellow doth he not declare himself the slaue of Satan that euery where vseth this word in scorne and contempt saying sir minister the minister insolent minister and giuing out that a true minister and false minister is all one to him In his answer to my Epistle speaking of my request to haue Creswell to answer he alludeth to Christs words Mat. 20. Mar. 10. where answering the sonnes of Zebedey he sayth Nescitis quid petatis For making himselfe Christ and me one of the sons of Zebedey he sayth Nescis quid petis So shamelesse he is in taking vpon him the person of Christ abusing Christs words to his scornefull purpose He should therfore rather haue made himself a beare ward his seditious schollers beare-whelpes Creswel the crier of the game In the end of his wild obseruations vpon my Preface he obiecteth preaching vnto me where in great reproch he calleth me preaching Deane Yet the Apestle Rom. 16. and 1. Cor. 1. teacheth vs that preaching is the meanes to reueale the Gospell and to bring men to Christ. It is no maruell therefore if this limbe of Antichrist do hate preaching by which men are brought from Antichrist to Christ desiring nothing more then to kéepe his countrimen in darknes and to reduce them backe into Egypt Fol. 22. he iesteth at Sir Francis Hastings saith He doth imitate the spirit of some hidden prophet But what is more impious then to vse the name of a prophet of Gods holy spirit to make vp a iest He professeth that he handleth controuersies of religion and yet fol. 33. b. he calleth his dispute an Enterlude Do you then thinke that this man deserueth credit that of a Masse-priest and Iebusite is now become a Comedian séemeth to make a iest of religion Eusebius liked not the Gentiles that in their Theaters made sport with matters of Christian religion What then may we think of this counterfet Christian but that he is worse then the Gentiles Fol. 29. he defendeth Panormitan and Hostiensis that affirme that Christ and the Pope haue but one consistory and that the Pope can as it were do all things that Christ can do except sinne But therein he professeth his owne impietie rather thē excuseth theirs For who doth not acknowledge it to be a matter impious to compare a man to Christ in all things except one and to make Christ the author of the Popes sentences and iudgements Likewise it is impious to defend the Glosse that sayth Dominus Deus noster Papa c. cum inter extr Io. 2◠de verb. signif as doth Parsons Nay he goeth about to face down Sir Francis that doth reprehend it Neither is it materiall that the name of God is giuen sometime to creatures For that is by a similitude and not absolutely nor properly Fol. 38. he defendeth Steuchus and Pope Nicholas that say that Constantine called the Pope God and held him for God which was neuer vttered by Constantine nor can be spoken without blasphemie Fol. 40. he maintaineth the words of Cusanus that sayd that the iudgement of God changed But S. Iames saith Apud Deum non est transmutatio there is no change with God This was also an opinion of the Arrians Dei verbum posse mutari that the sonne of God which is the eternall word may be changed as Athanasius testifieth decret Nicen. synod contr Arrian Furthermore it is blasphemous as hée holdeth with Cusanus to say that Gods institution in the sacrament may be changed Fol. 42. he saith Sir Francis cometh out with a decalogue of blessings answering perhaps to the ten Commaundements for whose obseruation the Iewes haue many blessings promised founding a scurrilous iest vpon the ten Commaundements and emplying that among Christians there is no such reward for performance of the law as among the Iewes Fol. 45. he placeth Trinitarians among heretikes as if it were heresie to beléeue in the holy Trinity Fol. 60. and 61. he beareth his reader in hand that reading of scriptures in tongues vnderstood is cause that men fall into heresies direct contrary to the doctrine of our Sauior Search the scripture saith he for in them ye thinke to haue eternall life Thus he blasphemeth the sacred word of God with his impure mouth Fol. 79. he maketh a iest of the words of our Sauiour Matth. 5. where he saith Our clergy may sing beati pauperes spiritu This I say is mere impiety For so should he sing too if he were of an Atheist and had forgotten that these are Christs words Fol. 81. he maketh sport with words of Scripture comparing Cadburie to the ruines of Hierusalem and yet this fellow is estéemed a worthy patron of poperie such a patron such a cause Fol. 101. he denyeth scriptures to be the rule of faith which is as much as if he meant either impiously to ouerthrow the canon of scriptures or else to preferre vncertaine traditions before them 2. enconter c. 5. fol. 32. 6. he compareth reading of scriptures to excesse of apparrell spending much and playing at dice like a cheating companion drawing similitudes from his owne practise to disgrace the word of God Chap. 6. encontr 2. he will not confesse his errour that sayd before Wardw. p. 14. that the words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. make against reading of scriptures Who can denie saith he but Saint Paul talking of scriptures as they were in the learned tongues saith of them litera occidit But to accuse men for reading of scriptures is impious and sauoreth of the error of the Origenists and Swenchfeldians errour that condemne the letter of the Scriptures Neither can he excuse himselfe saying that he meant rash reading For the Apostle where he saith that the letter killeth talketh not of reading but of the effect that the scriptures worke in mens harts shewing that the letter condemneth those which by grace are not moued effectually to embrace the word Chap. 11. encontr 2. most blasphemously he compareth Christs miracles to the miracles of Thomas Becket and his lying legend to the scriptures For which he deserueth to be marked as a miraculous blasphemer In the same place he saith that materiall honour in worshipping saints hurteth not the deuout nor diminisheth their merit Which is as much as if he should say that those that worship theeues and malefactors as saints offend not but rather merit with God And that men may worship they know not whom nor what Fol. 99. he maintaineth a blasphemous prayer wherein papists desire
certaintie of faith by his owne reading or by the credite of some others we may aske his friarship likewise or because he is but a doogeon dunce of the Pope who is as it were an oracle of Papists the same question And if he answer that he hath it by his owne reading then we shall much wonder at his impudencie For Parsons knoweth that Popes reade litle or nothing and for the most part are ignorant of schoole diuinitie If he say his Popeship hath it by the vertue of his close stool then is the same but filthy learning especially the Pope being laxatine as was Gregory the fourteenth If he say he haue it from his Masse-priests and friars then are they more certaine oracles then he and this learning must come from the tayles of friars and not from the head of the church Parsons therefore to cleare this doubt fol. 110. saith That they do not depend on the Pope as a priuate man but as he is head and chiefe pastor of Christs vniuersal Church He saith also That his rudenesse is turned into wisedome But that the Pope is the head of Christs vniuersall Church is the thing in question That a man should be a sot as he is a priuate man and wise as he is a publike person is ridiculous That he is made wise and learned being made Pope is most false So it appeareth Parsons is ensnared in his owne question and must confesse that the faith of papists is nothing else but the Popes priuate fancie and grounded on the Popes chaire and most absurd and sottish which can not be obiected to vs séeing we ground our selues vpon the Apostles and Prophets who in matters of faith saluation speake plainely and alwayes the same things most constantly In his first encounter chap 15. he spendeth much talke about the rule of faith But most of his words are direct contrary both to himselfe and to his holy fathers profite For in the Wardword page 6. he said the vniuersal Church was the squire and pole-star which euery one was to follow confounding like an ideot the thing ruled with the rule In the Warneword fol. 100. he saith the summe and corpes of Christian doctrine deliuered at the beginning by the miracles preachings of the Apostles is the rule of faith Which is contrary to the Popes profit For if this be true then vnlesse the Popes determinations and traditions ecclesiastical were preached by the Apostles and confirmed by mracles they are to be excluded from being the rule of faith Parsons therefore is like to those which dig pits for others but fall into them themselues He hath prepared weapons for vs but like a mad sot hath hurt himselfe with the same Finally Captaine Cowbucke like a noble woodcocke is caught in his owne springes CHAP. IX A catalogue of certaine principall lies vttered by Robert Parsons in his late Warne-word THe Spirit of God as the Apostle sayth speaketh euidently that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith and shall giue heed vnto spirits of errour and doctrines of diuels which speake lyes through hypocrisie and haue their consciences burned with a hote yron Which prophecy as in other heretikes so especially in the Papists we may sée most plainely and euidently to be fulfilled For they departing from the auncient and Catholike faith taught by the holy Apostles and Prophets and recorded in holy Scriptures haue giuen héed to spirits of error and beléeued the trash of vnwritten traditions and lying legends and therupon haue founded their prohibitions of certaine meates and mariages and such like doctrines of diuels confirming their opinions with grosse lies vttered with seared consciences and brazen faces contrary to all shew of truth They take to themselues the name of doctors and fathers but are false teachers and vnkind traitors And as Theodoret saith of certaine heretikes Christianorum sibi appellatione imposita apertè docent contraria Calling themselues Christians or Catholikes they openly teach contrary I could specifie it by Caesar Baronius and Bellarmine by Sanders Stapleton and diuers other principall authors of the popish sect But I will not match any man of note with so notorious a dolt and so base a swad as Robert Parsons is of whom we are now to speake though not much to his commendation The onely example of Parsons and that in one of his fardles of lies which we are now to rip vp shall shew them to be notorious and bold lyers The diuellish and erronious doctrine of friars we haue touched before and shall haue often occasion to mention In the front of his booke he promiseth the issue of three former treatises and in the second page talketh of eight encounters But he falsifieth his promise and lieth grossely For of the thrée former treatises he toucheth onely two chapters and of eight encounters entreth onely vpon two Further he declineth the true issue of matters and runneth bias like a warped bowle of dudgeon into impertinent idle questions Doth he not therfore as Hierom saith of one make shipwwracke in the port In his Epistle to the Reader taking vpon him to deliuer the summe of the controuersie betwixt him and vs he wracketh himselfe likewise thinking to wreake his malice vpon vs and beginneth with a grosse lie There hapned saith he some few yeares past he noteth 1599. in the margent as often also before a certaine false alarme of a Spanish inuasion then said to be vpon the seas towards England Where I néed not to note the idiotisme of Parsons speech that talketh of a Spanish inuasion vpon the sea towards England being ellewhere noted but only I wil touch his impudencie in lying and dcnying that about this time the Spaniards were ready with forces at the Groyne for the inuasion of England And the rather for that this was the occasion that moued Sir Francis Hastings to giue warning to his countrey and also because the same sheweth that Parsons is very sorie that any man is acquainted with the desscines of the Spanish Ring and that he could not take vs sleeping and so closcly and priuiliy cut his countrimens throtes I say then it is a lie most notorious to affirme that the alarme giuen vpon occasion of the Spanish preparations anno 1598. for an inuasion of some part of England was false And proue it first by the words of the Ring who recouering out of a trance and comming to himself asked if the Adelantado were gone for England Secondly by the prouisions of ships and men made at the Groync and Lisbone and which coming thence shaped their course for England albeit they were by wether beaten back Thirdly by the testimony of one Leake a Masse priest that was dealt with all to come for England Fourthly by the testimonie of the Secular priests in their reply to Parsons his libell fol. 65. sequent who direaly charge Parsons to be a solicitor of these pretended attempts anno 1598. Fiftly by Parsons his
would not haue touched any matter of noueltie or absurditie For therein he giueth his aduersaries iust occasion not onely to iustifie their religion to be most ancient and consonant to holy scriptures but also to declare his popish religion refused by vs to be a packe of nouelties and a masse of grosse absurdities For who knoweth not that the Romish Church consisting of a triple-crowned and crosse-slippard Pope with his guard of Suizzers a consistory of purple Cardinals that hath neare affinitie to the purple whore of Babylon a rabble of rakehellike masse-priests filthy monkes friars and nunnes with a people worshipping idols and beléeuing the decretaliue doctrine of Popes and the decrées of Trent is new and neuer séene before vntill of late Who doeth not vnderstand that both the grounds of popery the doctrine thereon built is new For neither can K. shew that the auncient Church was founded vpon the Pope and his decretals or vpon traditions allowed by the Church of Rome or that the Church was tied to such senses of scriptures as the Romish Church alloweth or bound to follow the old Latine translation of the Bible Neither can he proue either out of fathers or ancient writers that Christs true body is both in heauen and earth and in euery pixe at one and the same time or that his body is inuisible or impalpable or that there are iust seuen sacraments and neither more nor lesse and that Christians receiue Christs flesh with their téeth and mouth or that the Pope is the head and spouse of the Church or that he hath two swords or that any images are to be worshipped with latria or that diuels torment soules in purgatory or that the Popes indulgences deliuer soules frō those torments or such like points of popery Now what I pray you is more absurd then to beléeue that a man can eate himself as the Massė-priests say Christ did at his last Supper nay that a dogge or a hogge can eate Christs body or that a spider can be drowned in his bloud which saueth all destroyeth none that can receiue it Againe what is more senselesse then to adore crosses and dumbe images which neither see nor heare nor moue and whose honor is not séene or knowne of those saints to whō they belong for ought we know Thirdly what is more inconuenient then to make a blind Pope that is ignorant of all matters of religion for the most part supreme iudge of controuersies of religion Can blind men iudge of colours or ignorant atheists of religion Fourthly what is more blasphemous then to teach that the Scriptures to vs are not authenticall vnlesse the Pope consigne them vnto vs Shall not truth be truth vnlesse it please the Pope to say it Finally seeing faith ought to be most certaine and built vpon grounds most certaine the popish religion must néedes be an absurd faith and a false religion that is built vpon traditions as well as Scriptures of which traditions the papists can yéeld no certaine proofe but are driuen to alleage either lying legends or old motheaten missals or vncertain customes It were an easie thing to alleage infinite such like absurdities of which this surueying K. hath very foolishly offered vs occasion to discourse at large He doeth also very simply talke of the sacrifice of the Masse Suruey li. 4. c. 2. For if Papists say truly that Christs body and blood is really offered in the Masse and that euery externall sacrifice requireth a reall destruction then it followeth that these masse-mongers do really destroy Christs body and blood Bellarmine lib. 1. de missa c. 2. sayth that an externall sacrifice doth require a reall destruction Requirit realem destructionem Was then this fellow wise trow you to talke of this braue sacrifice Further do we thinke him wise that in a booke offered to the king doth rayle on the kings religion saying That it leadeth vnto atheisme Finally it is a note of desperate folly to affirme That our religion leadeth to Atheisme for want of a Pope or for want of the Popish masse or sacrifice The contrary hereof rather is to be gathered against the Popish religion wherein as we may collect out of the aduersaries owne confession in c. si Papa dist 40. the Pope may lead with him thousands of soules into hell The masse also is a masse and sinke of superstition and idolatry Neither is any thing more repugnant to Christs only sacrifice then the priesthood and sacrifice of the masse Modesty he sheweth none with a face as hard as a lopster affirming That we teach that God is the author of sin That we despoyle Christ of his diuinitie That we wrong him in his office of redemption and bereaue him of his title of lawgiuer and priest And doubt not to say that Christ dispaired Now what greater impudency can be imagined then to ascribe that to vs which we vtterly deny and disclaime Nay we pronounce him accursed whosoeuer shall hold any of these points But the Papists in some things rub very néere vpō these rocks namely where they giue to euery man power to satisfie for the temporall paine of his sins and yéeld that others beside Christ may be called redéemers and make the Pope a law-giuer able to bind mens consciences and giue power to the priest to intercede for Christs body and blood that God would be pleased to accept it as he accepted the sacrifice of Melchisedech Impudently also he belieth vs raileth vpon vs saying that we make euery priuate mans spirit supreme iudge of controuersies and that we reiect Fathers auncient Councels and ouerthrow all religion and worship of God Neither doth he onely raile vpon vs but also vpon scriptures where he sayth that founding our selues only on scriptures we open a gate to all heretikes and heresies As if the Fathers and auncient Councels which founded their faith vpon holy scriptures only opened a gap to all heresies Or as if this could be spoken without disgrace to holy scriptures that he that relieth vpon the word of God deliuered in scriptures doth open a gate to all heresies Finally he taketh vpon him the title of the legate of the great monark of heauen being but a base fugitiue renegued companion set on by Antichrist and his supposts to raile at religion and the professors thereof and lying without rule or order His want of learning doeth euery where appeare throughout his whole Suruey The Scriptures he citeth very rarely The Fathers he mistaketh and misalleageth In Ecclesiasticall histories he is but a nouice Nay albeit he talketh much of our Religion yet he vnderstandeth not what we professe what we reiect Finally although the fellow be but a poore translator and collector of other mens slanders yet could he not well relate that which is translated out of others His principal witnesses are Staphilus Cochleus Bolser Nicol Borne Stapleton Surius and such like railing and base authors Was it then likely that he should shew
in one that is not in another but others condemne him for that opinion Writing vpon the 3. dist lib. 1. sent they denie their masters examples and one condemneth another Bonauenture saith that men may attaine to the knowledge of the holy Trinitie by naturall reason others say contrarie The Scotists lib. 1. sent dist 5. inuey against Henricus de Gandauo for his opinion about the eternall generation of the Sonne of God AEgidius holdeth that the son of God hath power to beget another son which displeaseth Thomas and Bonauenture and is very strange doctrine Thomas Aquinas part 1. q. 32. art 4. saith that Doctors may hold contrary opinions Cinca notiones in diuinis He teacheth also that the holy Ghost doth more principally proceed from the Father then from the Sonne which others mislike If then they agrée not about the doctrine of the holy Trinitie it is not like that in matters wherein they haue libertie to dissent they will better agrée Scotus holdeth that the soule and an Angell do not differ as two diuers kinds Dthers teach contrary Some Doctors hold that Angels consist of forme onely others hold contrary They dissent also about the sin of our first parents Pighius in the doctrine of original sin dissenteth from his fellowes Innocentius in c. maiores de bapt eius effect misliketh the opinion of the master of the Sentences that held it to be pronitas ad peccandum that is a pronenesse to sinne The Thomists to this day could neuer be reconciled to the Scotists about the conception of our Ladie these denying she was conceiued in sin the others affirming it Gropper in his exposition of the Créed confesseth that among the Papists there are two diuers opinions about Christs descending into hell Bellarmine in his bookes of controuersies doth not more violently run vpon vs then vpon his owne consorts In euery article almost he bringeth contrary expositions of Scriptures and contrary opinions In the sacrament of the Lords supper which is a pledge of loue there are infinite contradictions among them as I haue shewed in my bookes de Missa against Bellarmine The like contentions I haue shewed in my Treatises de Indulgentijs de Purgatorio and shall haue occasion more at large to speake of them hereafter We are therefore to thanke God that the doctrine of faith in the Church of England is setled and that refusing all nouelties we agrée therein with the auncient catholike Church We acknowledge one Lord one faith one baptisme one head of the Church one canon of Scriptures with the auncient fathers The rules of all auncient and lawfull generall Councels concerning the faith we admit We haue one bniforme order for publike prayers adminis stration of Sacraments and Gods seruice Neither do we onely agree among our selues but also with the reformed Churches of France and Germany and other nations especially in matters of faith and saluation And as for ceremonies and rites it cannot be denied but that all Churches therein haue their libertie as the diuersities of auncient Churches and testimonies of Fathers do teach vs. Most baine therefore and contumelious is that discourse of N. D. in his Warne-word 1. encontr ca. 4 5 6. where he talketh of the difference of soft and rigide Lutherans among themselues of them from Anabaptists and from Zwinglians of all from the followers of Seruetus and Valentine Gentilis For neither do we acknowledge the names of Lutherans Caluinians or Zuinglians but onely call our selues Christians nor haue we to do with the Arians or Anabaptists or Seruetus or Gentilis or any heretikes Nay by our Doctors these fellowe 's haue bene diligently confuted and by our gouernors the principall of them haue bene punished But these may Parsons reply haue bin among vs. Admit it were so yet do not our aduersaries take themselues to be guiltie of Arianisme and Anabaptisine because there are diuers guiltie of Arianisine and Anabaptisme among them We say further that the Churches of Germany France and England agree albeit priuate men hold priuate opinions Finally where we talk of the Church of England what a ridiculous sot was this to bring an instance of the Churches of Germany or Suizzerland nay not of the Churches but of priuat persons and that in matters not very substantiall if we admit their owne interpretations Hauing therefore talked his pleasure of Lutherans and Zuinglians he descendeth to speak of rigid and soft Caluinists as he calleth them in England He calleth them also Protestants and Puritanes But neither do we admit these names of faction nor is he able to shew that publikely any Christian is tolerated to dissent either in matters of faith or rites from the Church of England But if any there be that mislike our rites yet is not that contention about matters of faith nor can the disorder of priuate persons hinder the publike vnion of the Church Finally I do not know any man now but he is reasonably well satisfied concerning matters of discipline albeit the same be with the great griese of Papists who go about to stirrc vp the coles of contention as much as they can that heretofore haue bene couered CHAP. II. Of the restoring of Christian Religion and the reduction of the Church of England to the true faith TRue faith in time of Poperie was a great stranger in England most men being ignorant of all points of christian Religion the rest holding diuers erronious points and heresies Their ignorance we shall proue by diuers testimonies hereafter Their errors and hercues are very apparent and at large proued in my late challenge That which the Apostle calleth the doctrine of diuels 1. Tim. 4. that they imbrace for doctrine of faith For they forbid their Priests Monkes Friers and Nuns to marrie and commaund the Benedictines and their Charterhouse Monkes at all times to abstaine from flesh They also forbid men to eate flesh vpen all fasting dayes fridayes and saterdayes and in Lent dissoluing the commandements of God by their owne traditions The Manicheyes abstained from egges as Saint Augustine sheweth lib. de heres cap. 46. Nec eua saltem sumunt quasi ipsa cùm franguntur expirent nec oporteat vllis corporibus mortuis vesci So likewise did Papists at certain times they cal such as allow ymariage of priests sectatores libidinum praeceptores vitiorum that is followers of lusts and teachers of vices albeit the Apostle affirmeth mariage to be honorable in all sorts of men They dissolue such mariages albeit Christ teach that man is not to separate them whom God hath ioyned together Their Fastes they place in eating of fish and not in abstinence from all sustenance as the auncient Fathers by their doctrine and practise taught Some count it as mortall sinne to eate flesh on fridayes as to kill a man and that a Priest doth sinne lesse in committing fornication then in matching himselfe in honest mariage and yet they confesse that
Catholike Church doth beleeue them Alijs saith he qui sunt simplices vel laici sufficit quod credant eos scil Articulos fidei implicitè id est sicut docet credit sanctà Ecclesia catholica He saith also that such knowledge is sufficient for Clerkes that haue no meanes to maintaine themselues at schoole as some suppose But suppose they could say the articles of faith and beléeue them and the rest which Peccham in the constitution ignorantia de officio Archipres doth require at their hands yet should they be very ignorant For a man may beléeue as the Church beléeueth and yet know nothing nor be able to answer to any point of faith Thomas Aquinas 3. 2. q. 2. art 6. compareth Gods people to asses and their teachers to oxen holding that it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere to their superiors because it is said Iob 1. Quòd boues arabant asinae pascebantur iuxta eos Whereby it appeareth he requireth no great knowledge at lay mens hands but would haue them beléeue as their teachers do without further enquiring He fetcheth his proofe out of Gregorie But whence soeuer he draweth it he vseth Gods people very rudely that compareth them to asses and oxen Yet thus much I am content to yéeld that the Masse-priests and their followers are like oxen and asses firmely linked together by the Popes cow-heards and muleters for the diuell their maisters seruice The same man 2. 2. q. 2. art 5. teacheth that lay men are to beléeue all the articles of the Creed and no more explicitè The which is no point of deep learning yet his scholer Siluester in sum in verb. fides 6. will not allow so much saying that it is not necessarie for a lay man to beleeue all the articles of the faith but as much as is sufficient to direct vs to the last end Nec tamen necesse est cuilibet saith he explicitè credere omnes articulos fidei sed quantum sufficit ad dirigendum in vltimum finem The author of Summa Rosella saith that it is sufficient for simple people and percase for lay men comming to yeares and discretion to beleeue that God is a rewarder of all good and a punisher of all euill And that other articles are to be beléeued implicitè that is beléeuing all to be true which the catholike Church teacheth Simplicibus fortè omnibus laicis discernentibus adultis sufficit credere Deum esse praemiatorem bonorum omnium omnium malorum punitorem alios autem articulos sufficit credere implicite credendo scil verum quicquid Ecclesia catholica docet But beside that this is an argument to proue the aduersaries allowance of the peoples extreme ignorance it is false and blasphemous to say that any man may be saued without notice or beléeuing in Christ as the author of Summa Rosella his words imply Loth the Pope is that the people should know too much and therefore he forbiddeth Scriptures to be either translated or read in vulgar tongues without licence In publike Liturgies it is not the fashion of Papists to suffer the people to heare Scriptures read in vulgar tongues The Papists also that vnderstand not Latine pray with their lippes but not with their vnderstanding and spirit For the Popes pleasure is that the publike Liturgie of the Church shall not be read in vulgar tongues whereupon the people must néedes grow dull and ignorant Iohn Billet in prolog lib. de diuin cffic complaineth of this abuse Quid nostris tēporibus est agendū saith he speaking of reading of Latin seruice vbi nullus vel rarus reperitur legens vel audiēs qui intelligat videns vel agens-qui animaduertat iam videtur impletum quod à Propheta dicitur Et erit sacerdos quasi de populo vnus He saith that there are few or none that reade or heare that do vnderstand or marke what is read or heard and that the saying of the Prophet is fulfilled That the priest shall be like one of the people Costerus saith That God and the Saints vnderstand all languages and therefore that it is sufficient if the people pray in Latine Which as it is blasphemous making Saints present in all places so it is an argument that he requireth litle vnderstanding in the people Hosius commendeth the Coliars faith that could not tell one article of his beléefe but onely answered that he beleeued as the Church beleeueth which is an argument first of the commendation of ignorance among the Papists next of Hosius his blasphemie that would haue a man saued beléeuing as doth the Catholike church albeit he beleeued or knew nothing of Christ Iesus Seeing then the Papists require so litle knowledge in the people and will not suffer them either to pray or to haue Scriptures read publikely in vulgar tongues and preach so seldome and so leudly is it likely that they should prooue great clearkes Furthermore the Priests in England were commaunded to teach the people the worship of the crosse of images of reliques and how farre the same reacheth as appeareth by B. Arundels prouinciall constitution beginning nullus de haereticis They were also taught what manner of men were S. Austin of Canterburie S. Bernac S. Dunstane and such good fellowes And were wont to heare many good tales of the miracles of S. Audrey and S. Cuthburge and other she Saints But all this tended litle to instruction in faith or reformation in manners Finally in stend of true doctrine they were taught the traditions of men concerning worship of Saints crosses images reliques fasting on Saints Gigils pilgrimages indulgences purgatorie and such like Petrus de Alliac lib. dereform Ecclesiae wisheth That Apocryphall Scriptures and new hymnes and prayers and other voluntarie nouelties should not be read in churches Quòd in huiusmodi festis Scripturae Apocryphae aut hymninoui velorationes seu aliae voluntariae nouitates non legerentur but he preuailed not Nay further they do not onely teach false doctrines and Apocryphall nouelties but also most wickedly rehearsing the commaundements they haue left out the second commaundement that concerneth worship of images albeit S. Augustine quaest ex vet test 7. do set it downe for a distinct commandement from the first Being then taught very litle truth and much falshood it must néeds follow that the Papists were in time past very ignorant and that Iohn Billet in prolog de diuin off plainely confesseth Experience also teacheth the same and manifestly sheweth that they scarce vnderstood any article of the Créed Acertaine Italian being asked not many yeares since by his confessor in Rome whether he beleeued the holy Trinitie answered yea Being further demaunded what the Trinitie was VVhat said he but our Lord God and our Lady and you our masters the priests and Friers They are so brutish that they verily beléeue that images walke and talke and haue life Certaine parishioners of a village not
solis dist 9. Are not the Papists then most miserable that build their faith vpon the Popes Decretals that are contrarie to Scriptures to Fathers one to another and oftentimes void of truth wit learning religion or honestie The last foundation of Romish faith is the preaching of Masse-priests and Friars Quomodo Christus eiusque doctrina saith Stapleton Christianae religionis fundamentum est sic alij nunc à Christo missi eorúmue doctrina praedicatio determinatio fundamenti apud me vim locum habebunt As Christ and his doctrine is the foundation of Christian religion so others now sent of Christ and their doctrine preaching and determination shall in my opinion haue the force and place of a foundation saith he And afterward he declareth that those whom the Pope sendeth are sent by Christ and the men which he meaneth But if this be the foundation of their religion then is the same built vpon old wiues fables forged traditions lying legends philosophicall subtilties scholasticall disputes popish Decretals humane inuentions and such like principles For of thē consisteth the greatest part of these fellowes sermons as both experience diuers Friars idle Homilies which euery man may sée do plainely testifie Furthermore if these be the foundations of popish Religion then is the same built vpon man and not vpon God vpon humane deuises and not vpon the infallible word of God vpon sand and not vpon a rocke Such also as these foundations are such is the building that is weake false and erronious such is the Romish religion which the Pope and his adherents by force of armes treasons murthers empoysonments lyes glozing flatterie and all meanes possible would thrust vpon vs and such are the conclusions that are built on these foundations Finally séeing no man can be saued that buildeth his faith vpon men vpon vnwritten traditions vpon vncertaine grounds and lying reports let the Papists consider with themselues in what miserable state they stand and returne to the true faith in time lest like the foolish man in the Gospell they build their house on sand and be ouerwhelmed with the fall thereof CHAP. IIII. Of diuers other blasphemous ridiculous and absurd points of popish Religion TRue Religion is most true venerable and respectiue of Gods true seruice If then popish Religion containe any vntrue or ridiculous vaine and blasphemous doctrine then is it not true or Apostolicall or Christian nor can it stand with Christian Religion séeing no man can serue God and Baal nor Dagon could stand before the arke of God But notorious it is that popish Religion centaineth many blasphemous ridiculous and absurd points First concerning the flesh of our Lord and Sauior Christ Iesus they teach falsly and blasphemously and say that a mouse or dog or hog may eate the body of Christ. Nay they are not ashamed to affirme that his most holy body may be cast out vpon a dunghill or into any vncleane place Prima opinio saith Alexander Hales part 4. sum q. 53. m. 2. quae dicit quod corpus Christi defertur quocunque species deferunt vt in ventrem canis vel suis vel in alia lo ca immunda videtur vera And again p. 4. sum q. 45. m. 1. si canis aut porcus deglutiat hostiam consecratam non video quare corpus Christi non simul traijceretur in ventrem canis vel porci Is a dog or hog should swallow a consecrate hoft saith he I see no reason why the body of Christ should not withall passe into the belly of a dog or hog Thomas Aquinas likewise although made a saint by the Pope yet shameth not to hold this prophane and vnholy opinion part 3. q. 80. art 3. And in his comment in 4. sent dist 9. q. 2. The same is also stiffely maintained by Brulifer in 4. sent dist 13. quest 5. And this is the common opinion of schoolemen That the priest is able to make his Creator they make no question Bonner counted this among the prerogatiues of priesthood in his absurd spéech which he made in the Con stian faith by the very confession of the aduersaries The same also may otherwise be proued if they should not confesse so much For how is Christ ascended if his body be hanging ouer euery altar How is it credible that he shall come from heauen to iudge quicke and dead if he be lurking in euery consecrate hoast How was he conceiued and borne of the virgine and suffered death on the crosse if he had a body of such a simple nature that it was like light in glasse and might be in many places at once without filling any Finally it implyeth a notorious contradictiō for Chrifts body to be in heauen visible and here inuisible to be there palpable and here impalpable to be continued and not continued eaten here and not eaten in heauen here without filling of a place there filling a place here in the priests hands and there not Absurdly also do the Papists talke of Christ his most holy sacrifice Christ sayth the Apostle Heb. c. 9. was once offered that he might take away the sinnes of many And Hebr. 10. Christ hauing offered one sacrifice for sinnes doth perpetually sit at the right hand of God And againe With one oblation he hath for euer sanctified those that are sanctified But the Papists say that our Sauior offered him selfe twise once at his last supper and the second time vpō the crosse They teach also that the priest in euery Masse doth offer vp the body and blood of Chrift really for a sacrifice for quicke and dead The which is not only contrary to Scriptures but derogateth much from the perfection and vnitie of Christs sacrifice For how is Christs sacrifice perfect if the same be so often reiterated How is Christ his sacrifice one and the same if euery pelting priest do offer vp this sacrifice The same is contrary to the doctrine of the Fathers which teach that the sacrifices of Christians are spiritual and no where say that they offer vp Christs body and bloud really Iustin in dial 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith that prayers and praises of God are the onely acceptable sacrifices of Christians With him concurreth Tertullian lib. 3. contra Marcionē This visible sacrifice saith Augustine lib. 10. de ciuit Dei ca. 5. speaking of the Eucharist is a sacrament of the inuisible sacrifice that is the same is a holy signe of it Likewise Chrysostome hom 17. in epist. ad Heb. saith that our oblation is but a commemoration of Christ his death and a figure of that oblation which Christ made Finally it is most blasphemous For in the Masse the priest taketh on him to be a mediator for Chrift and prayeth that God would looke on Christ with a propitious and serene countenance accept the sacrifice of his body as he vouchsafed to accept the offerings of Abel Abraham and Melchisedech The scriptures teach vs that Christ onely is a priest