MOTIVE. I. That Religion which in many points giueth libertie to sinne, is not the truth: but such is the Religion of the Church of ROME: ergo, &c.

THe first proposition is an vndoubted truth, and2. MAIOR▪ Iames 1. 27. needs no confirmation, especially, seeing S. Iames describeth true Religion by these at­tributes, pure and vndefiled: And S. Paul 2. Tim. 3. 1. Tit. 1. 1. calleth it the mysterie of godlinesse, and the do­ctrine according to godlinesse. And herein con­sisteth an essentiall difference betwixt the true Religion and all false ones; so that it must needs follow, that, that Religion which is essentially the cause and occasion of sinne, and ope­neth a wide window to vngodlinesse, cannot be the truth of God, but must needs fetch it beginning from the deuill, who is the author of all euill. The Gospell indeede may by acci­dentRom. 7. 11. Matt. 10. 34. be the occasion of euill, as S. Paul saith, The law is the occasion of sinne, for it stirs vp contention and strife, and dis­couers the corruptions of Mans heart, and by opposing a­gainst them (as a damme against a streame) makes them to swell and boyle, and burst forth beyond the bounds: how­beit, here the cause is not in the Gospell, or Lawe; but in the corruption of mans heart, which, the more it is stirred, the more it rageth and striueth to shew it selfe. But neuer yet was the doctrine of godlinesse the cause of wickednesse, nor the pure and vndefiled Religion of Christ Iesus, an essentiall pro­curer and prouoker vnto sinne.

3. This therefore being thus manifest, all the question and difficultie remaineth in the second proposition; to wit, that the Religion of the Romish Church is such as openeth a gappe vnto sinne, and giueth notorious libertie and scope to vngodlinesse; and that not by way of accident or occasion, but necessarily as the cause to the effect, Qua data, necessariò soquitur effectus; as the Logicians speake: and therefore be­ing an [...]npure and defiled Religion, and the mysterie of ini­quitie, [Page 4] not the mysterie of godlinesse: it cannot be that true Religion which Christ our Sauiour brought with him from heauen, and left here vpon earth blamelesse and vnspotted like himselfe, to be the way to lead vs vnto heauen, where hee is.

4. That the Romish Religion is a polluted and defiled Re­ligion,MINOR. tending to libertie and loosenesse. Let the indifferent Reader iudge by these few instances, deriued out of the verie bowels of their Church, and being articles of their faith, and grounds of their Religion. And first to beginne with theirI. Med. Christ. pa­raen. li. 7. ca. 17. Gratian part. 1. pag. 76. Panorm. extr. de diuort. c. fin. Felyn. de consist. cap. statut. can. 1. Anton. pa [...]. 3. tit. 22. cap. 6. doctrine of dispensations; whereby they teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with the word of God, and with eue­ry commandement of the Law, and not onely with the Law, but with the Gospell and Epistles of Paul: to what horrible loosenesse and lewdnesse of life doth it tend? for to omit that it containeth in it open blasphemie by their owne rule, which is, that In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior, the inferiour may not dispense with the precept of the superiour, by which the Pope dispensing with Gods lawe, is not one [...]y equalled, but exalted aboue God; what sinne is there, bee it neuer so hainous, which there is not libertie giuen to com­mit by this licencious doctrine?

5. Incest? But Pope Martin the first gaue a dispensation to one to marrie his owne sister, and not his wiues sister on­ly, as some of the Romish crue would dawbe ouer this filthie wall, because it is in Antoninus, Cum quadam eius germana: Antonin. part. Siluest. in verbo Papa. pag. 279. Bartho. fumus in verb. dispensat. Angel. de Claua. in verbo. papa. for Siluester Prieri [...], Bartholomeus Fumus, and Angelus de Clauafio, speake more plainely, Cumsua germana; that is, with his owne naturall sister. Another Pope dispensed with Henry the eight to marrie his sister in law: and with Philip of Spaine to marrie his owne Niece: and Clement the 7. licenced Petrus Aluaradus the Spaniard, to marrie two sisters at once: andFumus quo su­pra Caietan, in Leui. cap. 18. Nauarr. enchir. pag. 515. no maruaile, seeing it is the very doctrine of the Romish Church, that the Pope can dispense in all the degrees of Con­sanguinitie and Affinitie, saue onely with the Father and his daughter, and with the Mother and her Son. Sodometrie? But Pope Sixtus the fourth licensed the Cardinall of Saint Lucie, [Page 5] and his familie, to vse freely that sinne, not to bee named in the three hote moneths of the yeare. And Iohannes a Casa Archbishop of Beneuentum, and Legate to Pope Iulius the third, set forth a Booke in Italian Meeter, in commendation of this execrable sinne.

6. Adultery, and fornication? But they affirme and hold,Nauarr. Enchir, pag. 515. Caietan in Leu. cap. 18. that the Pope hath power to dispence with all manner of persons in the contract of Matrimonie, (the Father with his daughter, and the mother with her Sonne) onely excepted. And therefore Ʋladislaus King of Hungarie, and Ludouicus Rob. Gag. in Lu­d [...]uic. 12. the French King, by meanes of dispensation purchased from the Pope, put away their lawfull wiues, and married others. And for Fornication, the Popes Canon is famous, Hee that Mich. Ritus l. 2. Decret. dist. 34. cap. 4. hath not a wife, but for a wife, or instead of a wife, a Concubine, let him not for that be kept from the Communion. And Bellar­mines doctrine confirmeth the same Canon of the Pope, and [...]el. de monach. li. 2. ca. 30. crosseth the Canon of Christ; for thus he writeth, that speech of the Apostle (they that cannot containe, let them marrie, for it is better to marrie then to burne) cannot bee rightly said of them that haue vowed, for both are naught, both to burne and to mar­rie; yea, it is worse of the two to marrie, whatsoeuer the Prote­stants say to the contrarie. This is the 75. Grauamen complai­nedCent. Grauam. grau. 75. of by the Germanes, that the Bishops and their Officials did tolerate Priests to haue Concubines, vnder the paiment of a cer­taine annuall rent of money. Which also Espens [...]s a learnedEspens. de conti. li. 2. cap. 7. & in Tit. 1. Bishop of their owne confesseth, and complayneth of both in his second Booke de Continentia, and in his Commentarie vpon Titus. Nay, that which is horrible to speake, and almost incredible to beleeue, the Germans in their 91. Grauamen cō ­plained, that not onely those Priests that had their whores, payd yearely rent for it, but euen those that were continent and would haue no Conenbines, must pay the rent; and then be it at their choyce whether they would haue a Concubine or no. And lest any should thinke that Priests onely were thus dispensed withall, and that their Concubines were in stead of wiues, though for the auoyding of scandall they might not haue that name: as if the name of a wife were more scandalous then the name [Page 6] of a Concubine (O height of impiety!) let all the world know, that not onely the Clergie, but also the Laity were in this case dispensed withall, as might be prooued by many exam­ples, if need were. May not this Church than rightly be s [...]led The Whore of Babylon, which thus authoriseth whoredome in all degrees, and turneth a filthy sinne into a lawfull and war­rantable act?

7. Periurie? But it is a prouerbe in the Popes Court, (asPet. Martyr loc. com. testifieth Peter Martyr) Quòd non est Regum & Magistratu­um, sed Mercatorum stare iuramentis; It is not the part of Kings and Magistrates, but of Marchants, to stand to their oaths: And this is one of their renowned positions, The Pope may dispense with any oath, be it neuer so lawfull. Vpon which ground Azorius the Iesuite defendeth Pope Gregorie Azor. Inst [...]tut. mor. l. l. 5. c. 15. the twelfth, who in the time of a great schisme did openly and solemnly sweare, that if he were made Pope, he would giue it ouer againe: but being elected, he performed nothing lesse. And also the same Iesuite auoucheth, that other mens oaths Idem li 11. c. 9. may be dissolued by the Pope. And the glosse vpon the Decre­talsGlossa ad De­cret. li. 2. tit. 24. cap. 10. sayth, That a man is no further bound to the obseruation of any oath, then it shall like the Pope. And the reason is added, Quia in omni iurament o excipitur authoritas maioris, in euery oath the authority of a superiour must bee excepted; which superiour by their doctrine is the Pope. And for their pra­ctice herein, I appeale to Cardinall Iulian the Popes LegateBonfin. Decad. 3. lib. 6. in Hungarie, who not onely licenced, but perswaded Vladi­slaus the King to breake the league, and falsifie his oath madeAeneas Siluius com. in Europ. to Amurath the Turke, which was the cause not onely of his ouerthrow, but of the losse of a great part of that famous Kingdome; behold the fruits of these Romane Prophets. And to leape from a Cardinall to a Pope, I call to witnesse Clement the 7. who dispensed with Francis the French King, for his oath sworne to Charles the fift, at his deliuery out of prison. And lest any should thinke this to be a particular blot of one Pope; adde to him Gregorie the 7. who released Rodolph the King of Sue [...]ia from his oath of obedience to the Emperour Henrie the 4. and conferred the Empire vpon him. And Pope [Page 7] Zachary, Boniface the eight, and Benedict de la lune, who freed the French men from their oath of obedience, which they ought vnto their Kings. And lastly, Pius Quintus, who by his Bull of excommunication against our late famous Queene of blessed memory, discharged her subiects from their oath of allegeance, whereby many open rebellions were raised vp a­gainst the State, and secret treas [...]ns plotted against her sacred person.

8. Disobedience to Parents, Rebellion against lawfull Princes, and murdering of them also if they stand in their way?Bell. de monach. lib. 2. cap. 36. but the Pope can dispense with children, if they shall take vpon them the vow of single life, after fourteene yeares of age, and enter into a Sodomiticall Cloyster: and the Father hath nothing to doe with his childe being there once encloi­stered except he cannot liue without his helpe. And for Prin­ces;I▪ [...]uita Gicar. if the Pope shall excommunicate a Prince, or suborne a wicked traytor to murder his Soueraigne, then is this rebel­lion and murther not onely a warrantable, but also a merito­rious and an heroicall act. Witnesse at home the Irish rebelli­on, heartened forward by Doctor Saunders, by the Popes instigation: and abroad, the murther of Henry the third, the French King, by Iames Clement; which bloudy deed was after highly commended by the Pope in his consistoriall Ora­tion to be seene in print. And of Henry the fourth, of late dayes by hellish Rauilliac, with many such like, which I could here produce, but that fitter occasion will be offered hereafter for their larger discouery.

9. These few particulars are sufficient to shew, what a gap is layd open to all loosnes by this Romish doctrine of dispen­sations; which, that it is not our malicious collection (as they affirme) but a necessary consequence: One of their owneFrancis [...]. V [...]ct. d potest. pap. & concil. Relect. [...]. pag. 139. learned Fryers confesseth as much, Vid [...]m [...] quotidie à Roma­na curia, &c. We see daily (sayth hee) so large, yea so dissolute dispensations come from the Court of ROME, that the world is not able to endure them; neither doe they tend onely to the scandall of the weake, but of those also that are strong. I omit here the Popes dispensing with the cure of soules; whereby hee [Page 8] plainely declareth, that though hee proudly stileth himselfe supremus pastor animarum, the chiefe shepheard of soules: yet he is maximus vastator animarum, the greatest hauocker of soules that is on the earth (the Deuill onely excepted) who goeth beyond him a little, I must needes confesse: for when he licenceth some of his Cardinals to enioy some 200. someNichol. Clenang. 300. Benefices, most of which they neuer saw nor knew, nor regarded how they were serued, or starued: what doth heeIoh. Gers. tom. [...]. de potest Eccles. consid. 10. but shew himselfe rather a Wolfe, than a Shepheard? This kind of dispensation Saint Bernard in his time calleth a dissipa­tion. And Iohn Picas the famous Earle of M [...]randula, in anIoh. Pic. Miran. [...]rat. ad Leon. 10 Oration to Pope Leo the 10. complaineth of, as a notorious corruption in the Church in his dayes. Now then, to conclude the poynt, if to maintaine Incest, Sodometry, adultery, for­nication, periury, disobedience to Parents, rebellion against Princes, and murther, be not to giue licence to most horrible and foule sinnes, l [...]t all men iudge, and then consider what that Religion is to be iudged of, which giueth either open or secret dispensation to all these.

10. This is the first Romish doctrine directly tending to2. liberty: A second, nothing inferiour to the former, is their doctrine of popish pardons and Indulgences: a doctrine in­deed full of all licentiousnes, stuft with impiety, and letting the reynes loose to all manner of villany. For thus they teach, that the Pope being Christs Vicar heere on earth, hath the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen in custody, to admit in by Indulgence, or to shut out by excommunication as hee shall see cause: and that the merits of Martyrs (to wit) their workesBel. de Indulgen. lib. 1. ca. 2. of supererogation, which they haue more then they need for their owne saluation, which (mixt with the merites of Christ) they call the treasure of the Church, are to bee dispensed and disposed at his pleasure.

11. The limits and largenes of these pardons they stretchAquin. supl. in 3. par. q. 25. art. [...]. Bonif. apud Plat. in vita. so farre, that they make them of more force then the death and passion of Christ: for as they teach, Christs death freeth onely a culpa & aterna poena, that is, from the guilt of the fault and the eternall punishment due vnto it, but not a poena tem­porali, [Page 9] from the temporall punishment: but these popish par­dons acquit and discharge both from the guilt, and from the punishment temporall and eternall, as some of them affirme, and they that mince it finest, from the guilt and temporall pu­nishment: so that Christs passion commeth short of his Vi­carsƲeg. li. 13. c. 36. pardon, and the seruant can doe more then the Master by their Religion: for though the efficacie of these pardons dependeth vpon the merits of Christ; yet that is but in part,Tapper. expl. art. Louan. art. 6. for the Saints merits must be mixed with them, or else they a­lone make no good medicine, and the Pope must dispence them, or else they are of no value. Neither doe they firetch onely to those that are aliue, but to the dead also: And thatFu [...]men. brut. ex bul. Clem. 6. not onely in Purgatory, but in Hell. Out of both which pla­ces (say they) both the suburbs and the Citie, the Pope is a­ble to deliuer whom he pleaseth, and place them in heauen, the seate of the blessed: this is the opinion of diuers of them. Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence auoucheth almost asAntonin. part. 3. Tit. 22. c. 5. §. 6. much (leauing out hell) for he saith that the Pope, in respect of his absolute iurisdiction, may absolue all that are in Purga­tory, and empty the prison at once: (marke his reasons) for (sayth he) seeing Gregory by his prayer discharged Traiane from the paine of hell, which is infinite: Therfore much more may the Pope by communication of indulgences, absolue all that are in Purgatory, from that punishment which is but finite. And for asmuch as Christ may take away all paine, therefore the Pope also (who is his Ʋicar) may. These be the Archbishops good­ly reasons, the one whereof is meere foolish and friuolous, the other blasphemous: but howsoeuer it be, yet thousands of ignorant persons haue receiued these as their Creed, and by them beene seduced to the vtter ruine and destruction of their soules.

12. And to that height of impudency are these pardon­mongersOnuph. Pa [...]vi [...]. growne, that they stocke not to promise plenary re­mission of all sinnes, to all that either come on pilgrimage to Rome, or miscarry in their iourney, or that visite the holy pla­ces there, especially the 7. priuiledged Churches; promising to some 50. to some a 100. to some 3000. yeares of pardon. [Page 10] Yea, Boniface the eight granted, of his bountifull liberality, 82000. yeares pardon, for euery time saying a prayer of S. Augustine, printed in a Table at Venice, and that toties quoties. Iohn the 22. granted twentie yeres pardon to euery one that doth but bow his head at the naming of Iesus. Here is a no­table pardon indeed: a man may in one day prouide for mil­lions of ages, and not onely for himselfe, but to helpe his friends out of Purgatory. Besides all this, their holy Father the Pope vseth to consecrate and hallow an infinite number of Crucifixes, and Medailes, and Agnus Dei's, Holy graines or Beads, and such like trash, and send them abroad into the world, that whosoeuer weareth one of them about him, if he bee at the poynt of death, and say but in his heart the name Iesus, shall haue a plenary and full forgiuenesse of all his sins.

13. But what should I rake any deeper into this filthy puddle? I might spend much time and trauaile in deciphering the infinite and grosse absurdities of this monstrous doctrine,Recitare, est re­futare. the very naming whereof is a sufficient confutation. I referre the Reader to others that haue amply discouered these secrets of the whore of Babylon. But to returne to the poynt, Is not this a doctrine (I pray you) of licentiousnesse? who would feare to sinne, when pardon may be obtayned at so low a rate? for bowing the head, saying ouer a short prayer, visiting a Church, creeping to a Crosse, wearing a Crucifixe, pardon may be purchased for sinnes, without number, and that for yeares without number. What is the height of liberty, if this be not? But yet they ascend higher, for there is a great Mart of all these Indulgences at Rome, there you may haue them at a very lowe price, rather then goe without, yea, chea­per than any other ware: and lest Rome should seeme too farre to fetch them thence, there are petty markets and faires of them in euery Country, and the Pedlers that carry about this trash, are the Priests and Iesuites. Leo the tenth sent T [...] ­ [...]elius [...]alaeus in vita Leonis 10. about with his Pardons, offering to euery one for the payment of tenne shillings, and not a penny vnder, to set at liberty the soule of any one which they should name in Pur­gatory. And of late it is sayd, that the Iesuites brought into [Page 11] England, Agnus Dei's by thousands, which they sold at what rate they list to poore seduced Papists. Peroun the French Car­dinall brought with him from Rome many such hallowed and holy things, as some say, by the sale thereof to helpe to de­fray his charges which he was at in that costly iourney.

14. What should I name vnto you their odious marchan­dize, and setting to sale of all manner of sinne, called taxa poe­nitentiaria Apostolica, whereby impunity is graunted to eue­ry sinne, be it neuer so grieuous; so the party payeth accor­ding to the rate for his absolution, to wit, if he will be absol­ued from adultery or incest, it must cost him foure Turons: if from both together it must stand him in sixe Turons: if from wilfull murther (being in holy orders) hee must pay twelue Turons: being a Bishop or an Abbot fiftie Turons, twelueMuscul. com. loc. tit. minist. Ducats? &c. Thus there is no sinne so haynous, for which par­don may not be purchased for a small summe of money, as one of their owne Canonists could sing,Iohan. Monachu [...]

15. If this be not a doctrine of liberty, let all the world iudge. Who need care what sinne hee commit, when a par­don is but a money matter? Is it any maruaile now, if whores and theeues and notorious offenders turne Papists, seeing they may haue so easily a full and plenary remission of all their offences? And that which is yet a greater emboldening of men to sinne then all the rest; they oftentimes for money pardon a sinne before it be committed, as it is constantly re­ported of Parry, that he brought with him his pardon in his pocket for murdering the late Queene, intended by him. But I haue heard of some that haue beene hanged with their par­dons [Page 12] about their necks, and so (it may be) was that bloudy­minded Traytor. And this was it that emboldened the Ger­mansChemnit. exam. de poeniteat. to robbe the Popes pardoner, because they had purcha­sed of him before, a pardon for the next sinne they should commit, though it were a great one: now this was the next, and therfore iustly he could not find fault with them.

16 By this it is euident, to what loosenesse and lewdnesse of life this doctrine doth tend. Isti enim indulgentiarum buc­cinatores, Onus Eccles. ca. 15. fol. 26. omnimodam promit [...]unt securitatem, quaeparit negli­gentiam & negligentia offensam Dei, saith the Author of that Booke called Onus Ecclesiae; that is, these publishers of par­dons do promise all manner of security, which breedeth neg­ligence, and negligence the offence of God: for Culpam qui praeterit, inuitat nouam, conniuence at one fault is the hatching of a new. Who so will plainly see in one view the monstrous licentiousnesse of life that issueth from this puddle of Popish pardons, let him read the third grieuance of the German Na­tion, in the Booke of their Centum grauamina, exhibited to the Popes Legate at Noremberge, Anno 1522. in the latter end whereof are these wordes of iust complaint. By the sale and marchandize of this ware, not onely Germany is spoyled of money, but Christian godlinesse is extinguished, where, when eue­ry one, according to the quantity of his payment, taketh vnto him­selfe liberty to sinne: hence whoredome, incest adultery, periury, murther, theft, robbery, vsury, and a whole heape of mischiefes haue proceeded; for, what mischiefe will men be afraid to commit, when they be once perswaded that they haue obtained licence and impunitie to sinne, not onely in this life, but also after their death? Hitherto is the complaint of Germany, which also may bee the iust complaint of the whole world.

17 A third doctrine of the Papists (opening the gap to li­centiousnes)3. is their auricular confession, and popish penance: I ioyne them together, because they goe together in their practice, and are both together members of one of their new deuised Sacraments. True it is, that in outward showe these carry a semblance of seuere discipline: but if we search into their bowels, we shall find them to be the greatest baytes that [Page 13] can be vnto dissolutenesse: For when they teach that the enu­meration and reckoning vp of all a mans finnes in the yeare, of a Priest, once a yeare, obtaineth present absolution and pardon at the Priests hands, who is both Iudge in this cause, and Phisicion; and hath power to loofe and binde, and to open and shut, to wound and heale, by the key of powerCoster. enchir. committed to him: What is this, but to open a gappe to all wickednes? for when men are perswaded that there is so rea­dy and easie a meanes to be rid of their sinne, what need they be so chary of committing it? Hence it is (as by lamentable experience it is found true) among those that are deuoted to this Religion, they sinne freely, that they may confesse and be absolued; and when they haue confessed they sinne againe, that they may confesse againe, making no conscience how they liue all the yeare, and what horrible sinnes they commit, being perswaded that at Easter, by the shriuing of a Priest, they are cleane absolued. Iust like a drunkard, that drinkes so long till hee vomite, and when his stomacke is disgorged, drinkes afresh, that he may vomite afresh: or like a glutton, that surfets all the yere long in all maner of intemperancy, & then in the spring takes phisick to purge out the naughty hu­mors frō his stomake, & as soone as he is purged, fals again to his surfeting & ryot, in hope to be purged again in the spring.

18. This is the fruite of Popish shrift, commended so high­ly by them to be so soueraigne a medicine against sin; which, if it be so, why did not Christ and his Apostles vse it? were they not as carefull to preserue men from sinne, as the Pope and his shauelings are? or is the Pope and his Apostles wiser then Christ Iesus and his Disciples? why was it not vsed in the Primitiue and purer times of the Church? Rhenanus and E­rasmus, Rhen. Annot. ad Tertul. de poenit. Eras. Annot. ad Hieron. de obitu Sabi [...]l. Chrysost. Homil. 22. ad popul. An­tioch. two learned Papists, affirme plainely, that it was nei­ther ordained by Christ, nor vsed by the ancient Church: and Chrysostome telleth vs, that God doth not enforce vs to come forth and disclose our sinnes to any man. He requireth no more (saith he) but that we speake to him alone, and to him alone con­fesse our faults. I, but the Popes iudgement is more diuine, and the times of Popery are more free from corruption (be­leeue [Page 14] it who list) and therefore howsoeuer then, yet now it is found to be a soueraigne preseruatiue against sinne: as if they that feare not to offend in the presence of God, will blush to confesse their offences in the eare of a sinnefull Priest: or as if the law of God were of lesse force to keep men in awe, which they cannot escape, than the feare of a mortall man, whome they may deceiue.

19. But let them say what they will, and cloake their li­centiousnesse with neuer so holie pretences, all that haue any iudgement to discerne colours, which the blinde Romanists cannot do, or any wisedome to trye the spirits and doctrines whether they be of God or no; know, that Romish shrift is nothing but a shift to diue into mens purses, and a tricke of policie to search into their purposes, that by that meanes they may enrich their owne coffers, and vphold their Antichristi­an Hierarchie: for by this deuice they vnderstand the secrets of state, and ciscouer mens affections in Religion, and so cun­ningly insinuate themselues into the managing of all affaires, both for preuention of preiudice to themselues, and vnder­mining their opposites: this is the policie of Romish shrift; and were this all, it were to be borne withall, if withall it did not open a wide doore of liberty to others, as I haue in part shewed; and were not a bawd of vncleanesse to the shriuers themselues. Heare what one of their own writers reuealeth concerning this last poynt. It is an ordinary practice (saith he)Aluar. pelag. & Planet. eccl. lia. art. 27. for Priests to commit execrable villany with women at shrift, raui­shing wiues, and deflowring maids in the Church, and committing Sodomie with young men, &c. Cornelius Agrippa, another of their owne, hath left in writing for all posterity to remem­ber, that Auricular confession is genus quoddam lenocinij, and heDe vanit. c. 64. referreth vs for proofe thereof vnto the Tripartite History: Nec desunt mihi (saith hee) si referre velim cognita recentia ex­empla. I need not to seeke for farre examples: for I could relate many fresh and well knowen, if I would. And then he concludes, that Priests and Friers, and Monkes, hauing, vnder pretence of Religion, free accesse vnto any woman many times, whose soules they should gaine to God, their bodies they sacrifice to the deuill. [Page 15] Thus is their owne filth cast in their faces by their owne fauo­rites, who by all likelihood would speake the best of their mother, and in no respect durst slander her, for feare of shame and punishment. Wee finde in the Tripartite History (to the which it may be Agrippa had relation) of the rape of a noble woman by a Deacon in the time of shrift; for the which cause Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople, banished this secret confession out of his Church; as also, all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs. This story is recorded by Socrates, Socrat. li. 5. ca. 9. Sozom. li. 7. c. 16. Tripart. l. 9. c. 35 Niceph. l. 12. c. 28 Andr. ort [...]o. exp. Baro. tom. 1. art. 56. [...]u. 28. Cost. ench. p. 387. Sozomene, and Nicephorus; neither is it denied by the Roma­nists themselues, though some of them condemne Nectarius for doing so: As Andradius and Baronius, the one calling it a most impudent fact: the other saying, that not a good spirit; but an euill spirit perswaded him there unto. And others seeke to elude ti, by saying the story is mistaken, and that Nectarius banished not confession it selfe, but the necessitie of confessing to one certaine Priest, which though it bee a vaine glosse which corrupts the text, as Chemnitius fully proueth: yet, notChem. exam. Tri. de confess. to stand vpon it, this is euident, that such a foule fact was committed in the time of shrift, and that thereupon this secret confession was either vtterly abrogated, or at least so restrai­ned, that it was no more secret, for feare of such like enormi­ties: and indeed graunt that Nectarius did euill in abolishing all kind of confession, as Socrates, and Sozomene charge him: and as wee also will not excuse him, for wee hold that there may be an holy & profitable vse of confession in the Church, for the searching of the wounds of sinnefull soules, and ap­plying of fit counsell & comfort to distressed consciences; yet from thence we may deriue these three conclusions, first, that secret shrift was then thought not to bee ex iure diuino, but onely a tradition of the Church, for else it could not haue been abolished; secondly, that it was not thought necessarie for the remission of sinnes, as the Romanists teach; and third­ly, that it is a most dangerous occasion to vncleannes, which is the matter we haue in hand to proue.

20. If any here except, that these enormities proceed from the abuse, and not from the vse of shrift, and that they bee [Page 16] personall frailties, and not corruptions of doctrine. I answer; first, that the very vse thereof is so daungerous, especially to these ranke Votaries, that it is tenne to one but it euer dege­nerates into the abuse: for, wanting the lawfull remedy ordained by God, no maruaile if their lusts breake forth into lawlesse actions. Againe, what warrant can there be of GodsPanormitan. Peresi. Petrus Oxoni [...]n. blessing to sanctifie the vse of that, which is not an ordinance of God, but a meere humane inuention, as diuers of their owne Doctors haue confessed, and is most easie to bee proo­ued? And lastly, though there may bee a profitable vse of confession, as I haue said; yet this Auricular enumeration and Romish shrift cannot be lawfully vsed, because they make the very act thereof meritorious to saluation, and the absolution of the Priest an actuall and reall remitting of sinne; which o­pinion cannot but animate men to the committall of sinne, seeing they haue their remedy so ready at hand, to wit, after the vttering a fewe wordes, the mouth of the Priest to ab­solue them.

21. As for Contrition, which by their doctrine must goe before Confession, that makes the matter neuer a whit theRoffens. ep. art. 5. Maldon. in Sum. q. 16. art. 1. Suarez. tom. 4. desp. 4. Sect. 4. Tollet. lib. 3. de instruct. sacr. c. 5 more difficult, neither doth it any whit the more bridle from sinne: for, if the griefe be but small, yet is the penitent absolued (saith our Fisher:) and a Iesuite, a slender griefe is sufficient: and another Iesuite, The least degree of griefe is able to wipe a­way the highest degree of sinne. Surely this kind of contrition is so farre from brideling our corrupt nature from sinne, that it more incites and prickes it forward; for who would feare to sinne, if this be true, that the least griefe conceiued in heart, together with the discouering of it to the Priest, and the Priests formall absolution, is sufficient for the full pardon and remission thereof?

22. But peraduenture the last part of this Sacrament binds vp the two former in greater seuerity: let vs consider a little therefore of their penance and satisfaction. They condemne vs lowdly, and raile with open throat against vs, calling vs Libertines, and Epicures, for reiecting their penance and sa­tisfactory paines after sinnes committed. But, who are the [Page 17] Libertines, they or vs? let any indifferent reader (all preiu­dice set apart) iudge. Are we Libertines for renouncing their popish penance? why, there is no doctrine that more noto­riously tends to liberty then this: For first, what are those sa­tisfactory workes which they enioyne poore penitents? Coster Cost. enchir. de p [...]nit. a Iesuite reduceth them to three heads, Prayer, Almes, and Fasting: to one of which three, all particulars in that kind may be referred; as to Prayer, they referre Masses, Dirges, and Trentals, visiting of holy places, pilgrimage, and such like: to Almes, building of Abbeys, and religious houses, giuing to Couents of Friers and Nuns: as for relieuing of the poore, that is the least poynt of their almes: to Fasting, sack­cloth, ashes, watching, whipping, sleeping on the pauement, going barefoote, handy labour, and such like: If the first sort be imposed, for the most part it is nothing but the shuffling o­uer of their Beads so many times a day, with so many Creeds, and so many Aues, though they vnderstand neuer a word they speake, or the saying of so many Masses, or going to visite the shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury, or of some other Saint: all which is so farre from pinching the soule, or taming the body for sinne, that as by Chaucers Canterbury tales may ap­peare, it deserueth rather to bee called a pastime than a pe­nance. If Almes be enioyned by the Confessor to the poore penitent, then must an Abby be built, or some religious house to nourish a company of idle drones, good for nothing but fruges consumere; or suppose an high-way bee repayred, or a Church reedified, or an Hospitall erected, what terrour can this be from sinne, when the penalty may thus be discharged by the purse? As for their Fasting, watching, whiping, going barefoote, though it carry a shew of zeale in respect of not sparing the body, yet it is a plaine imitation of Baals Priests; and little profitable (as Saint Paul saith) to godlinesse, but ra­therCol. 2. 23. 1. Tim. 4. 8. an incitation to loosenes. For when a man is perswaded and taught, that all his foule sins (committed the whole yere before) are vtterly blotted out, and done away, by fasting one meale euery Wednesday and Friday, and eating nothing but Fish during the holy time of Lent (except Iunckets, and [Page 18] sweet meates, and wine and Sugar, which they gorge them­selues withall, and yet fast too) and bearing ashes on Ash­wednesday, going woolward on Good-friday, or giuing him­selfe halfe a dozen lashes on the back, or creeping to a crosse, and such like trumpery: I say, when a man is perswaded that this short paine is a sufficient satisfaction for the punishment of all his former sinne, (for so they teach) who would not re­turneC [...]ster. ench. de sacram. p [...]nit. pag. 400. againe to his vomit of wickednesse, seeing the pleasures (which he hopes to enioy by his sinnes) are farre longer and greater then the punishment wherewith he maketh satisfa­ction?

22. Secondly, to shew that all this great noyse of satisfacti­ons is nothing but a meere May-game, and mockery; ob­serueSuar. tom. 4. disp. 50. Sect 5. Cost. d [...] Ind. &c. Aquin. S [...]plan 3. par. q. 25. art 1. Tol t. li. 6. de in­struct sac. ca. 22. & 23. diligently their owne doctrine: Thus they teach, that all satisfactory punishments may be released by a pardon. Aqui­nas, their illumined Doctor, giueth this reason thereof, Christ might release the fault without any satisfaction, and so might Paul, ergo, so may the Pope: and this is one of their late defi­nitions of a pardon. Indulgentia est remissio harum actionū quae sunt a Confessario iniunctae peccatori. It is the remitting of that penance which is enioyned a sinner by his Confessor. And therefore another Iesuite truely confesseth, that the Indulgen­ces Val. li. de Indul. cap. 2. haue taken away all vse of seuere discipline out of the Church: haue they so, good Iesuite? Then thus it followeth; you let out satisfactions (which you so much extoll) and withall let in great liberty into the Church, not onely by opening the dore to pardons, but bewray your own absurdities. For what a ridiculous jest is this? he that hath offended, must do penāce after his confession, or else hee cannot be saued, and after his penance is assigned, get but a pardon, and then there needes no further satisfaction. And how is a pardon procured? why, for a little peece of money, omnia venalia Romae. The Pope hath his pardon. Pedlers in all Countries, thou needest not go farre for it, they will bring it home to thy dores, at least, if thou beest sat, and able to greaze them well. Pope Boniface the ninth sent out his Buls into diuers Countries, releasing [...]. de [...]. li. 1. [...]a. 68. for a certaine summe of money all offences whatsoeuer, without [Page 19] any penance. And Leo the tenth offered to free for ten shillingsBal. in vita Le [...] ­nis 10. any soule you would name, out of Purgatory; much more a mans owne soule, that it should neuer come thither: here is a doctrine indeede of seuerity, if any was among the Epicures: who will not say but this is a Censorious and strict Religion?

23. I, but some will say peraduenture, oh, it is an hard mat­ter to pay tenne shillings for a pardon, this is the penance of the purse, which to a couetous rich man, or to a miserable poore man, is worse thē the penance of the carkeis. Why, but thou mayst haue it cheaper if thou wilt, and therefore indeed he is a foole which will part with a penny for the purchase ofNich. Sali. An­tidot. animae. a pardon: say but deuoutly a little short prayer in the Pri­mer, & thou shalt haue three thousand dayes pardon of mor­tall sinnes, and twenty thousand dayes of veniall, giuen byVide White pag. 255. Pope [...]ohn the twenty two. And if that Prayer bee too long, say fiue Pater-nosters before the Vernacle, and thou shalt haue tenne thousand dayes pardon graunted by the same Pope; and if so many Pater-nosters be too tedious, say but an Aue at the Eleuation, & thou shalt obtaine pardon for 20000. daies: or if thou dwellest neere Rome, doe but visite the Church of Saint Paul without the walls, & haue eight & forty thousand yeres of pardon. Who would stand vpon dayes, when he may haue thus many thousand yeares? If thou beest weake or sick, and not able to visite a Church; then doe but deuoutly wor­ship the Crosse, or the nayles, whip, launce, heart or hands of Christ painted in thy chamber, and that shall bee a sufficientDor [...]nam: of Antichrist. D. White: the Way of the true Church. pag. 255. satisfaction for all thy sinnes. Here is stuffe with a witnesse! for can a man forbeare laughter to heare these May-games? and yet this is not the tenth part of these incredible absurdi­ties. But I passe them ouer, being sufficiently discouered by others, to the shame of the Romish Religion. It sufficeth, that by this little it is euident, that satisfactions are so farre from restraining, that they rather remit the reines to all liberty and licentiousnesse.

24. Lastly, to conclude, if so be their imposed penance be at any time strict & seuere, it is when the Pope i [...] offended, not when God. Men may franckly sin against God, & no man will [Page 20] say vnto him, blacke is thine eye: or if vpon his shriuing they enioyne him penance, either it shall be so easie that it will not much trouble him to endure it, or if it be too hard, he may ei­ther redeeme it with his purse, or at least commute it into an­other kind. But if their Lord god the Pope be offended, (so the Canonists stile him) then not onely seuerity, but cruelty must be exercised, then the whip and the scourge, then the fire and the fagot: Et scutica dignum horribili sectere flagello: ThatHorace. which deserued but a flap with a ferula, must be chastised with a scourge. As on the contrary, if the offence was only against God, and not the Pope, then that which deserued to be se­uerely corrected, must haue nothing but three flaps with a Fox-tayle; which is credibly reported by some Writers, to haue beene the penance of a Nunne, which was gotten withEthelr. Abbas de quod. mira. childe in her Cloyster. Albeit another Nunne at Watton in Yorkeshire, fared farre worse for her wantonnesse with a yong Monke of the same house: for being gotten with childe by him, she was first imprisoned, (saith the Story) and then bea­ten vnreasonably, and vnseasonably too, being great with childe: then the Monke that committed this trespasse be­ing taken and stript, and bound fast to a stoole, a sharpe knife was put into the Nunnes hand, and shee was compelled by most cruell enforcement to take vengeance on those parts which had done her the mischiefe, and to eate them also, with many other filthy circumstances, which I shame to speake of; but in conclusion, to make vp the matter with a miracle, two midwiues were brought from heauen to Mistresse Nunne, by the ghost of Henry Murdach the Archbishop of Yorke, which discharged her of her childe without paine, and carryed it forth with them to heauen (with lie and all) so that it was ne­uer after seene. Is not this penance (thinke you) able to ter­rifie any one from committing the like sinne? or rather, might not this Nunne say as another of her sexe and profession said,Lumbard. Gratian. Comestor. after she had had three Bastards, which proued great Clarkes and learned men in the Church, that it was a happy scape which brought forth three such worthy bastards? so this might call her Sonne an happy Sonne, which was honoured [Page 21] with so great a miracle. But let the Popes lawes bee broken, or his triple Crowne touched, and he shall smoake for it that dares do this.

25. Their fourth doctrine tending (apparently, and by ne­cessary consequence) to loosnesse, is their doctrine of vowed chastity, whereby they enioyne single life, and prohibite ma­trimony to certaine kinds of men and women; to wit, such as enter into holy orders, teaching and maintaining, that forPighius cont. 15. de caelibatu. Cost. enchir. cap. de caelib. prop. 9. Bell. li. 2. demon. cap. 30. such it is better to go to harlots then to marry: and that to go to a harlot now and then, is but a sinne of infirmitie (as Pighi­us calleth it) but to marry, is no better then a resolued, delibe­rate, or continuall incest, vtterly without all shame. What an occasion, or rather a cause, this point of Romish doctrine hath beene of horrible silthinesse and wickednesse of life, wofull experience, in all places where the Romish Religion beareth sway, manifestly declareth. For to omit that this doctrine is but an vpstart doctrine, in respect of true antiquity, brought in first by Pope Seritius three hundred and eighty yeares after Christ, who was the first that made any restraint of Priests marriages, as it is confessed by Polidore Virgill, thePolid. de Inuent. lib. 5. ca. 4. D. 82. plur. Clicto. de contin. Sacr. cap. 4. decree on the Canon law, and Clictoueus; and yet tooke not effect vntill the time of Gregory the seuenth called Hidle­brand, in the yeare one thousand seuentie and foure: as also, to omit that this doctrine is both contrary to the precepts of holy Scripture, and practice of holy men, both vnder the law, and vnder the Gospell: for vnder the lawe both Priests andEuseb. li. 4. c. 23. Athanas. epist. ad Dracon. Prophets were married; and vnder the Gospell, both Apo­stles and Disciples had their wiues, and after them Bishops and Prestbyters: and the doctrine of the Scripture is, Mar­riage Heb. 13. 4. 1. Cor. 7. 9. 1. Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 6. is honourable among all men: and again, If they cannot ab­staine, let them marrie, for it is better to marrie then to burne: Yea, and Saint Paul giueth order concerning the wiues and children of Bishops, which had beene needlesse, if they might haue none. And lastly, to omit that this prohibiting of mar­riage is called by Saint Paul one of the doctrines of deuils, e­uery1. Tim. 4. 13. one of which might be a sufficiēt argument, not only to euince the vnsoundnesse of this doctrine, but also to demon­strate [Page 22] how likely itmust needs be to occasionate sinne, com­ming not from God, and therfore not likely to haue his bles­sing to follow it; but from the deuill, and therfore most like­ly to serue for the aduancement of his kingdome. Notwith­standing, to omit all these, and to refer them to a fitter place, let vs weigh this matter in the ballance of reason, and wee shall easily find that a great breach is hereby made for mens vnruely and vntoward affections, to burst forth into horrible and damnable sinnes.

26. For first, the gift of Continency is no common, but a rare and singular gift, which God bestoweth not vpon all, but vpon some few: this proposition is prooued by that apho­risme of our Sauiour; All men cannot receaue this thing, saue Math. 19. 11. 12 they to whom it is giuen: and in the next verse, He that is a­ble to receaue it, let him receaue it: Whereby he insinuateth, that who so euer taketh vpon him the vowe of chastity, not being able to performe the same, sinneth in so doing. It is proued also by Saint Paul in this conclusion, Euery man hath 1. Cor. [...]. 7. his proper gift of God, one this way, another that way: for spea­king of the gift of continencie, he wisheth that all men were as he himselfe: but seeing they are not so, therefore he lea­ueth it free to marrie for such as haue not that gift. But the Romish Clergy, together with the infinite orders of religi­ous Votaries, are not few but many, and those chosen pro­miscuously without any respect had, whether they be endow­ed with that gift or no: therefore, being vnable to containe, and forbidden to vse the lawfull remedy ordained by God, they must of necessity fall into lawlesse and vnordinate lusts: besides, seeing that euery man that will, be hee neuer so de­famed for incontinency, and so by experience knowne to be voyde of that same excellent gift, may become a Votary, and on the contrary (our Sauiour saith) euery man cannot re­ceaue this, what hope can there be of chastity among these men? Is the gift of chastitie indeed so common, that euery man may haue it that will? Is it so ordinary, that it is communicated to thousands of Priests, Monkes, Friars, and Nunnes? yea, to innumerable of that order in all places? [Page 23] why then, what meant Cassander, a learned diuine of theirCassand. Art. cap. 1. owne, to say, that the world was come to that passe, that a man could scarce find one of an hundred, that kept himselfe free from Eras. annot. [...] 1. Tim. 3. incontinency? And Erasmus, that the number of Monkes, and Priests, that liued in whoredome and incest, was innumerable: weigh the reason now in his iust termes, they that cannot containe, must needs burst forth, either into secret or open vn­cleannesse. But of infinite Romish votaries, few or none haue that gift to containe, therefore the rest must necessarily fall into either secret or open vncleannesse, let any man iudge now, whether this doctrine doth not directly tend vnto loosenesse.

27. If any alleadge that this gift of continency may bee obtained by fasting and prayer: I answere, two things. First, If it may be thus obtained, it is a signe that they vse but little the same holy exercises, seeing fewe among them doe attaine vnto it. Secondly, I answere, that continency is in the num­ber of those gifts, which may be denyed to a man salua salu­te, without danger of his saluation, because it is not necessa­rie to saluation, nor common to all Gods children, but pecu­liar to some. Now the promise of our Sauiour, aske, and yee shall haue, is meant of things necessary to saluation, and not of particular and speciall gifts. Thus Paul prayed thrice, that the pricke in the flesh, the messenger of Sathan might be remoued 2. Cor. 12. from him: (and some say this was concupiscence) yet he was not heard in that which he prayed for, because hee might be saued without it, as it appeared in the answer giuen vnto him: my grace is sufficient for thee. And besides, what is it but a tēp­ting of God, to refuse the ordinary remedy which God hath ordained, which is marriage, and to flye to extraordinary meanes? as if a man should refuse all bodily sustenance on earth, in hope that God will feed him extraordinarily fromPsalm. 34. heauen at his deuout request, because he hath promised that those which feare him, shall want nothing, and whatsoeuer we aske in the name of Christ, shall be graunted. Let Saint Augustine determine this doubt, whose resolution is this con­cerning all things which men pray for, which are not necessary to [Page 24] saluation. Aliquando Deus iratus, dat quod petis, & Deus Aug. Ser. 53. de verb. Dom. &c. propitius negat quod petis. Sometimes God granteth in anger, and sometimes denyeth in mercie, that which thou desirest. And let Origens practice put it out of all doubt, who to auoid incontinencie, and to quench the fiery lusts of the flesh, offe­red violence to his own flesh, by cutting off those parts wher­in concupiscence raigneth. If he had beene pers [...]aded, that by fasting and prayer he could haue obtained that gift from heauen, surely he would haue macerated his body with the one, and brawned his knees with the other, rather then to haue fallen to that desperate and vnnaturall remedy.

28. But to leaue this their vaine obiection, and to come a lit­tle neerer to the poynt, how can that doctrine choose but lead to loosenes, which crosseth not onely the ordinance of God, who was the first ordainer of Marriage, but also the instinctGenes. 3. of nature; for this was naturally instilled into all liuing Crea­tures, especially Man, at the first creation, that he should en­crease and multiply: by vertue of which institution of nature,Genes. 1. a desire is engrafted in all the posterity of Adam, of the pro­pagation of their kind, that they may (as it were) liue in their succession. And whereas Bellarmine obiecteth, that theseBell. de Cler. lib. 1. cap. 21. words (Encrease and multiply) containe not a precept, but an in­stitution of nature, and a promise of fecundity, because the same words are vttered to other Creatures, which are not capable of precepts, and also because if it were a precept, it should bind all to encrease and multiply, and so imurie should be offered to Christ, to Marie, and other holie virgines. I answere, that a [...]beit one member of his reason is vnsound, to wit, that beasts are vn­capable of precepts; for God spake to the Fish, and it cast vp Ionah on the dry land; which sheweth, that beasts in theirIonas 2. 10. kind vnderstand Gods precepts, and obey; yet we do not say that this is an absolute precept, binding all without excepti­on to marriage, but onely a liberty granted to all that will, to marrie, that thereby mankind may be still propagated: and therefore they which take away this liberty from all ecclesia­sticall persons, and monasticall Votaries, offer iniury to na­ture, and tyrannize ouer the bodies and soules of men. For, [Page 25] whence ariseth this necessary conclusion, that the vow of sin­gle life is repugnant to nature, and therefore none may take it vpon them, but those either in whome nature is defectiue, which our Sauiour saith were borne chaste from their mothers Mat. 19 12. Basil de vera virginitate. belly, or that are endowed with a supernaturall gift, as our blessed Sauiour, the blessed Virgin his mother, and other ho­ly men and women: and so by consequent it followeth, be­cause this gift is rare and extraordinary, that most of them (which by a rash vowe binde themselues from marriage) should fall into fornication and promiscuous lust. The course of nature in man-kind is like the source of a running streame, which by no dammes, nor artificiall barres can bee stopped, but it will runne either the naturall course in the channell, or some other by-passage, and that the more it is stopped, the more violently it rageth, except the fountaine and spring be dryed vp. So, except the fountaine of concupiscence in in­continent persons be dryed vp by a supernaturall and extra­ordinary worke, the more it is interrupted, the more outragi­ously it fometh. Therefore if the ordinary channell of marri­age be dammed vp, it must needs burst ouer the bankes of lawfulnes, and spread it selfe ouer the pastures and medowes of adioyning neighbours. This is the very case of our Romish shauelings, being barred from marriage: they burst sorth like wilde Bulls into other mens grounds, and defile their beds by adultery, and fill their houses with bastardy.

29. If they challenge to themselues the supernaturall gift of continency, experience sheweth, that their challenge is vaine, for not one of an hundred of them liueth chastly: and besides, as God hath giuen that gift often to the heathen and repro­bate, as Histories report, so very often, yea, most ordinarily doth he deny it to his own children: for ordinary grace doth not abolish, but sanctifie nature; so that this i [...] no gift of ordi­nary sauing grace, but a superordinary worke aboue grace, and that also many times without grace. If then it be not in the power of any to quench the instincts of nature, if [...]t be not a worke of ordinary grace to abolish nature, but it requireth extraordinary grace for the effecting thereof; if the course of [Page 26] nature be stopped one way, it will burst forth another: then we may by sound reason conclude, that the vowe of chastity and single life, and the prohibition of marriage in the Church of Rome doth open a wide gappe to all loose and licencious liuing.

30. Lastly, that all this is true, let the lamentable effects and fruits of this their doctrine stand vp for witnesse and vm­p [...]ers in this matter; for, how shall a man better iudge of the goodnesse of the cause, then by the effects? a good [...]ree can­notMatth. 7. bring forth euill fruite, nor an euill tree good fruit; euery tree is knowne by his fruit: and albeit often that which is not the cause, is put for the cause, and by the accidentall failing of the medium, or instrument, the cause may misse of his pro­per effect: Yet, when the effects are not rare, but frequent, yea, infinite; and such as are so like, that they seeme (as it were) of one stampe, and (as it were) all egges of one bird: then it must needs follow, that parentem sequitur sua proles, like childe, like parent, such as the effect, such must the cause needs be. To beginne with Nicholas, one of the seuen Dea­cons, the prime Authour of the sect of the Nicholaitans con­demned by Saint Iohn, Apoc. 2. Let Epiphanius tell vs whatEpiph. tom. 2. lib. 1. haeres. 2 [...]. his opinion was, and what fruites issued there-from. This Ni­cholas hauing a beautifull wife, when hee sawe others in ad­miration for their single life, that he might not seeme inferi­our to them, vtterly renounced the company of his wife, and determined neuer to haue fellowship with her againe. But when hee was not able to represse any longer the flame of concupiscence, and being ashamed to returne to his wife, lest he should be condemned of inconstancy, he chose rather to giue ouer himselfe to all manner of vnlawfull lust, yea, to that which is against nature. And from hence sprang the sect of the Nicholaitans, whose chiefe opinion was this, that if so be they could abstaine from lawfull marriage, it was no sinne to defile themselues with any other filthy or vnlawfull copulati­on. Here wee may behold a perfect mappe of the Romish single life, with the fruits thereof. This happened in the first period of the primitiue Church.

[Page 27]31. Afterward in the Nicene Synode, when some went a­boutSocr. li. 1. ca. 11▪ Soz. li. 1. ca 23. to prohibite marriage to the Clergy: Paphnutius a great learned Father of that assembly, gaine-said with great vehemency the proceeding of that decree; giuing this for one principall reason, that it would bee the cause of horrible im­purity and obscaenity in the Ecclesiasticall order; which, to bee a true prophecie, the euent afterward hath manifestly declared. After this, about the sixe hundreth yeare of ourHuldericus Au▪ epistol. Lord, it is reported of Gregory the great, that when hee sawe the heads of more than sixe thousand infants taken out of a Fish-pond, he sighed, and confessed that the decree of single life in the Clergie, was the cause thereof; and therefore condemning that decree, he commended the Apostles coun­sell, that it was better to marrie, then to burne, and added this moreouer, that it was better to marrie, then to giue occasion to murder.

32. After this, in the yeare eight hundred and sixtie, Hul­dericus Hulder. August. epist. ad Nich. 1. Bishop of Augusta in Germany, in his Epistle to Pope Nicholas the first, most liuely describeth the filthy fruites of Popish single life, his words be these, Nullum tam graue faci­nus, &c. There is no so great offence, which is not to be admitted, to the end that a greater then that may bee auoyded. Notwith­standing, many flatterers desirous to please men, not God, vnder a false show of continency commit greater sinnes, to wit, they defile their Fathers wiues, they abhorre not the embracings of men and bruite beasts, though they be of the most holy order, they make no scruple to abuse other mens wiues: And when as certaine Bi­shops, and Archdeacons, are so giuen ouer to lust, that they cannot abstaine, neither from adulteries, nor incests, nor other filthy and vnnameable sinnes; yet they affirme, that the chaste marriages of Priests doe stincke in their nosthrils, and forbid, yea, constraine Clergie men to abstaine from them: saying, that it is more ho­nest to be entangled with many whores in secret, then to be tyed to one wife in publique. But, woe be to you Pharisecs, which doe all to be seene of men. These be the expresse words of that reue­rend Bishop: after he thus concludeth, Whilest the Clergie are constrained by Pharisaicall fury to giue ouer the lawfull fellowship [Page 28] of one wife, they are made fornicators, adulterers, and workers of other most filthy abominations, and that which with teares we be­hold, all of them rage in such wickednesse. Hence it is that the Church of God is so scandalized, and the Clergy so despised. Who seeth not by this testimony of this great learned man in the very heate and middest of Popery, what fruites this do­ctrine then brought forth?

33. After, in the yeare one thousand and eightie, when that brand of hell Hidlebrand, otherwise called Gregory the seuenth, sate in the Romane seate, who laboured earnestly to bring in that tyrannicall decree vpon the Clergie in Germa­nie: Auentinus thus writeth, Gratum hoc fuit scortatoribus, Auentinus. quibus, &c. This was acceptable to whoremongers, to whom now it was lawfull, in stead of one wife, to haue the fellowship of sixe hundred harlots. Hence many false Prophets tooke occasion by fables and miracles to cast mists ouer the truth, and by drawing places of Scripture to their purpose, to deceyue the people. In a word, when as very few did truely make warre with lust, and some did faine continency for gaine sake, the greatest part, vnder the honest name of chastitie, did commit whoredomes, incests, adul­teries euery where without punishment: thus writeth Auentine touching those times.

34. After this, in the yeare 1102. in a Synode at London, where Anselme the Archbishop of Canterbury laboured with tooth and naile to interdict Priests of the vse of lawfull mar­riage, allowed before vnto them by King William; many op­posed themselues against him, saying, it would be very dan­gerous, Ne dum mundicias viribus maiores appeterent, &c. L [...]st, while they desired greater purity then their strength was a­ble to beare, they should fall into horrible vncleannes, to the great ignominy of Christian Religion. And when as notwithstanding Anselme had effected this prohibition, the next yeare after complaint was made vnto him, that in stead of marriage for­biddē, the horrible sin of Sodomie raigned ouer all England, and from the Clergie crept also into the Laity; which he en­deuoured to restraine also, but all in vaine: for the ordinance of God being neglected, what can the wisdome and lawes of man doe good?

[Page 29]35. But were the latter ages any whit better reformed?Bernard. De conuers. ad Clericos cap. 29. peraduenture, in these sixe hundred yeares last past, the Po­pish Cleargie, were more holy and lesse licencious. Let Saint Bernard be iudge of his times; If (saith he) according to the Prophecie of Ezekiel, we should digge through the wall, that we might looke into Gods house, there will peraduenture appeare within the wall a filthy abomination; for after fornications suc­ceede adulteries, after incests, the passions of ignominie and works of filthinesse are not wanting. I would to God that it neither be­hooued the Apostle to write these things, nor vs to relate them, that it might not be beleeued, that such abominable lust possessed the mind of man. Alas, the enemie of mankind hath besprinck­led the body of the Church with the execrable ashes of Sodome, & that many of the very ministers therof: And in the end he thus concludes; Many (I say, not all) yet many (they can neither be hidden for multitude, neither do they seeke to be hidden for im­pudency) I say, many seeme to haue giuen libertie to the occasion of the flesh, ābstaining from the remedie of marriage, and bursting forth into all manner of wickednesse. Againe, the same Bernard in another place thus complaineth, Tolle de Ecclesia, &c. Take Ber. sup. cant. ser. 66. from the Church honourable marriage, and the bed vndefiled, and thou shalt fill it full of whoremongers, incestuous persons, bugg [...]rers, and all kind of vncleane ones. And a little before in the same Sermon he giueth the reason hereof, Omni immunditiae laxat habenas qui nuptias damnat: He that condemnes marriage, lets loose the reynes to all vncleannesse.

36. Robert Holket an English man, and a Dominican Frier,Holket sup. sap. lect. 173. that liued in the yeare of our Lord one thousand three hun­dred and fortie, thus complaineth of the corruption in the Clergie of his time, Sed proh dolor, &c. But alas, in these daies the saying of Iob is verified, Behold, they that serue the Lord, are not stable and constant, &c. For of the Priests some be Angels of Sathan by discord and contention, some Apostatious by pride, some bee filthy spirits by rioutousnesse and vncleannesse, and some Angels of the bottomles pit, by couetousnes; and a little after, Not a few of our moderne Priests doe serue the most vild and filthy God Priapus. Panormitane, a man of great fame in the Councell of [Page 30] Basill, after he had shewen the vowe of continencie not to bePanor. par. 3. de Cler. coniug. cap. cum olim. of the essence of Priest-hood, nor by the lawe of God, but a constitution of the Church, addeth these words: I beleeue that it were a wholesome ordinance for the good & saluation of soules, to leaue it to m [...]ns owne wils to marrie, or not, because experience doth show, that now a daies they doe not liue spiritually and vnde­filedly, but that they are defiled by vnlawfull copulation, whereas they might liue chastly with their owne wiues.

37. I could adde vnto these testimonies the report of Iohn Gerson, touching his time: who complained that some Cloy­sters Gers. tom. 1. decl. defect. vir. Eccl. Lib. 1. fastor. of Nunnes were become Stewes of strumpets and whores. And of Mantuan a Carmelite Italian Frier, whose verses tou­ching this poynt are sufficiently knowne.

The life of the Fathers was better being married, then ours to whom marriage is forbidden: and of Polidor Virgill, whoPolydor. Virg. de Inuent. li. 5. ca. 4. liued in King Henrie the Eights daies; whose censure is this, that this enforced chastity is so farre from excelling that marri­age-chastity, that no crime hath brought more shame to the order of Priesthood, more euill to Religion, nor more griefe to all good men, then that blot of the filthinesse of Priests. But that I feare I haue too much offēded chaste eares already, with raking into this dunghill, I conclude with the report of Martin Luther, he saith, that he saw Cardinals at Rome, which were accoun­ted holy for no other cause, but that they were content onely to commit fornication and adultery with women, and did not giue themselues to other vnnaturall lusts. Thus, as it were in a mappe, I haue described the filthy and abominable fruites that proceed from that Romish doctrine of vowed chastitie. Is it possible that the spring should be good, when the streams are thus corrupt?

38. The fift doctrine of Poperie (giuing manifest occasi­on5. of liberty to the professours thereof) is their doctrine of veniall sinnes. By which they teach, that many acts which are transgressions of the laws of God & men, yet are not pro­perly [Page 31] sins, nor deserue the wrath of God, but of their nature are pardonable; and therfore he which committeth any such,Henr. Sum. mor. cap. 20. lib. 4. Tho. par. 3. q. 83. & 81. art. 3. Ouand. 4. d. 16. Pinwood. li. 3. de celeb. miss. Gregor. de Val. tom. 3. p. 1090. doth neither offer iniury to God, nor breake charity in respect of his neighbour, and so deserues not hell, nor is bound to be sorry for them, but that the knocking of the brest, going to Church, being sprinckled with holy water, or the Bishops blessing, or crossing ones selfe, or doing any worke of cha­rity, though we neuer thinke actually of them, is a sufficient satisfaction for them. This is the doctrine not onely of the Schoolemen, but also of the finest, and refyning Iesuites, e­uen of Bellarmine himselfe, who thus distinguisheth veniallBellar. de omiss. grat. & stat. pec­cati lib. 1. ca. 3. sinnes, that some are veniall of their own nature and kind, to wit, such as haue for their obiect an euill and inordinate matter, but which is not repugnant to the law of God, and of our neighbour: others are veniall by the imperfection of the worke, which imper­fection ariseth partly, ex surreptione, that is, by vnaduised fal­ling into them, without full consent of will; and partly, ex parui­tate materiae, by the smalnesse of the matter which is committed, as if a man should steale a halfe-peny, or some such trifle. This is the Cardinals doctrine, which (as neere as I could) I hau [...] word for word set downe. And that wee may more fully vn­derstand their meaning, they affirme in very deede that they are no sinnes, but aequiuoce, that is so called, but not [...]o in truth; for the word peccatum, sinne, doth not vniuoce, a [...]ee [...]eni­allBellar. de amiss. grat. & stat. pec­cat. lib. 1. cap. 12. 1. Ioh. 3. sinnes, as it doth to mortall; and therefore it is their gene­rall opinion, that they are not against, but beside the lawe, that is in plaine words, not sinne: for euery sinne is a transgression of the law. Now, let the Readeriudge whether our doctrine, that all sinnes of their owne nature are mortall, and deserue condemnation, except they be repēted of, or heirs, that some are veniall, and binde not the offender to condemnation, doe more tend to liberty: whether we restraine more the people from sinning, that thus say vnto them, All your sinnes (though neuer so small) are of their owne nature damnable, except by faith in the bloud of Christ they be purged away, and by re­pentance, which is a fruite of faith sorrowed for, and labou­red against: or they that say thus to them, A number of your [Page 32] ordinarie sinnes, are not damnable, you neede not faith in Christs bloud to purge them; nor repentance to bewaile them; nor care and endeuour to preuent them: who seeth not that our doctrine pulleth in, and theirs letteth out the reynes of libertie to our corrupt nature? for when a man be­leeueth that he may do many things, which are in deed trans­gressions of Gods lawe, without offence to God, or hurt to his neighbour, or wounding of his owne conscience; and, that after he hath committed them, he needeth not greatly to repent of them, or to be sorry for them; but that they are done away by saying a Lords prayer, or hearing a Masse, or creeping to a Crosse, or receiuing a little Holy water; what neede he make any conscience of these so sleight trifles; nay, how can hee choose but neglect and make light account of them? This is one of the deuils subtile deuices or iuggling trickes which Saint Paul speaketh of, where with hee labou­reth2. Cor. 2.11. to seduce simple soules, for either hee will aggrauate our sinnes to driue vs to desperation, or extenuate and excuse them to draw to presumption: the rocke and gulfe whereat many thousand soules suffer shipwracke. And this last the most dangerous, wherein the Papists shew themselues the deuils agents and factours, by this their doctrine of veniall sinnes: for what is this but to excuse sinne, and to extenuate it, and so to make men presume to commit those things which they esteeme of no greater moment?

39. The truth of this will more clearely appeare, if wee take a suruay a little of those particular sinnes, which they account as veniall. To sweare by the bloud of God, or wounds, or bodie of Christ, is no blasphemie (saith Cardinall Caietane) if it Caietan. in sum. pag. 49. be spoken in a brawle, or in some perturbation of mind, neither is it to be counted any more than a veniall sinne. Againe, formall cursing (saith Gregorie de Valentia) although in it owne kinde it Grego. de Val. tom 3. pa. 1090. be a mortall sinne; yet it may be onely a veniall, to wit, in respect either of the smalnesse of the matter, or the want of deliberation in the speaker: and hereby (saith he) Parents cursing their chil­dren with bitter words, and deuoting them to the deuill, may often M [...]l. tract. 2. ca 9 con. 1. pro. 5. be excused from mortall sinne. An officious lye, and a lye in sport, [Page 33] are but veniall sinnes (saith Molanus:) the same Authour af­firmeth, that if any man steale some little thing, suppose an halfe peny, (as Bellarmine giueth instance) whereby no notable Bell de amiss. grat. & stat pec­cat. lib. 1. ca. 3. hurt is caused, this is to bee esteemed no mortall sinne. Againe, rash iudgement (though consent bee added thereto) is regularly but a veniall sinne: so also is the painting of the face (saith Mo­lanus.)Molan ibidem. Cardinall Caietane reckoneth vp a number such like, as for example. page 18. Partiality in iudgement, and acception of person, if it be not pernitious. page 22. Flattery, when we praise one for ve­niall euils, and it be without any manifest hurt. page 25. Ambition, that is an inordinate desire of honour, if it be not for euill deeds, or im­moderate. page 27. Arnogancie, whereby a man attributeth that to himselfe which is farre aboue him; if it be without preiudice of his neighbour. page 30. Craft, if it bee not ioyned with damage. page 30. Co­uetousnesse, as it is opposed to liberality, that is, an inordinate de­sire of money, and greedy keeping of it being gotten, because it is not against, but besides charity. pa. 99. & 101. Contempt of our neighbour and Superiour in small trifles. page 102. To contend in words against a known truth; if the opposite falshood be not pernitious. page 105. To rayle vpon our neighbour to his face, if it proceede from passion, or bee but a light reproach. page 110. Curiositie, if it bee naked, without some other euill ioyned with it. page 119. To mocke and scorne our neighbour; if in a small matter. page 131. Drunkennesse; if it be not full and compleat, to wit, if a man drinke till the house seeme to goe round, and yet is not depriued of reason; yea, if it bee of purpose and with full in­tention. page 317. For a childe not to reuerence his Parents; so that it be free from notorious iniurie and contempt. page 318. To deceiue; if in a small mater. page 322. Gluttony is then onely mortall, when a man makes the delight in eating the last end. page 340. Hypocrisie, to wit, thus farre forth, if a man faine himselfe to be good in some thing, when hee is not, or better then he is. page 354. Filthy speech is most vsuall, but veni­all. page 369. To disdaine a mans neighbour, is commonly but a veniall sinne. page 401. To iudge rashly of our neighbour, is either veniall or mor­tall, according to the greatnes of the thing where of we giue iudge­ment. page 447. Idlenesse; if it haue no other mischiefe to accompany it. These, and a number such like are reckoned vp by that Au­thor; to which I might adde many more out of other Romish [Page 34] writers, but these may suffice for our purpose, to demonstrate what liberty this doctrine giues to loosnesse. For hence men may be bold to sweare, to curse, to raile, to back-bite, to steale, to be drunke, to be idle, &c. & cloke all vnder this vaile, They are but veniall sinnes. Yea, and because the common people are not able to vnderstand their nice distinctions of, against, and beside charitie; surreption, and irruption; great and small dammage, &c. therefore often grosse and great sinnes creepe in vnder the name of venials; if this be not a doctrine of liberty, what is?

40. The sixt and last doctrine tending to loosnesse (the6. last, I meane, of those which I intend to propound in this Dis­course, for there are many more that tend to the same end) is their doctrine of implicite and infolded faith; where by they teach, that if a man know some necessary poynts of Re­ligion, as the doctrine of the God-head of the Trinitie, of Christs incarnation and Passion, &c. it is needlesse to busie himselfe about the rest by a particular or distinct knowledge: but it sufficeth to giue assent to the Church, and to beleeue as the Pastors beleeue. This implicite faith is the mother of ignorance, and this ignorance (say they is) the mother of deuotion: but what kind of deuotion I pray you? such as the mother is, such is the daughter, a blinde mother, andRom. 10. 2. Acts 3. 17. a blinde daughter: such a deuotion and zeale which the Iewes had, when they crucified Christ; or as Saint Paul Acts 22. 3. 4. had, when he persecuted the Church of Christ; or which the Gentiles had, when they thought they did God good seruiceIoh. 16. 2. by putting to death the primitiue Christians. Like Poliphe­mus, when his eye was bored out by Ʋlisses, dashed himselfe [...]ortull. against euery rocke: so doe these blinde Romanists, the eye of knowledge being bored out by this pernitious doctrine, dash themselues against the rocke of Heresie in matter of faith, and impietie in manners: for all errour in doctrine a­riseth from ignorance of the Scriptures, You erre, not knowing Mat. 22. 19. the Scripture, and the power of God, saith our Sauiour: and er­ring in manners, proceedeth from the same fountaine; for if the hyding of Gods word in the heart, is a preseruatiue against [Page 35] sinne, as the Prophet Dauid auoucheth: then the ignorancePsal. 119. 11. of Gods word must needs be the cause of many errours and enormities in life. To this agreeth the opinion of Chrysostome; Scripturarum ignoratio haereses peperit: haec vitam corruptam Chrys. de Laz & Diuite, Hom. 3. inuexit, haec sursum ac deorsum omniamiscuit. The ignorance of Scripture hath bred heresies, brought in corruption of life, and turned all things vpside downe. And also of Saint Hie­rome, Hierom. who sayth plainely, Ama scientiā Scripturarum, & car­nis vitia non amabis. Loue the knowledge of the Scriptures, and thoushalt not loue the vices of the flesh. Whereby hee giueth vs to vnderstand, that where there is no loue of knowledge,Ibid hom. 13. in 2. Cor. Greg. Niss. orat. de ijs qui ade­unt Hierus. there must needs be the loue of vice: the reason is manifest, because the Scripture is a most exquisite rule and exact squire to try all our actions by, as Chrysostome calleth it, and a straight and inflexible rule, as Gregory Nissen termeth it. Now, if this rule, squire and ballance be hid from vs, how can we square our actions aright? how can wee giue them their iust poyse and weight? As the Carpenter that hath lost his rule and line, cannot but erre grosly in his worke: So the Christian that is depriued of this knowledge of Gods word, must needs runne into infinite foule and grosse enormities.

41. From this fountaine, conioyned with those which went before, springeth the monstrous corruption of man­ners in all places, wh [...] Popery raigneth: especially in Ita­lie and Rome, vnder the Popes nose. They obiect to vs the great and horrible disorder and corruption which is among Protestants; but we on the other side, as we stand not to iu­stifie our selues in this kind, but rather be waile the prophane­nesse of all estates in these dayes, euen vnder the Gospell; so we dare boldly say, that in the time of Popery heretofore, and in places where it now swayeth, their impiety and prophane­nesse doth as farre exceed ours, as a great mountaine doth a little molehill. Of all Countries in the world, Italie is the Popes owne peculiar: and yet that is the very siacke of the world for sinne; witnesse Aencas Siluius, who liued almostAencas Sil. Com. in dicto & sacto Alphons. two hundred yeares since, who sayth, that it was the Italian fashion to liue by robberie, and to trample vnder focte all equity [Page 36] and religion. And for the moderne times, witnesse the com­mon prouerbe. An Englishman Italionate, a deuill incarnate. Rome is the Popes owne [...]eate, for it is the spirituall Babylon, built vpon seuen hils, and yet that is the sincke of Italy, wit­nesse their owne Mantuan. I pudor in villas, &c. Mant. li. 2. Fast.

Depart honesty into Villages, the Citie is wholly become a Stewes, and Trauailors report, it was neuer so euill as it is at this day; witnesse their owne pasquill.

As if there were none but such at Rome.

42. And this the best of them (against their wils) acknow­ledge, when they confesse Rome to be mysticall Babylon: for why is Rome so stiled in the Scripture, but because it resem­bleth the Assyrian Babylon in pride, idolatry, filthinesse, and especially in most cruell persecution of the Church of God? and for the same cause it is called spirituall Sodome and Egypt: Sodeme, for pride and filthines, Egypt, for Idolatry and cruelty. The Popes court is the Popes owne Sanctum Sanctorum, if in reuerence to that holy place I may so say, yet that is the sincke of the Citie. Witnesse Catherina Senensis that holy wo­man, whom Pope Pius the second canonized for a Saint, who thus complained, that in the Court of Rome, where should bee A [...]o. [...]t. 3. [...]it. [...]3. cap. 14. a delicate Paradise of vertues, she sound a stincke of hellish vices. Concerning the whole state of the Romane Church, both Lai [...]ty and Clergy, heare what the iudgement of Durand Duran. de [...]oncil. [...]t. [...]7. was in his time; Desperata est salus Romanae Ecclesiae, &c. The saluation of the Romane Church is desperate; of which is ve­rified the sayings of the Prophet Esay, (It shall be a bed of Dra­gons:)Card. All ac. de reform. Eccles. and of Petrus de Alliaco; a Cardinall in his time, Ad eum statum venit, &c. The Romane Church is come to that state, that it is not worthy to be gouerned but by reprobates. And of Platina himselfe, the Popes owne Secretary, Hac nostra aetate Platina d [...] vita M [...]. (sayth he) vitia cò crcuerunt, &c. In this our age vices are so [Page 37] increased, that they seeme to haue scarce left vs any place in Gods mercy, &c. After the Councell of Trent, which promised a reformation, heare how a Bishop of their owne, Espensaeus Epis. Espen. com. in tit. complaineth; All hope (saith he) of reformation is taken away: where vnder the Sunne is there greater licenciousnes, clamour, impurity, I will not say madnesse, and impudency, then in this Ci­tie? such, and so great, as none can beleeue, but he which hath seene it; none can deny, but he which hath not seene it. I could heape vp many like testimonies for the clearing of this poynt, but it is needlesse, seeing that all that haue either gotten ex­perimentall knowledge by their trauailes, or speculatiue by their reading, can & will iustifie the truth of this position, that in no place of the world, more impiety, atheisme, impurity, cruelty, poysoning trechery, & all maner of villanie raigneth, then in Italy the Popes owne dominions, and in Rome vnder his Holinesse nose. So that for shame (but that the whore of Babylon, and her adherents haue brazen foreheads) they may cease to lay that imputation of loosnesse and wickednesse of life vpon vs and our Religion, and assume the aspersion of it vnto themselues, being farre more guilty, and their religion directly tending thervnto, by these six maine grounds which I haue in this first motiue propounded to the iudgement of euery indifferent Reader: The Lord of his mercy open our eyes, that we may discerne the truth, and our hearts, that we may loue it, and embrace it.

MOTIVE. II. That religion, which maintaines by the grounds thereof things forbidden, by all lawes both of God, of Nature, and of Man, cannot be the true religion: but such is the reli­gion of the Romane Church: Ergo.

THe first proposition in this reason is vnquestionable andMAIOR. without controuersie: for the law of God is one part of [Page 38] true religion, as the Gospell is the other: and therfore what­soeuer contradicts this law, is opposite vnto true religion, and so cannot be true religion it selfe: for truth is not opposite vnto truth, but falshood: and the lawe of nature is nothing but the law of God, engrauen in the hearts of all men by the instinct of nature, which Tullie calleth a lawe engendred, notCic. pro Milon. Lex nota non data. imposed, borne with vs, not laid vpon vs. And the positiue laws of men, if they be good, are nothing els but extracts out of the law of God, & characters of the law of nature. That re­ligion therefore that crosseth all these lawes by allowance of such things, which are by them all condemned, cannot in any wise be the true religion, but must needs stand guilty of fals­hoode and errour. Now, that the Romish religion is suchMINOR. (which is the second proposition in the reason) that is my taske to proue, and I hope I shall by inuincible arguments make good the same.

1. And first, what can bee more contrary to the lawes ofI. God, of Nature, of Man, then treason and rebellion against Princes? for the lawe of God commandeth ciuill obedience to the Magistrate, by the first precept of the second Table: and our Sauiour in the Gospell biddeth to giue to Caesar those Matth. 22. 2 [...]. things that belong vnto Caesar: and Saint Paul chargeth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers, because all power is of God: Rom. 13. [...]. euen tyrannicall power, as our Sauiour confesseth to Pilate: Thou hadst no power ouer mee, except it was giuen thee from a­boue: Ioh. 19. 11. where he acknowledgeth, that Pilates power (though he was a tyrant) was of God; and therefore submitteth him­selfe vnto it. As for the law of nature, it requireth as much of all; for as in the bodie naturall, all the outward members and inward faculties are gouerned by reason, residing in the head, and in the body oiconomike, all the familie is directed by the Father or Master thereof: so in the body politique, all the members of a Common-wealth must by natures decree be obedient to the King or gouernour, whom to resist, is to rebell against nature, as it is against nature for the member to mutiny against the head; or for children and seruants to be disobedient to their Fathers or Masters: Neither are the [Page 39] lawes positiue any whit behinde: for no offence by lawe is more seuerely punished, then crimen laesae Maiestatis, that is, high treason against the Kings person or State: and that not onely in this our Kingdome, but in all others, as is sufficient­ly knowen.

2. Now, that the Romish doctrine and religion is a sup­porter of treason, and an animater of traytors against their Soueraignes; I call to witnesse, first, their owne principles, and secondly, their practice. Their principles are these: As Toll. Instr. Sacer. lib. 1. cap. 13. long as the Prince continueth excommunicate, the Subiect is freed from the oath of subiection: this is the Position of a Cardi­nall, whose authority was so great in the Church of Rome, that whatsoeuer he wrote, was allowed as sound and authen­ticall, without examination or supervizing. To him I adde aSimanc. Inst. lib. 23. Sect. 11. Bishop, whose writings, after supervision and examination, were approued as Catholique doctrine, and to containe in them nothing contrary to the receiued faith of the Romane Church: his Position is this, Assoone as a Christian King be­comes hereticall, forthwith people are freed from their subiection. The condition in the first Position is, if the King be excom­municate: in the second, if he be hereticall; which though different in termes, yet in substance are all one, for euery he­retique is excommunicate, quatenus apertè haereticus, in thatVal. Ies. tom. [...]. in Them. disp. 1. qu. 12. he is an open heretique, if not by name, yet in deed, and by right, and so Subiects may lawfully deny him obedience, saith another Iesuite: and what is an hereticke in their diui­nity,Alph. de Cast. l. 1. de iust. punit. haer. cap. 10. I pray you? Marry, Whosoeuer maintaineth any doctrine expresly condemned by the Church of Rome, hee is to be accoun­ted (say they) an obstinate hereticke. To these adde the sen­tence of another Cardinall, euen our owne Countriman Al- in his Apology for Stanlies treason, who ioyneth both these two conditions together as two twinnes. By reason (saith he)Cardinal Allen. of Queene Elizabeths excommunication and heresie, it was not onely lawfull for any of her Subiects, but euen they were bound in conscience, to depriue her of any strength, which lay in their power to doe, and to deliuer her Armies, Townes, or fortresses into her enemies hands, she no more being the right owner of them. But [Page 40] all this while we haue not the pillar of Popery, Bellarmine, it may be he is of another mind: heare therefore his resoluti­on. Non licet Christianis tolerare, &c. It is not lawfull for Bell. de Rom. pōt. lib. 5 cap. 7. Christians to tolerate a King that is an infidell, or an heretike, if he endeuour to draw his Subiects to his heresie or infidelity. This is braue Bellarmines resolution of this case. Neither doth he barely set it downe, but laboureth to proue it by many argu­ments throughout that whole Chapter: indeed he pinneth it all vpon the Popes sleeue; he must pronounce the King to be an heretike, and they like sheepe must auoyde him as a wolfe; he must forbid them to obey, and they must forthwith fall to rebellion: that whole seuenth Chapter is worth the reading, if any desire to know the full and compleat doctrine of the Romish Church, concerning the poynt of rebellion and trea­son against Princes. And that this was the doctrine not of some few among them, but of all in generall: Let a Fryer ofSigebert. Chron. Anno 1088. their owne testifie about three hundred yeares since; Sigebert mencioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Empe­ror, thus writeth; Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men, this nouelty, that I say not heresie, had not as yet sprung vp in the world, that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subie­ction to euill Princes, and though they haue sworne allegeance to them, yet they owe them no fidelity, neither shall hee be accounted periur'd which thinketh against the King, yea, hee that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate, and he that doth against him shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periurie. Here we may behold the doctrine of that age, and withall, that by this Fryers iudgement concurring with vs, it is not onely no­uelty, but a point of heresie to dissolue the bond of allegeāce, which Subiects owe vnto their Princes, vpon any pretence whatsoeuer.

3. But all these are but the opinions of priuate men, and not the decrees of the Church: heare therefore what the Church speaketh, by the pretended head thereof the Pope, who (as they affirme) cannot erre whilest he sits in the chaire of Peter, to determine matters of faith. Gregory the seuenth,Gratian. [...]. 15. q. 6. alias, Hildobrand, thus determineth, We by Apostolicall authority [Page 41] doe absolue all from their oaths which they haue giuen to persons excommunicate. And another Pope of later time, in his Bull against Queene Elizabeth, thus; We absolue all Subiects from Bulla Pij Quin. their faith they haue plight with Elizabeth their Queen. A third Pope Paulus Tertius did excommunicate Henry the Eight,Pet. Math. Cem. in bul. Pij Quin. King of England, and commanded his nobles to beare armes against him: and to make vp the full squadron of Popes, when as the Vniuersite of Salamanca determined, that all Catholiques which did not forsake the defence of the Eng­lish, and follow the traytor One all in Ireland, did sinne mor­tally, and could not obtaine euerlasting life, except they should desist: Pope Xistus giueth this censure of their deter­mination,Lib. de iusta ab­dic. Hen. 3. pa. 370. Those Diuines (saith he) haue done the parts of good Lawyers, Confessours, and Doctours. Many more testimonies to this effect might be accumulated, but these are sufficient (because wee shall haue occasion to speake hereof more at large hereafter) to all that are not either bewitched with the enchantments of the whore of Babylon, or blinded with pre­iudice, to shew how both in their principles and their pra­ctice, they maintaine treason and rebellion against Princes, contrary to the lawes of God, of nature, and of man.

4. A doctrine Cousin german vnto this, & of the same kind,2. though not of the same degree, is that their Position touching the dissoluing of all bonds of naturall and ciuill society: wher­by they resolue, that no communion or fellowship is to bee held with heretiques, that is, with Protestants, by whatsoe­uer bond of nature or ciuility they be obliged therevnto: and therefore the Father is bound to dis-inherite and cast off his Sonne, the Sonne to deny and disobey his Father, the wife is forbidden to render due beneuolence to her husband, the seruant is commanded to disobey his Master, the debter to deny payment to his Creditor, the Countriman to deny his owne Country, the kinsman to disclaime his kindred, if any of these be heretiques, that is, be Protestants. What a religion is this, that not only choaketh the breath of humane society, but euen stifleth the life of nature it selfe? Hee that desireth to see these things proued, let them reade Doctor Mortons [Page 42] first Booke of Romish positions and practices of rebellion, and also his reply vnto the moderate answere, where he shall find them largely and foundly discouered and confirmed.

5. Againe, by their doctrine of equiuocation, they teach and maintaine open and notorious lying and periury, such as the very heathen of stricter life and simpler iudgement ab­hor'd: their doctrine is this; A man (saith Tollet) is not al­waies Toll. li. 4. de Iust. Sacerd. ca. 21. bound to answere according to the meaning of the asker, but may sometimes vse equiuocation, and deceiue the hearer: this is lawfull (saith he) whē the Iudge requireth an oth against iustice, or when he is not a competent Iudge (as another speaketh:) as for example, if the Iudge demand, Hast thou done this? he may an­swere, I haue not (though he haue) with this secret meaning, to tell it thee, or at this time, or some such like things. And if an husband aske his wife whether shee be an adulteresse, she may answere no (though she be) with this mentall reseruati­on [to reueale it to him] and if a man be constrained to sweare that he will take a woman to his wife, he may doe it safely al­though he neuer meane it, with this close clause in his mind (if she shall after please him.) Thus farre Tollet.

6. Now of late dayes, one hath divulged a whole Treatise in defence of this monstrous doctrine; to the which Blackwell the Arch-priest hath giuē this solemne approbatiō, that it is a very godly, learned & Catholique Tractate, & worthy to be publi­shed in print, to the comfort of the afflicted, & instructiō of the god­ly. The author of this Tractate thus concludeth, If a Catholike or any other person shal be demanded vpon his oath before a Ma­gistrate, whether a Priest be in such a place, he may (though hee know the contrary) securely in conscience answere, No, without periury, with a secret meaning reserued in his mind, namely, that he is not there, so as a man is bound to reueale him. Againe, if one shall aske me whether such a stranger lyeth in my house, I may answere, he lyeth not in my house (albeit he do) meaning Non mentitur: this last is verball equiuocation, the former is mentall reseruation, which are the two approued kindes of their equiuocating art.

7. If this filthy strumpet be not the mother of two foule [Page 43] daughters, Lying, and Periury: lying, if by a bare asseuera­tion; periury, if ioyned with an othe: let all that haue but common sense and reason iudge, and let the Enquest that shall enquire into this matter be, first, heathen Philosophers; secondly, the Popish writers themselues; thirdly, the Fathers and Doctours of the Church; and fourthly, which is of grea­ter moment then all the rest, the holy Scripture of God di­uinely inspired, and cannot deceiue, nor be deceiued. Let vs heare the Philosophers verdict; A Lye, saith Tully, is a false Tullie. enunciation of words, with an intent to deceaue: and againe, he defines dolus malus, that is, deceit to be, when one thing is Cic. de offic. 3. pretended, another acted; this is a false action. So, in like man­ner a false diction, which is, a lye, must needs bee when one thing is spoken by the mouth, another vnderstood in the heart: therefore the ordinary Grammaticall notation of this word mentiri, to lye, is quasi contra mentemire, as it were to goe against the minde: and Aristotle sayth, that speech is or­dained Arist. de interpr. for this cause, to signifie and expresse the secret concepti­ons of the mind: therfore when the mouth and the mind are at variance, then the law of nature is peruerted, and in stead of a naturall and true-borne childe Truth, a bastard, to wit, a lye is produced: But they which equiuocate, pretend one thing, and intend another; they speake one thing, & meane another; their heart and their tongue, like vntuned strings, are at iarre with themselues, and therefore by no meanes can they be ex­cused from open and notorious lying.

8. Now, if an oath bee mixed, then a fouler monster isToll. de Sept. peccat. cap. 54. brought forth, euen Periury; for what is periurie, but accor­ding to their own diuinity, a lye made in an oath? and is not equiuocating, when the equiuocator is sworne to speake the truth, periury? Let Tully determine this doubt, if it bee a doubt, Not to sweare a falshood, is to bee forsworne, but not to Cic. de offic. 3. performe or make good that which thou hast sworne according to thine owne meaning, as customably it is conceiued by thy words, is periury: all the world cannot more directly cut the throat of all equiuocation then this doth.

9. But I leaue the Philosophers, and come to their owne [Page 44] Schoolemen. To lye (saith Lumbard) is when a man speaketh Lum. l. 3. dist. 38 any thing contrary to that which he thinketh in his mind. It is a lye (saith Aquinas) when a man will signifie another thing, then Aqui. 2. 2. q. 111. art. 1. Lum. l. 3. dist. 39 that which he thinketh in his mind. Againe, Lumbard. Whoso­cuer vseth craft or subtiltie in an oath, defileth his conscience with a double guilt, for he both taketh the name of God in vaine, and also deceiueth his neighbour. And Aquinas, their great Doc­tor, condemneth in expresse words this equiuocating tricke of theirs: If a Iudge (saith he) shall require any thing which he Aqui. 2. 2. 4. 69. art. 1. cannot by order of law, the party accused, (what, may he equiuo­cate?) No. he is not bound to answere (in deed) but either by appeale, or some other meanes, may deliuer himselfe; but in no case may be tell a lye, or vse falshood, or any kind of craft or de­ceit. This was then good diuinity: but now the Iesuites, our pretended resiners of Popery, haue coyned a new kind of di­uinity; but like counterset slips, it will not abide the tryall. Heare what Scotus saith, another Schooleman, Dicere non fe­ci, Scotus lib. 5. de inst. q. 6. art. 2. &c. To say I did not that, which I know I haue done, although I speake it with this reseruation (that I may signifie it to you) is not equiuocation, but a plaine lye. To conclude with Maldo­nate, Mald. Com. in Luc. vl [...]. v. 28. Quisquis fingendo, &c. Whosoeuer (saith he) by saining doth goe about to deceiue another, although he intend some other thing in his mind, without doubt, lyeth; for otherwise there would be no lye, which might not by this meanes be defended.

10. Thus we haue the verdict of diuers of their own Wri­ters, touching this monstrous doctrine. Let vs heare now what the Fathers thinke of it, and let Saint Hierome speake first: None is a lyer (saith he) but he that thinks otherwise then Hieron. in 1. ad Corinth. ca. 4. he speaketh. Therfore the equiuocator is a lyar, for he thinketh otherwise then he speaketh: as when he affirmeth (I am no Priest) when he is one, he thinketh hee is that which he saith he is not. Is Saint Augustine of a contrary minde? no, hee agreeth with Hierome in this, though they iarred in some o­ther things. He that speaketh (saith he) falsly against his con­science, Aug. li. contramend. cap. 5. doth properly lye, but so doth our equiuocator. And for Periury, This (saith Augustine) is the very forme of Periu­rie, Idem Serm. 28. de verbis Aposl. to thinke that to be false which thou dost sweare. Thus doth [Page 45] the equiuocatour, for when hee sweareth hee knoweth not a man, and yet knoweth him, doth hee not manifestly thinke that to be false which he sweareth? his mentall reseruation cannot saue him from the pillory; seeing, as Isidore saith, God Isi lor. de summo bono. li. 1. ca. 13. doth valew an oath not by the sense of the speaker, but according to the sense of him to whom the oath was made. Thus by the ver­dict of these three Fathers, their doctrine of equiuocation is guilty both of lying and periury.

11. And that I may leaue them without a starting hole, let them heare what the Iury of Life and Death saith, I meane the holy Prophets and Apostles, yea, what GOD the Iudge himselfe saith. Thou shalt not (saith he) Beare false witnesse a­gainst thy Neighbour: No, nor of thy neighbour: therfore much lesse against thy selfe, or of thy selfe: but the equiuocatour doth both: first, against his Neighbonr, when by a false sug­gestion he perswadeth him to beleeue an vntruth; and of his neighbour, when hee reporteth that of him which is vntrue: and secondly, of, and against himselfe, by confessing him­selfe to be that which he is not, or denying himselfe to be that which hee is. Equiuocation then is a plaine breach of this Commandement, and therefore a lye at the least. The Pro­phet Ieremy interpreting this precept, as the manner of the Prophets was, giues it affirmatiuely thus, Thou shalt sweare in Ierem. 4. 1. Psal. 15. truth, &c. And the Prophet Dauid saith, that the righteous man speakes in truth. Now, what is it to sweare or speake in truth, Azorius the Iesuite will tell vs, that It is either for the confir­mation Azor. li. 11. mor, cap. 2. of a truth, or in a probable opinion of that to be true which we sweare or speake. But the equiuocatours speach or oath is neither for the truth, nor from the truth, and therefore a lye, if not grosse periury. Againe, the Prophet Dauid sets downe this as one note of a righteous man, that he speakes the truth Psal. 15. [...]. from his heart: but the Equiuocatour either speaketh not the truth at all, or at least speaketh not from the heart, whereby he is euidently conuinced to be none of those that shall dwell in Gods Tabernacle, or asend into his holy Mountaine. Lastly, when as Saint Paul was taxed by some false brethren to be carnally minded, because promising to come to Corin­thus, [Page 46] he came not, doth he excuse himselfe by equiuocation, saying, that he promised one thing and minded another? no, but he protesteth that he was minded as hee spake, and that his 2. Cor. 1. 13. word was not yea, and nay, but simply yea: which proueth, first, that all our speach must be simple and plaine, without equi­uocation: and secondly, that such as abuse their speach in such sort, are fleshly minded men, full of lightnesse and vani­ty. And thus we haue a full verdict of Philosophers, Popish diuines, Fathers, and Scriptures: and therefore why may not sentence bee pronounced, and the equiuocator adiudged guilty both of lying and periury, two sinnes which the law of God, of Nature, and Men, haue alway condemned?

12. Againe, what more contrary to the lawe of God and4. man, then adultery and fornication? But the religion of the Church of Rome doth directly maintaine and allow both these, by tolerating Stewes, places of common whoredome, & open and knowne Strumpets prostituted to filthinesse, and that not onely in all other places of the Popes Dominion, but euen in Rome, vnder his Holinesses owne nose, and by his au­thentical approbation; neither can this be imputed vnto them as a corruption in manners onely, and not as an errour in do­ctrine: for they not onely vphold these places and persons of infamy by their practice, and winke at them by neglect of due execution of iustice, but they are growne to that impu­dency, that they allow, maintaine, and approue them by their doctrine, as things necessary and commodious in a Common wealth: and albeit they condemne them generally as sinnes, yet they approue them againe as necessary and profitable: as if there were any necessary profit, or profitable necessity of sinnes, which Saint Paul calleth the vnfruitfull workes of dark­nesse, Ephes. 5. 11. And thus with their owne mouthes they condemne themselues in that which they allow, being Iudges ofRom 14. 22. themselues, and proclaimers of their owne shame.

13. Their doctrine is this, that a lesser euill is to bee per­mitted, to the end that a greater may be auoyded, and there­fore brothel houses to be suffered, lest all places should bee filled with filthy lusts: and this their position they defend; [Page 47] first, by the testimonie of Saint Augustine in his Booke De Ordine; secondly, by deprauing and corrupting that place of Scripture, where it is forbidden that there should bee anyDeut. 23. 17. harlot in Israel; thirdly, by diuers reasons, to wit, if harlots were suffered to be free and at liberty, without these Stewes, they would sinne more licenciously, and that by their first re­straint to that one place, they may be made ashamed, and so at length conuerted, and that knowne harlots are to be tolera­ted, lest violence should be offered vnto honest Matrons; and lastly, they are not ashamed to reckon whoredome and for­nication amongst those things which of their owne nature are not euill, because the Apostles place it among things of thatActs 15. 20. nature, to wit, bloud, things strangled, and things dedicated vnto Idols. These bee their goodly reasons whereby they maintaine Stewes; but no maruaile if they maintaine them, seeing their holy Father the Pope is in some sort maintained by them. The Romish harlots pay (saith Agrippa) vnto the Pope Agrippa de va­nit. cap. 64. euery wecke a Iuly (which is a certaine kind of Coyne) for their liberty, they prophane Gods word by a filthy Comment: for take away (say they) harlots out of the Common-wealth, and all places will abound with whoredomes: whereas, neuerthelesse the Com­mon-wealths of Israel endured long without that stain, where not­withstanding an harlot was not permitted. It is recorded also, that the harlots in Rome pay vnto the Pope a yearely pension, which amounteth sometimes to thirtie thousand, sometimes to fortie thousand Ducats. Pope Paulus the third is said to haue had in his Tables the names of 45000. Curtezans, which payd a monethly tribute vnto him. And therefore not with­out great cause (if gaine may be a sufficient cause) did Pope Sixtus build a noble or famous Stewes at Rome, as Agrippa Agrip. ibid. no­bile lupanar Ro­mae. witnesseth: for, seeing such large reuenewes arise to the ho­ly Fathers purse, by the meanes of strumpets, why should they not be there maintained? where, not as Saint Paul saith, godlinesse is gaine, but gaine is godlinesse, and all Religion is turned into lucre, as Mantuan a Fryer Carmelite of their owne saith,

Adde to these Whoredome, Sodomitry, and Incest, and all manner of sinne, and then there is a full square number. But I would faine know how these holy Fathers can free themselues from the name and imputation of notorious bawdes; seeing he is by all law esteemed a bawde, that main­taineth harlots, exposing them to the lust of others for gaine, then which, what can be more vilde and base?

14. As touching the testimony of Saint Augustine, and their other reasons, I answere in a word; first, that when Saint Augustine wrote that Booke, he was but Catecheumenus, a no­uice in Religion, not well instructed in Christs Schoole: and besides that, it doth crosse the doctrine both of himselfe in other Books of more mature iudgement, and also of the holy Scripture; for he himselfe affirmeth elsewhere, that the good which commeth of euil as a recompence, must not be admitted, and the Scripture condemneth to hell all those (marke, you Ro­manists) that say, Let vs doe euill, that good may come thereof, Rom. 3. 8. whose damnation is iust.

15. Their other reasons are vaine and idle: for what grea­ter liberty can they desire, then to be authorized by the head of the Church, who cannot erre as they teach, and to follow their filthy lusts by letters Patents frō his vnholynesse? (for so here it iustly deserueth to be tituled.) And is this the way to reclaime & conuert them frō their filthines, to dwell in gor­gious houses, to ride opēly in goodly chariots, to be apparel­led like Princes, to haue attēding on them men clad in braue attire, with chaines of gold and costly ornaments, yea, to be maintained by the Pope, and often visited by his Holynesse and his great Cardinals? if this be the way to reclaime them, [Page 49] let all men of sound sense and reason iudge indifferently.

16. Lastly, whether it be a meanes to stoppe the course of lust, and to refraine whoredomes from spreading farre and wide: let vs against Augustine oppose Saint Basill, Basil. commen. in Psalm. who expounding these words of the Psalme: And hath not sit in the chaire of pestilence, saith, That whoredome stayeth not it selfe in one man, but inuadeth a whole Citie: for some one comming to an harlot, taketh to himselfe a fellow, and the same also seekth another fellow: and so, as a fire being kind­led in a Citie, stayeth not in the burning one house or two, but spreadeth farre and wide, and draweth a great destruction with it: so this mischiefe being once kindled, rangeth ouer all the Citie. Oppose also to him Saint Ambrose, who wri­tingAmbr. omment in Psal. 119. vpon the 119. Psalme, thus sayth; Who can nourish burning [...]ales in his bosome, and not bee burnt with them? So how can harlots be nourished in a Citie, and young men not bee corrupted with wheredome? Yea, oppose Tertullian also, whoTertul. de anim [...] affirmeth plainely, That all Brothel-houses are detestable be­fore God. And lastly, Iustinian the Emperour, who in hisJustin. Authent. tit. de Lenouth. Authentikes, in the Title De Lenonibus, willeth that har­lots should bee vtterly banished out of the Citie: and sorrow­eth, because hee saw Brothel-houses so nigh vnto the Churches of God. And indeed, if it were true, that it is a meane to re­straine whoredome, why is it not then restrained at Rome, by that meanes? I am sure they haue their Stewes: And yet Mantuan doubteth not to affirme, that for all their Stewes confined into one place, Vrbs estiam tota lupanar: The whole Citie was become a Stewes. To conclude all in one briefe Sylogisme, That Religion which is contrary to the Religi­on of God, cannot bee of God, but of the Deuill; but the Romish Religion in this one poynt is contrary to the Religi­on of God; for the Scripture saith, There shall be no whore Deut. 23. 17. in Israel; the Romanists say, There must be whores in Israel, that is, in the Church, for the auoyding of a further mischiefe (then which what can be more contradictorie?) therefore the Romish religion cannot be of God, but of the diuell, I meane, in those poynts wherein it thus crosseth the truth of God.

[Page 50]17. But doe they stay at adultery and simple fornication?5. No, their religion maintaineth open and notorious incest, and such as the better sort of the heathen abominated; and this they doe by three doctrines: first, by that which giueth allowance, at least wise toleration to common Stewes and brothel-houses, for the auoyding of a further mischiefe, as I haue declared in the former Section: for Stewes cannot be tolerated, but incest also needs must not onely be occasioned, but euen after a sort approued; the reason is, because often it commeth to passe, that the Father and the Sonne, or two brethren and neere kindred are defiled with one and the same woman, and so vnnaturall and horrible incest, prohibited by the lawes of God and man, is commited. And albeit, often­times this is a thing secret and vnknowne vnto them: yet it doth not wash their consciences from the guilt of this foule crime, because they are bound to know in what degree she is vnto them, of whome they dare presume to haue carnall knowledge. And besides, the act it selfe being meerely vn­lawfull, doth take away all excuse; together, with a secret sus­pition they should haue, if they be not wilfully ignorant, that such a thing might be. For if that rule of Saint Augustine beeAugust. de ciuit. lib. 15. good, Ʋitandum est licitum propter vicinitatem illiciti: that which is lawfull is often to be auoyded, for the contiguity and neerenesse it hath with that which is vnlawfull: how much more is this true, that a thing vnlawfull in it owne nature is to be prohibited and auoyded, not onely because it is vnlaw­full; but much more if it bring with it apparāt feare of a grea­ter mischiefe? Now that affinitie is contracted, and therefore incest committed, not onely by lawfull marriage, but also by vnlawfull copulation: I thinke no man doubteth, seeing that Saint Paul plainely affirmeth, That hee which cleaueth to an [...] Cor. 6. [...]6. harlot, is made one flesh with her. And their owne law sayth, that it skils not whether the kindred descendeth from the lawfull Digest. lot derit. [...]up [...]. leg. 54. marriages, or otherwise.

18. Their second doctrine maintaining Incest, is their opi­nion touching the Popes power in dispensations: for they hold, that hee being Christs Vicar on earth, may dispense in [Page 51] degrees expresly prohibited by Gods law, and so hath andOccasio L [...]cri. doth, if occasion be offered: by vertue of this dissipation, (so it may better be termed with Saint Bernard, then dispensati­on) the King of Spaine, and Charles the Arch. Duke of Au­stria, married each of them their sisters daughters. And Pe­trus Aluaradus married two sisters at once, and such like, as you may see more at large in the former demonstration. What is this, I pray you, but to allowe and authorize incest? when as they ascribe vnto their holy Father the Pope autho­rity to dispense with it: for according to the old rule in Lo­gike, Causa causae, est causa causati, which is, the cause of the cause, must needes bee also the cause of the effect: when as their doctrine therfore vpholds the Popes power to dispense, and this power to dispense, brings forth Incest, a bastardly brat; by consequēt their doctrine must necessarily stand guil­ty [...]f being the first moouer thereof.

19. The third doctrine by which this soule sinne is autho­rized, is the generall opinion of the Church, touching the extent of degrees of Consanguinity prohibited in marri­age: for, albeit in former ages it was forbidden to marrie within the seuenth degree: yet in the Councill of Laterane, Concil. Later. cap. 10. that Pontificall constitution was abrogated and the prohibi­tion of marriage restrained to the fourth degree inclusiue­ly: so, that beyond the fourth degree it might be lawfull for any to marry without exception. Which constitution is at this day held for Authenticall, and is of force in the Ro­mane Church: now this doth giue manifest allowance vn­to Incest. for whether the supputation be made after the rule of the Ciuill law by generations, or of the Canon law by per­sons: yet so [...]e cases cannot be cleared from Incest; for this is the rule of supputation by the Canon law, which is most fauourable to them; Quo gradu remotior distat à communi stipite, eodem etiam inter se distant. In what degree the person furth [...]st remoued is distant from the stock [...], in the same degree they are distant from one another. Now put the case after this man­ner.

• [Page 52]ABRAHAM.
  • ISAAC.
  • IACOB.
  • IVDA.
  • PHARES.
  • ISCAH.
  • ISMAEL.

Here in this Scheme or figure, Iscah is by their own rule in the first degree from ISMAEL: and therefore by their doctrine, ISMAEL may marry ISCAH, which is most notable and apparent Incest: for brethren and sisters are but one flesh; and so Isaac and Ismael are both one flesh; as Iudah said of Ioseph, Frater noster est. caro nostra est: he is our brother and our flesh▪ And therefore Ismael is vnto all Isaacs posterity as it were their Father; and they vnto him in stead of Children: and so by consequent cannot marrie, not one­ly within the fourth degree, but euen vnto the thousand de­gree, if it were possi [...]le. For Adam, if hee were now aliue, could not find a woman in the whole world to marry lawful­ly withall, without committing Incest: neither is this a con­ceit of our own deuising, but the expresse rule of the word of God: for Leuit. 18. 12. 13. wee are forbidden to vncouer the shame of our Fathers sister, or of our Mothers sister: but all our predecessours in the right line are our fathers and mo­thers, though they he neuer so sarre remooued; and there­fore to marry with their brothers or sisters, stands guilty of Incest by [...] law. For which cause also Iustinian decreeth, [...] 1. [...]t. [...]it. 10. that Amitam licet adoptiuam, &c. It is not lawfull to marrie our Fathers adopted sister, nor our Mothers adopted sister, because they are held in place of Parents: and the law in the DigestsDigest. deritu [...]. Leg. 17. is plaine and pertinent. Amitam quoque & materteram item magnam amitam. & materter am magnam, prohibemur vxorem ducere, quamisis amita magna, & ma [...]rter a magna quarto gra­dit sunt. We are forbidden to warry our Auxt either by Father or Mothers side: yea, our great Aunt, though she be in the fourth degree. Thus by all [...]awes the Popish doctrine, that it is law­full for any to marry beyond the fourth degree, is a plaine maintenance and allowance of Incest.

[Page 53]20. Againe, who knoweth not but that theft is condemned by all lawes, except it be by the lawes of Platoes imaginaries Cōmon-wealth, or the Anabaptistical positions of some later heretikes, who would haue propriety of goods taken away, and a communitie of all things brought vp? but the Papists by their doctrine not onely tolerate some kind of theft, but euen maintaine and allowe it as lawfull: For, thus writeth Maldonate a learned Iesuite, and of great authoritie; Poore Mald. in Sum. q. 8. art. 3. men (saith he) doe not commit theft, when being pressed with ex­treame necessity, they take that which is another mans; because (marke his Anabaptisticall reason) the thing at such a time is not properly another mans, but common to the life of man being in danger, &c. And to prooue this, hee abuseth an excellent sentence of Saint Ambrose, who speaking of the communitieAmbrose. of charitie, and not of propriety, saith, Esurientis pauis est, quem [...] retines; nudorum vestimen [...]ū est, quod [...] recludis; misero­rum paecunia est, quam tu in terram defodis. It is the poores bread which thou retainest, his garment which thou lockest vp, and his money which thou hy dest in the ground. But he speaketh, as any man may see, not to encourage the poore to lay hands vpon rich mens substance, but to stirre vp the rich to the workes of charitie: neither to excuse a poore man from theft, if he steale from the rich, but to accuse the rich of theft, if out of his wealth he do not powre forth to the necessitie of the poore. Neither is this the opinion of one Iesuite onely, but it is back­ed and barred by the approbation of another of no meane credite: For thus writeth Emanuel Sa: in his Aphorisines.Eman. Sa. aph. page [...]66. Ego, inquit, &c. I (saith he) am of the same mind with them, which thinke that it is lawfull for a poore man priuily to purloine from a richman, which is bound to helpe him and doth not. Here be two brethren in euill, concurring in the defence of one and the same sinne; for if to steale, be not an offence for a poore man, why doth the law say in generall, Thou shalt not steale? Let them shew the exception and exemption of the poore from the law; or let them confesse to their eternall shame, that they are maintainers of those that breake Gods law. Be­sides, if (as Saint Augustine, and all other learned Diuines con­fesse) [Page 54] it bee not lawfull to lye, though it bee to the sauing of our August. de men­dac. ca. 13. liues: then it must needs follow, that it is not lawfull for a poore man to steale, though it be for the sauing of his life: for theft is a sinne that bringeth more damage with it, then an of­ficious lye can doe, which is vttered not for hurt of another, but for the preseruation of our selues.

21. Besides these, Cardinall Tollet another Iesuite, a man of high dignity and authority in the Romane Church, appro­ueth by his verdict another kind of theft, worse then those before specified; for he alloweth in some cases the vse of false ballances, and falsification of wares, his words are these. There Toll. desept. pec. [...]a. 49. pa. 744. is (saith he) a man that either by reason of vniust dealing of the Magistrate, or the malice of the buiers conspiring together to pull downe the price, or some other reasonable cause, cannot sell his wine at a iust price: when the case thus falleth out, then may this man either less [...]n his measure, or mingle water with his wines, and so sell it for pure wine, and require the full price, as if the measure were compleate: prouided that he doe not lye, which neuertheles if he doe, it is no pernitious lye, nor mortall, nor binding to resti­tution. In like manner, it is lawfull to sell other silke in stead of Granado silke, and Italian in stead of Greeke: and so after the same proportion all other wares. These bee the braue positions of that renowned Cardinall: wherein how apparently hee doth contradict the written word of God, let any indifferent vmpier iudge, by comparing this his doctrine with these sen­tences of the Scripture here ensuing. Diuers weights are an Prou. 20. 2 [...]. abomination to the Lord, and deceitfull ballances are not good. A true weight and a ballance are of the Lord, and all the weights of Prou. 16. 11. the bagge are his worke. Diuers weights and diuers measures, both Prou. 20. 20. Leu. 19. 35. 36. these are euen abomination to the Lord: yee shall not doe vniustly in iudgement, in line, in weight, or in measure; yee shall haue iust ballances, true weights, a true Ephah, and a true Hin. I am the Lord your God, &c. Thou shalt not haue in thy bagge two man­ner Deut 25. 13. 14 15. of weights, a great, and a small; neither shalt thou haue in thy house diuers measures, a great, and a small; but thou shalt haue a right and a iust weight, a perfect and a iust measure. Let no man oppresse or defraude his brother in any matter. How1. Thes. 4. 5. [Page 55] contradictory these plaine precepts and enunciatiue proposi­tions of Gods word, are vnto the positions of the Cardinall, no man can but discerne that is not bewitched with the so [...] ­cerie of Iezabel: either therefore let him shew out of holy writ some exception from these generall rules, or let him ac­knowledge his Doctrine and Religion, to be the vpholder of most grosse and palpable theft.

22. If any man say that these be the opinions of priuate men, and not the doctrine of the Church: I answere, that this is a most friuolous conceit, for none of their bookes are admitted to the presse, before they be examined by certaine Censurers deputed to that purpose by the Church: and if any thing dislike them or seeme to sauour of heresie (as they call the trueth) presently it is either gelded out, or corrected at their pleasures. And that which goeth for currant, hath his allowance subnexed. That it containeth in it nothing contrary to the Catholike faith of the Church of Rome. These positions then of these Iesuites standing thus approued by the common consent of their Censurers, and priuiledged to be both prin­ted and read of all men, as containing nothing contrary to wholesome doctrine, cannot be thought to be the vnaduised opinions of priuatemen, but euen the doctrine and religion of their Church.

23. Lastly, that I may conclude this second argument,7. they maintaine also the prophanation of the Sabboth, which the Lord hath enioyned to be sanctified with so great and vr­gent a precept: Remember that thou keepe holy the Sabboth day. Adding [...] m [...]men [...]o before, and fencing it with so many reasons after, that it might not seeme a light matter, but a cōmandement of great consequence; yet these impudent pre­uaricators make it a matter of no moment, yea, giue liberty to the open breach and transgression of it. For thus writeth Cardinall Tollet. Homo tenetur, &c. A man (saith he) is bound Tollet. lib. 4. In­struct. 5. acc [...]t. 9. c. 24. vpon paine of a mortall sinne to sanctifie the Sabboth, but is not bound vnder the same paine to sanctifie it well. As if forsooth it could be sanctified at all, if it be not well sanctified: or as if the prophanation of the Sabboth were the sanctifying of it: [Page 56] for not to sanctifie it well, is nothing else but to prophane it: howbeit, if this were all the iniurie hee doth to Gods Sab­both, it might be borne withall: but the bold Cardinall ta­keth vpon him to breake in pieces the barres thereof, and to expose it being the Lords day, and therefore fit to bee em­ployed onely in the Lords worke, to most vile and base offi­ces; for thus hee writeth in the same booke. Licet iter fa­cere, &c. It is lawfull to take a iourney on the feast day: (with this caueat, that diuine seruice be first heard.) It is lawfull to hunt, and doe such like things. It is lawfull for Iudges, especially rurall, to giue iudgement on the feast day: it is no sinne for a Bar­ber to exercise his trade on the feast day for commodity, if he had no leasure to doe it at another time: they are excused also which sell flesh, kill beasts, and sell necessary victuals on holy dayes: And if the occasion of a great gayne would otherwise bee lost, as in fishing for Herring and Tunnes, which come not but vpon cer­taine dayes, it is lawfull to fish on the holy day. In publique solem­nities it is lawfull to prepare the wayes, and to build for spectacles. This is the doctrine of that renowned Cardinall, whose wri­tings are so approued of the Church of Rome, that whatso­euer hee speaketh, is held for trueth. But here it may be an­swered, that he nameth not the Sabboth, but the festiuall or holy day: to which I answere: First, that the title of that Chapter is de Sabbath [...]: and therefore if he meaneth not that, hee swarueth from his purpose. Secondly, that the expresse words and drift of the whole Chapter demonstrates, that vn­der the name of the festiuall or holy day, he includeth also the Sabboth. And thirdly, how could he giue instructions touch­ing the cases of the Sabboth, if he intended not the Sabboth, seeing all his rules runne vnder this generall terme, on the fe­stiuall or holy day? This therfore is but a mist to blinde mens eyes, that they might not see their impietie.

24. Can this Religion (thinke you) be of God, which in thus many points crosseth and trampleth vnder foote the law of God? Doth not the head of that congregation euidently shew himselfe to be [...], that outlaw, which S. Paul spea­keth of, 2. Thess. 2. that is, such an one as opposeth himselfe [Page 57] to the law of God? Doe not the necke and shoulder which are supporters of that head, I meane, the Cardinals and Bi­shops, shew themselues to be of the same nature and disposi­tion with it? and the whole body, which is quickned by the life of his doctrine, to be meerely Antichristian? He that seeth not this, is blinde, and cannot discerne a farre off; hee that seeth it and confesseth it not, is carelesse of his owne saluati­on. Let vs leaue them therefore, either to bee conuerted, which God graunt for Christ his sake, or to bee confounded, if they continue in their errours.

MOTIVE. III. That Religion which imitateth the Iewes in those things wher­in they are enemies to Christ, cannot bee the truth: but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome. Ergo.

THe malice of the Iewes towards Christ our Sauiour, andMAIOR. his Church, from the beginning vnto this day, is so noto­rious, that the whole world is witnesse thereof. Saint Paul witnesseth of them, that they killed the Lord Iesus, and their 1. Thes. 2. 15. 16 owne Prophets, and persecuted the Apostles, and were contrary to all men, and forbad them to preach vnto the Gentiles that they might be saued, to fulfill their sinnes alwaies, and that the wrath of God was come vpon them to the vttermost. And as it was at that time, so euer since they haue not any whit remitted, but increased in their rancour; for still they crucifie vnto them­selues the Lord of Life, though not in his person which is at the right hand of God; yet in his mēbers whō they persecute vnto death asmuch as in them lyeth, and in his Gospel, which they still pursue with a deadly hatred. Yea, so great is their malice, that many times they haue taken Christian children, vpon their preparation day to the Passouer, and nailed them vpon the Crosse, loaded them with reproaches and scornes, in disgrace of Christ, and miserably tormented them to death; [Page 58] as was done by the Iewes of Inmester, a Towne scituate be­twixtSocrat. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 16. Chalchis and Antiochia, as witnesseth Socrates in his Ecclesiasticall History; and in Germany, at Fretulium; asJo. Finc. li. 3. Flores Histor. also in England, at Lincolne and Norwich, as our Chronicles testifie. Yea, it is recorded how the Iewes of Hungarie tooke a Carpenters Son that was a Christian, in despi [...] of Christ, whom they esteemed no better then the Soone of a Carpen­ter, and cut all the veines of his body, and suckt out his bloud with quils: and being apprehended, and tortured, they con­fessed that they could not bee without Christian bloud, for therewithall they anoynted their Priests. Yea, they haue of­ten poysoned the springs, and by that meanes brought great plagues vpon Christian people; and set on fire Cities and Townes, to bring them to pouerty and misery. Can there be greater enemies to Christ then these are? for the poysoned arrowes of their malice are shut vp against him, who is in hea­uen beyond their reach, and therefore they fall downe vpon his members: but the venome of them lighteth vpon their owne heads, to their eternall confusion. Who would now imitate these wretches in any thing, especially in that where­in the cause of their enmity consisteth? can they be of God that doe this? or rather are they not the brood of that Ser­pent, that hath beene euer a profest enemy to the seed of the woman? This being so cleare and manifest, I leaue the first proposition without any other guard or defence, and come to the confirmation of the second, wherein the pith of the argu­ment confisteth.

2. That the Religion of the Church of Rome is an apishMINOR. imitation of Iudaisine, and that in those things wherein it is most opposite to Christ, may appeare, if wee first consider wherin the opposition of the Iewish Religion consisteth, and then secondly compare the Romish with the same. The Iewes Religion is opposite to Christ in two respects principally: first, in retaining the old Ceremonies of Moses law, whichRom. 10. 4. Heb. 10. 1. were shadowes of things to come, and had their accomplish­ment in Christ: for that which Paul saith concerning Cir­cumcisiou, is to be vnderstood of all other Ceremonies: They [Page 59] which entangle themselues with that yoke of bondage, vnder Gal. 4. 9. and 5 2. 4. those impotent and beggerly rudiments, are abolished from Christ, and Christ doth profit them nothing: And secondly, in deuising a multitude of strange and new superstitions, coyned in the mint of their Rabbinish conceits, contrary not onely to the Gospell of Iesus Christ, but euen to their owne law, which Deutorologies of theirs our Sauiour condemneth, Math. 15. 3. 6. when hee saith, that they transgressed the Commaunde­mentMatth. 15. 3. 6. of God, & made it of no effect by their owne tradition. Both these wayes shew they their enmity to Christ and Chri­stian Religion, and are thereby retained and encouraged in their errours.

3. Now compare the Romish Religion with these Rabbi­nisticall conceits in both respects, and it will appeare that one egge is not liker to another, nor milke to milke, then the Ro­mish and Iewish superstition are to each other. And touch­ingI. the first, to begin with the multitude of their ceremonies: It is not vnknowne to any that know any thing in the booke of God, that the Church of the Iewes was loaden with a hea­uie burden of ceremonies. S. Paul saith, that it was so heauie, Acts 15. 10. that neither they nor their fathers were able to beare it, and therefore calleth the Ceremoniall law, a yoke of bondage, andGal. 5. 1. and 4. 31. those that were vnder that yoke, children of the bondwoman, and not of the free. And the reasons why God did impose vp­on them such a number of Ceremonies, were iust and holy, to wit: first, because the Church was then in the infancy, and therefore needed to be vnder a Schoolemaster to instruct,Gal. 3. 24. and as it were catechize it vnto Christ, and therefore they were to be dealt withall, as children vse to be with the guil­ded leaues and faire pictures of externall rites, and to be fed with milke, being not able to digest strong meates. Second­ly, because by them they were, as it were by visible represen­tations informed, both touching some great benesit past and receiued, and touching the Messias to come and his Kingdome, as also concerning godly conuersation required in their owne life: for in the barke of euery legall ceremonie, these three vitall spirits were contained. And thirdly (as it is [Page 06] well obserued by S. Chrysostome) in regard of their infirmityChrysost. and weakenesse, who being lately come out of Egypt, and there defiled themselues with idolatrie and superstition, ne­cessarily required sacrifices and ceremonies to be allowed vnto them, lest they should fall backe againe to their Egyp­tian corruption: wherefore Almighty God (saith he) so dealt with them, as a Physician dealeth with his sicke patient, who through the burning heat of his disease, requireth a cup of cold water, or else is ready to hang or kill himselfe; there the Physician being constrained by necessity, commands a viole of cold water prepared by himselfe, to be brought vnto him, but withall warnes him, that he drinke not but out of that Viole. So God granted sacrifices and ceremonies to the sick­ly Israelites, but so, that they should not vse any, but those which hee appointed for them, and that after the manner by him prescribed. And this to be so, hee proueth, because the law of ceremonies was not giuen, vntill the children of Israel had defiled themselues with the golden Calfe, for the making whereof they were so madde bent, as that they pulled off their Iewels, eare-rings, and rings from their bodies, and gaue them for the framing of that Idoll: and hee illustrateth the same in another place by another excellent similitude. If a man (saith hee) haue a wife prone to incontinencie, hee shutteth her vp in certaine places & chambers, setting about her a guard of seruants and attendants, to keepe her from straying abroad, and entertaining her louers. So God dealt with the Church of the Iewes, which he had married to him­selfe in compassion and loue, seeing it prone to Idolatry and superstition, hee separated it from other Nations, and shut it vp within the bounds of the land of Canaan, and set about it a guard of Ceremonies and externall Rites, which should be as it were Tutors vnto it, vntill it were fully confirmed in faith and obedience. Thus farre Chrysostome. By all which wee see not onely, that the Church of the Iewes was loaded with a bundle of ceremonies, which were to endure till the comming of the Messias: but also the reasons why the Lord imposed that burden vpon them.

[Page 61]4. Now is the Church of Rome any whit behinde them in this? No verily, but farre before them: for if we shall com­pare Moses Leuiticus, with the Romish Missals, wee shall finde, that in number of ceremonies they farre exceede the Synagogue of the Iewes. The Iewes had but two great Sa­craments: the Church of Rome haue seuen. The Iewes but one ordinary Altar: the Church of Rome tenne thousand, euen as many as Churches, and not onely so, but often diuers Altars in one Church. The Iewes offered many sacrifices, but the Church of Rome exceede them in the number of their Masses tenne to one. The Iewish Holy-dayes were few in comparison of the Romish, for they had but their Passeouer, Pentecost, feast of Tabernacles, of Trumpets, reconciliation, new Moones, Purim and dedication: but these haue their Holy-dayes for euery Saint, for the Crosse, Corpus Christi, All Saints, All Soules, and what not: insomuch that their friend Erasmus complaineth, that in Ieromes age there wereEras. in Mat. 11. few Holy-dayes besides the Lords day: but now, that there is neither end nor measure in the multitude of them. The Iewes obserued a few fasting dayes by Gods appointment, and others taken vp by their owne tradition, as the second and fift day of the weeke: but the Romish fasts exceede both in number and superstition: for besides two dayes in euery weeke, euery Saints Eue almost is a fasting day with them, besides their Lent fast continued whole sixe weekes without intermission, if to abstaine from flesh, and glut themselues with other viands, as nutritiue to the body, be to be termed a fast. The Iewes Priest-hood was distinguished but into two maine orders, Priests and Leuites, and these later assigned to some few distinct offices about the Temple: but the Romish Priest-hood is pestered with a swarme of the seuerall orders of Friars, Monkes, Anchorites, secular and regular Priests, that almost serue for nothing but to consume the fruits of the earth. The holy garments for the Leuiticall Priest-hood, were but few in number in comparison of the Romish vest­ments: for the high Priest of the Iewes had but sixe garments appointed to him; the Ephod, the brest-plate, the Robe, the [Page 62] linnen coate, the girdle, and the crowne; and for the inferiour Priests, but foure, linnen coats, bonnets, linnen breeches, and girdles: but the Romish haue sixe garments in token of per­fection; and the Bishops nine, because there are (as they say)Bonau. ratio. Di­ui. offic. li. 3. c. 1. nine orders of Angels; in all fifteene, answerable to the fif­teene degrees of vertues. What should I reckon vp their ma­nifold crossings, kissings, kneelings, whisperings, washings, anoyntings, spittings, breathings, saltings, with an infinite number besides of vaine and strange obseruations which are vsed in their Church, which the Iewish Synagogue may not compare withall, either for multitude or strangenesse? And thus they are not onely equall to them, but farre exceed them in the number of their Ceremonies. And this is euenAgrip. de vanit. cap. 60. confessed by many of their fauourites: for Cornelius Agrippa saith, that Christians are now more oppressed with ceremonies, then the Iewes were in former times. And Polydore Ʋirgsll, thatPolyd. Virgil de inuent l [...]. 4. in prooemi [...]. a very wood of Iewish and heathenis [...] ceremonies pestered the Lords field. Yea, Saint Augustine complaineth of the same superstition in his time, when Antichristianisme was but in breeding, when he saith, that the Church was pressed contrary Aug. Epist. 119. cap. 19. to Christs mercifull institution, with such a seruile burden of Ce­remonies, that the state of the Iewes vnder the law was m [...]re to­lerable then the condition of Christians, seeing they were sub­iect onely to Gods ordinances, and not to humane presumptions as Christians are. But if he had liued at this time, and seene the fruitfull multiplication of them, in respect of his age, how would hee haue complained? And thus in respect of mul­titude of Ceremonies, the Romish Church is by many de­grees before the Church of the Iewes.

5. To descend to particulars. The Iewes had their sacrifi­cing Priests, whereof one was their chiefe Priest, and the o­ther of an inferiour ranke. The Romanists, in an apish imita­tion, haue their sacrificing Priests too, the Pope their chiefe, and the vnder-shauelings his vassals: as if Aaron was a type of the Pope, and not of Christ; or as if all Christians wereHeb. 8. 6. & 9. 6. 11. 12. 1. Pet. 2. [...]. not Priests vnder the Gospell; both which are euident in the new Testament: but we no where find that the high Priest [Page 63] of Ierusalem was a type of the high Priest of Rome, or that theReuel. 1. 6. Ministers of the Gospell are sacrificing Priests. This latter isBel. de cultu san­ctor. lib. 3. ca. 4. confessed by Bellarmine, who saith that the Christians of the Primitiue Church did purposely abstaine from the names of Tem­ple and Priesthood, vntill the dayes of Tertullian, lest that they should seeme to haue retained some Iewish Ceremonies. Why then doe they now entertaine those names, whereof the pu­rer times were ashamed? do they not shew thereby that they are degenerated from that primer purity, which they so much bragge of? And yet we doe not dislike the name of Priest, if it bee rightly taken, for such an one as ministreth in holy things betwixt God and the people, but that the Ministers of the Gospel should be sacrificing Priests, is Iewish; as also, that the man of Rome should be the Arch-priest on earth, whereas we haue but one high Priest, euen Christ our Sauiour, who ha­uing once offered himselfe a sacrifice for sinne, sitteth for euer at the right hand of God. And that we may plainely see that in their Hierarchie they imitate the Iewes, Bellarmine is a suf­ficient witnesse, who to proue that there ought to be a visi­ble Monarch in the Church, alleageth that Aaron was not one­ly Bell de Roman. Pontif. li. 1. ca. 9. a type of Christ, but also of the Pope, because the sacrifices of the law did not onely represent the bloudy sacrifice of the Crosse, but also the vnbloudy sacrifice of the Masse. Which if it be true, then there can be but one high Priest in the Church of Christ, as there was but one in the Church of the Iewes: for the ar­gument will stand thus in good moode and forme, being built vpon their owne ground. As the Church of the old Testa­ment was gouerned, so ought the Church of the new: but the old was gouerned by one onely high Priest; therefore the new ought also to haue but one onely: for either he must shew that there were two high Priests in the Church of the Iewes, one subor­dinate vnto the other, or conuicted by his owne principle, he must acknowledge that there ought not to bee two in the Church of Christ, or at least confesse that this argument is lame, drawne from the imitation of the Iewish Hierachy: and then if it be not true which he affirmeth, what will be the se­quell therof, but either ignorance in symbolizing those things [Page 64] which are no wise matches, or impiety in dethroning Christ from his office, and setting the Diademe vpon the Popes head; and so, that in their Romish Hierarchy they are the Iewes Apes, in that thing which most tendeth to the dishonor of Christ.

6. As they imitate the Iewish Priest-hood, so do they also their Altar and sacrifices: for they are not content with the name of the Lords Table, which name was vsed both by the1. Cor. 10. 21. Arnob. cont. gen. lib. 6. Cyril. Alex. cont. Iulian, l. 10. Chrys. in Psa. 95. Apostles and primitiue Church. For which cause (as testifi­eth Arnobius, Cyrill, and Chrysostome) they were challenged by the Pagans of impiety, nor yet to take the name of Altar and Sacrifice in an improper signification, as some of the la­ter Fathers did, calling the Lords Table an Altar, because onAug. cont. Faust. lib. 20. ca. 18. & li. 3. de bapt. c. 19 it was represented the sacrifice of the Crosse, and the action in the Eucharist a sacrifice, because it was a commemoratiue representation of that sacrifice, as their writings plentifully testifie; but they will haue a very Altar in proper phrase of speach, and a true reall sacrifice, then which what can be more Iewish? especially, seeing all such Altars were abolished by the Crosse of Christ; and there remaineth but one Altar in the Church, Whereof they haue no power to eate which serue the Ta­bernacle, Rco. 13. 10. Theodoret. Oëcumen. Aquinas. Glossa ordin. in lacum. to wit, Christ, as all the Fathers expound the place, who is the onely true Altar and proper sacrifice of the new Testament: True Altar (I say) and proper Sacrifice, because the soule of euery iust man is called by them a metaphoricall Altar, and their prayers, good workes, almes-deeds, &c. spi­rituall sacrifices. And therefore Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen, and Lactantius, writing against the Pagans, who ob­iected that Christians had no Altars nor sacrifices, and there­fore no religion, answere, That a iust and holy soule is a right holy Altar, from which doe arise prayers as sweet incense, and vp­on which are offered vp to God, iustice, patience, faith, innocen­cie, chastity, and such other v [...]rtues. And these are the onely Altars and Sacrifices now vpon earth; for our true Altar and sacrifice is in heauen.

7. Againe, the Iewes had lampes continually burning in the Tabernacle, and afterward in the Temple, which were [Page 65] types of Christ, who is the true light of the world, and of theIoh. 1. 9. Matth. 5. 14. Apostles and Ministers of the Gospell, who by their doctrine and preaching conuay this light from Christ the fountaine, as it were by Conduits and Pipes, to the illuminating of the whole world: Qui [...] in candelabro (saith Gregory) nisi Redemp­tor Gregor. in E­zech. [...]m. 6. humani gener is designatur? Who is figured out by the candle­sticke, but the Redeemer of mankinde? Hastile candelabro (saith venerable Bede) ipse qui est caput Ecclesiae debet intelligi, By Beda. the shaft of the Candlesticke, must be vnderstood, hee that is the head of the Church. And the sixe branches issuing out of the body of the Candlesticke, what are they but the Apostles and Pastours of the Church (saith Marbachius) which asMarbach. branches issue from Christ, and make but one body with the shaft, to signifie that they must conspire in preaching Christ alone, and so vnited to each other by the bond of Concord? Yet the Church of Rome retaine also this ceremonie: for they haue multitude of Lampes and Candles in their Churches burning in the day time, as if they would declare to the world, that either they beleeue that Christ is not yet come, or else that they haue not the cleare Sunne-shine of the Gospell amongst them, but the dimme Candle-light of superstition. Now that this Iewish ceremonie is vsed amongst them, not onely experience sheweth in all places, and their great so­lemne Candlemasle, vpon the day of the purification of the blessed Virgin: but also the decree of their owne Popes, Gre­gory Gregor. in De­cret. Pl [...]tin. in Sabi­nian. the first, and Sabinian his successour: the one of which appointed certaine Lands for the maintenance of Wax-can­dles and Lamps in Churches, and the other ordained, Ʋt ac­censae Lampades perpetuò in Ecclesys retinerentur: That burning Lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches. And that theyDurand. in Ra­tic. lib. 1. cap. 1. fetch their pattern [...] from the Iewes, Durand plainly acknow­ledgeth, when he saith, That the Church is enlightned by Gods commandement. Whereupon it is read in Exodus, Charge the children of Israel, that they offer pure oyle of oliue, that the Lamps may burne continually in the Tabernacle. It is cleare then, that this is a Iewish imitation, at least, if they had not rather bee counted to be followers of the Gentiles, then of the Iewes: [Page 66] amongst whom also this custome was in vse, to haue lights and Lampes continually burning in their Idoll Temples: as witnesse both Tertullian, Lactantius, & Gregory Naezianzene, Tertul. in Apr. [...]a [...]. 35. Lactant. lib. 6. cap. 62. Nazianz. in Iu­lian. Orat. 2. 1. Cor. 10. 20. Iud. 1. 6. 1. Ioh. 1. 5. with diuers others. Lactantius saith plainly, That they set vp lights to their God, as if he dwelt in darknesse. And so they did, for their gods whom they worshipped, were deuils, who are reserued in the chaines of darknesse, vnto the Iudgement of the great day. But our God dwelleth in light inaccessible, and he is all light, and in him is no darknesse: what neede any light or Lamps be set vp before him then? If they say, that they haue the example of the primitiue Church for their war­rant. I answere, that it is true indeede, as may appeare out of all Ecclesiasticall Histories, and the Epistles of Plinie the se­cond, to Traiane, that they had the vse of Lamps in their as­semblies: but this was in their night-meetings, which they were constrained to vse in the time of persecution, not da­ring to assemble together by day: as is testified both by Eu­sebius, [...]useb. de vita Constant. lib. 4. Epiphan▪ aduers. haeres. sub finem. Tertul. quo su­pra. Jerom. contra Vigilant. c. 3. Epiphanius, Tertullian, &c. but neuer in the day time, till Ieromes age, when this superstition began to grow vpon the Church. So that this custome is either Heathenish or Iewish, let them chuse whether: both which are equally dis­gracefull to the Church of Christ.

8. So likewise they fetch the vse of their hallowed water from the Iewes, if not from the Pagans, for the Iewes hadNumb. 10. their Holy-water made of the ashes of a red Cow, whereby were purged all legall vncleannesses: so haue the Romanists their Holy-water sprinkles, to purge and clense away all the impurities of the soule. This is plaine, not onely by their practice, but also by the decree falsly fathered vpon Pope Alexander the first: but indeede of some later Pope, whichDeconsecrat. D. 3. cap. aquam sale. thus speaketh: We blesse water mingled with salt, that all being sprinkled therewith, may be sanctified and purified, which wee en­ioyne all Priests to doe: for if the ashes of a Cow being sprinkled, did sanctifie and clense the people of the Iewes, then much more doth water mixed with salt, and consecrated by diuine prayers, sanctifie and clense Christian people. Which consequence how vaine and impious it is, who seeth not? Vaine, I say, for the [Page 67] Leuiticall Holy-water did onely clense from outward vn­cleannesses, but the Romish by their doctrine doth purge the soule from spirituall pollutions. Impious, for the Scrip­ture saith, that it is the bloud of Christ that purgeth vs from all 1. Ioh. 1. 7. our sinnes, and not water mingled with salt: and it maketh the comparison not betwixt the ashes of an Heyser and Holy­water,Heb. 9. 13. 14. water, but betwixt it and the bloud of Christ. This imitation then is both vaine and impious, if it bee of the Iewes: and more, if it be of the Gentiles: for what agreement hath the2. Cor. 6. 16. Iustin Martyr in Apolog. 1. Temple of God with Idols? And yet so it is also: for Iustine Martyr telleth vs, that the deuils, when they heard out of the Prophets of the spirituall washing that should be in the Kingdome of Christ, in an apish resemblance caused his worshippers to purge themselues by the sprinkling of hallowed water. And Theodoret, Theodoret hist. lib. 3. [...]. 14. 15. that Iulian the Apostate commanded their bread, flesh, fruits, and all other kind of victuals, to be purged (as he supposed) by holy-water: and that Ʋalentinian his Tribune, who succee­ded him in the Empire, when Fortunes Priest sprinkled him with holy-water, strooke the Priest with his fist, saying, Thou hast not clensed, but defiled me. Hipocrates also the PhysicianHypocrates de morb [...] sacr [...]. doth witnesse the same, when he saith, that entring into their Temples, they were sprinkled, not that they might be defiled: but that if they had any sinne, they might be purged from it. Thus it plainely appeareth, that this was a Heathenish custome; which how it can agree with the Church of Christ, I know not; sure I am, that in the Primitiue Church there was no holy-water besides the water of Baptisme, that can be proued by any good authority; for the testimonies of Alexander the [...]el. de verbo Dei non scripto. lib. 4. cap. 3. [...]useb. de spiritu Sancto. cap. 27. Eras. in Basil. first, Clement and Basil alledged by Bellarmine, are all coun­terfeit, as partly the matter in them contayned, and partly the censure of Eusebius and Erasmus doe sufficiently proue, and might here bee demonstrated, if I thought it necessary: neither doth it agree with the nature of those times, to the which S. Iohn so lately before had left this doctrine, that the onely purgation of sinne was the bloud of Christ; and not ho­ly-water consecrated by a Priest.

9. In like manner, their vse of Incense on their Altars to driue away deuils (as they say) doth sauour both of Iudaisme [Page 68] and of Paganisme. That the Iewes vsed to burne Incense inPolyd. Virgil, de Jnuent. li. 5. c. 1. Innocent. 3. de offic. Miss. lib. 2. cap. 17. Exod. 30. 1. Psal. 141. 2. Reuel. 8. 2. sacrifice to God, is no question, for they had their Altar of burnt Incense appoynted by God himselfe for that purpose: & this Altar (without question) was a type of Christ our Me­diatour, and the incense of the prayers of the Saints, which are then acceptable vnto God, when they are offered vp in the name of Christ, who is the Altar that sanctifieth all our sa­crifices. This is so euident, not only out of holy Scripture, but frō the full consent of all Writers old & new, that it is needles to stand to prooue it. And therefore offering of Incense be­ing a shadow of things to come, why should it still remaine, seeing the Sunne of righteousnesse is risen in our Horizon, and hath [...]ispelled all shadowes by the glorious beames of his presence? As touching the Pagans, Polydore Virgil con­fesseth, that it was their custome to offer Incense to their I­dols.Polyd. Virgil de Inuent. li. 5. c. 1. Theod. li. 3. c. 15. & 16. And Theodoret affirmeth, that when Iulian distributed gold amongst his Souldiers, hee commanded an Altar full of coales to bee set by him, and Frankincense to bee layd on a Table, to the end that euery one would recieue gold at his hand, should first cast Frankincense vpon the Altar: and this hee did to distinguish the Pagan from the Christi­an. By which it is euident (by the way) that at that time this was not in vse in the Church. This Iewish and Paganish cu­stome then, how commeth it to passe, that it should now bee taken vp as a holy seruice of God? Are not all Iewish Cere­monies at an end by the cōming of the body which is Christ? And is it fit that Christians should learne to worship God frō the Gentiles, which were worshippers of deuils? These things are so dissonant to the nature of true Religion, that they ad­mitArnob. l. 6. & li. 7. page 226. Euseb. in orat. ad Sancta. Coelum. no iust reconciliation. Sure it is, that the Primitiue Church neuer knew the vse therof, as appeareth both by that Example of Iulian before alleaged out of Theodoret, and al­so by testimonies of Arnobius, Eusebius, and Augustine: all which acknowledge that the Church in their time had no [...]n Psal. 49. & 50. such custome. We go [...] [...]into Arabia (saith Saint Augustine) to fetch Frankincense, God requireth of vs the sacrifice of praise. As for the auncient Leiturgies and Dionisius, that mention it in Gods seruice, wee care not for them, seeing all men either [Page 69] vehemently suspect them, or vtterly reiect them as coun­terfeit.

10. Againe, the Iewes had their holy oyle wherewith their Kings, Priests, and Prophets were anoynted, which was a type and figure of that spirituall vnction of grace, wherewithPsal. 45. 7. Iohn 3. 34. 1. Ioh. 2 27. Christ our head was anoynted aboue his fellowes, and all his members in a due proportion. The Church of Rome hath al­so reuiued this Ceremonie, and that after a farre more super­stitious manner: for there was not halfe such a stirre at the making of the holy oyle of the Tabernacle, as there is at the consecrating of their holy Chrisme: it would euen prouokeGallas. the spleene to laughter, and the gall to bitternesse, to heare or behold the apish trickes that they vse at the making of their precious Chrisme: such muttering, such charming and en­chanting, such blowing and breathing, such exorcising and coniuring the deuill, by the mitted Bishop first, and then twelue Priests in their order, before they come to Aue San­ctum Chrisma, All haile O holy Chrisme, as is wonderfull. What is this, I pray you, but a profest restoring of a Iewish Ceremony, and a plaine declaration that their Priests are ra­ther Iewish than Christian? and that those graces of Gods spirit, which were figured by their holy oyle, are not to bee found in cheir Church, seeing they retaine so superstitiously the type thereof? If they say that Saint Iames mentioneth oyle to bee vsed at the visitation of the sicke, whereby they recouered health: I answer, first, that this was no such conse­crated oyle as is in vse in the Church of Rome: and second­ly, that it was applyed onely to the sicke that were in danger of death, not to young Infants that are new come into the world, at their baptisme: thirdly, that it was not an instru­ment of spirituall grace, but of corporall health: and lastly, that it lasted onely during the time that miracles liued in the Church, and dyed when they dyed: so that Saint Iames his oyle maketh nothing for the maintenance of the Romish Chrisme: and therefore I leaue it vnto them as a meere Iew­ish superstition.

11. Lastly doth not the high Priest of Rome imitate the high [Page 70] Priest of the Iewes in his Pontificall garments? are not their Fryers and Anchorites [...]p [...]sh counterfeiters of the Leuiticall Nazarites? doth not their Iubile both in name and nature represent the Iewish Iubile? no man that knoweth the one, and seeth the other, but will confesse this to be true: for A­aron wore a Crowne vpon his head, to signifie the Kingly po­wer of Christ: the Bishop of Rome hath three Crownes, to signifie (forsooth) his threefold power in Heauen, Earth, and Purgatory. Or as Aretine iested, one for the flesh, another for the world, and the third for the deuill, and none for God. Aaron had a plate on his Crowne, wherin was engrauen Ho­linesse Auent. to the Lord. The Bishop of Rome vsed to weare a plate on his head, wherein was written the word Mysterie, as if he would professe himselfe to be the vpholder of that mystery of iniquitie spoken of by the Apostle. Aaron had his Ephod2. Thes. 2. 7. and Robe: the Bishop of Rome hath answerable therevnto his rich Pontificall attire, which in many resemblances is like vnto the same: yea, the Romanists doe plainely Iudaize in bringing in againe into the Priestly order such variety of gar­ments, as the Pall, the Miter, the Crozier-staffe, the Albe, the Chimere, the gray Amice, the S [...]oale, with such like. Inso­much, that when their Bishops come forth to doe diuine ser­uice, a man would thinke that he saw Aaron addressed with his attire to sacrifice at the Altar.

12. As touching their Fryers and Anchorites, how like are they to the Nazarites of the Law: the Nazarites might not drinke wine nor strong drinke: no more may diuers of the religious shauelings by the rules of their order. They were tyed by a vowe which they might not breake without sinne: so are these at their first entrance into their Cloysters and Cels; and that so strictly, that they account it a greater sinne to violate that vow of voluntary Religion, then the vowe that they haue made to God in their baptisme: and there­fore they hold it a lesse sinne to commit fornication, which they haue vowed against in baptisme; then to marrie, which they made vowe against when they tooke vpon them the re­ligious order, as hath beene prooued in the former reason. [Page 71] They might not meddle with worldly affaires, during the time of their separation; no more may some of these Romish vota­ries, they may not so much as handle money (forsooth) with their bare hands; but with Gloues on, they will receiue as much as they can lay their clouches on: and euen whilst they thus seeme to contemne riches, they spread their nets to draw whole Townes and Countries into their possessions. Onely in this the Nazarites and they differ: they were true worship­pers of God, and their order was Gods ordinance: these are monstrous hypocrites, hidden vnder the cloke of Religion, neither are their orders of God, but as Chaucer long agoe sung, The deuils excrements.

13. Lastly, for their Iubile ordained first by Boniface the eight, to bee euery hundreth yeere, after brought downe by Clement the sixt to euery fifty yeere: and after that by to euery three and thirtith yeere; and last­ly, by to euery fiue & twentith yeere, where it resteth. What is it but a renouation of that Iewish cere­monie, which was instituted by God, to signifie that euerla­sting happinesse and ioy, which was brought into the world by Christ our Sauiour? The Trumpetters whereof were first the Prophets, as Esay for example, who in the person ofEsay 61. 1. Christ proclaimed good tidings to the poore, healing to the broken hearted, liberty to the Captiues, and redemption to the Prisoners▪ the acceptable yeere of the Lord, &c. Second­ly, the Angels who professed, that they brought glad tidings of great ioy that should bee to all people, at the birth of our Sauiour Iesus Christ. And lastly the Apostles, who when theyLuke 2. 10. 11. began to preach the Gospell, proclaimed this great Iubile to all the world that should beleeue in Christ, [...]o continue not a yeere, but for euer and euer. To imitate this ceremony then, what is it, but with the Iewes to expect the Messias to come in the flesh, and to disclaime the glad tydings of the Gospell, as a false message, deceiuing the world? This is so Iewish a superstition, as the very name, time, and vse, declare that no­thing can be more.

14. Thus wee see, how in the imitation of the Leuiticall [Page 72] ceremonies, the Church of Rome goeth in equipage with the Synagogue of the Iewes: from whence may be deduced these two conclusions. First, that the light of the Gospell is either vtterly extinguished, or at least very dimly shining amongst them: for it is a true rule, the more shadow, the lesse light; and the more light, the lesse shadow: and therefore those Northerne people called by the Philosophers Amphisei [...], be­cause their shadow goeth round about them in a circle, haue the Sunne so farre remote from them, that they are scarce re­freshed with the beames thereof: but they which haue the Sunne perpendicularly ouer them, are Ascij, without shadow. And what is the night, but the darke shadow of the earth, and the day, but the remouing of that shadow by the comming of the Sunne? The Church of Rome then being thus enwrap­ped, and compassed about with the superstitious shadowes of Iewish ceremonies, plainly declareth, that either the Sunne is not risen amongst them, or that it is very farre off, euen in the skirts of their Horizon. Secondly, that their Church is not as they bragge of it, the onely Catholick Church, but ra­ther the whore of Babilon, for her attire bewrayeth her con­dition: a chast Matrone is attired decently, but not garishly, but a strumpet like Iezabel, sets forth her selfe with garish deckings, and a painted face to allure louers vnto her: the Romish congregation then being thus adorned, not like a chast Matrone, but like a light Harlot, with the garish attire of Iewish ceremonies, all in pompe and ostentation, discoue­reth her selfe not to be the Spouse of Christ, but the strumpet of Antichrist. And so I conclude the first part of this argu­ment, that seeing one piece of the Iewes enmitie to Christ, consisteth in retayning the Leuiticall ceremonies, which had their accomplishment in Christ: therefore to imitate them in this respect, is a plaine demonstration, that their Religion is not from Christ, but from Antichrist, his profest enemie.

15. The second point wherein they imitate the Iewes, is farre worse then the former: for it is in their Rabbinish and Cabalisticall traditions, which as they are most grosse corrup­tions of the law, so are they the foulest enemies to the Gospell [Page 73] of Iesus Christ that the world hath. I will not stand to reckon vp the foolish & ridiculous niceties of the brainsick Rabbines, wherewith the ignorant Iewes are at this day besotted, and which are as a veyle ouer their eyes, to hinder them from see­ing the truth. I remit the Reader for these things to Buxdor­fius, Buxdorf▪ Synag. Iudaic▪ Paul. Fag. Sixt. Senens. Bibliot. lib. 2. Galat. de Arca­nis. Paulus Fagius, Sixtus Senensis, and Galatinus: my taske is to shew, how the Church of Rome imitateth them in many of these their absurd fancies, which will proue their Religion to be little better then theirs.

16 First, the Iewes hold, that Moses receiued two lawes of God in mount Sinai; the one written, and the other vn­written: this latter they call their Cabala, and they say, that Moses by word of mouth commended it to Ioshua, and Ioshua to the Elders of Israel, and they to the Prophets, and they againe vnto the Masters of the great Synagogue vnder Esdras, from whom their wisemen called Cachamim successiuely re­ceiued it, and in this they glory, calling it the ioy of their hearts, and the refreshing of their bones. This vnwritten Ca­bala, was at the first preserued onely in the hearts of their great Cachamim or learned Masters, and deliuered by them to the people by mouth onely: afterward it began by little and little to be commended to writing, and was at the first called Mischua, that is, the law repeated, after the Thalmud of Ieru­salem: and lastly, the Thalmud of Babylon, which is the most sacred Scripture, by which the Iewes are gouerned and dire­cted at this day, and which they preferre before the law writ­ten: for the law written (say they) can neither be vnderstood, nor expounded without the helpe of this, neither is perfect, vnlesse this bee added to it. Thus dote the Iewes vpon their Thalmud and Cabala.

17. And doe not the Romanists dote as much about their vnwritten traditions? heare and iudge: first, with them theyConcil. Trident▪ Bellarm. de [...]er­bo. Coster En­chir. deuide the word of God into verbum [...] and [...], written and vnwritten: their vnwritten word is nothing but orall Traditions, deliuered (as they say) by Christ himselfe to his Apostles alone, and not to his common Disciples, because it contayned the high mysteries of the Kingdome of God, and [Page 74] by them conuayed to their successours, Bishops and Elders of the Church. Secondly, they affirme also with them, that these orall Traditions are of equall authority and necessity with the word written, yea, that the word written is of no authority at all, quoadnos, in respect of vs, except it bee au­thorized by the tradition of the Church. And thirdly, they teach that the word written is imperfect, vnlesse the vnwrit­ten Cabala bee added vnto it, and that, not one alone, but both together make a perfect rule both for faith and man­ners. Doe they not now Iudaize in all these points? Yes, the Romish Apologers, to proue their doctrine of traditions, fetch an argument from the Iewes Cabala, as may bee seene in a late tractate, falsly called the Catholike Apologie: which is so much the more strange, because their own Sixtus Se­nensis professeth, that the Iewish Thalmud is fraught with in­numerable Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. lib. 2. blasphemies against God and his Christ our Sauiour, and impieties against the law of Moses, besides other infinite fopperies. Is not this then a good patterne for them to imi­tate? and is it not a sound argument that is deduced from such premises? Surely their traditions which they build all their superstition vpon, thus symbolizing with the Iewish Cabala, can be of no better credit then it is: and what credit that hath, not onely their Senensis before, b [...]t Galatinus, ano­ther stout champion of theirs acknowledgeth, when he saith, that it is mere madnesse to approue all their vnwritten traditions, Galat. de arcan. v [...]rit. Cathol. l. 1. c. 7. which they bragge to haue beene deliuered in mount Sinai, and from thence orderly to haue descended to posterity. Now that which he speaketh of the Iewes Cabala, may as truly be affir­med of the Romish traditions: let them therefore goe arme in arme together, since they will needes haue it so, [...] ioynt enemies to Christian Religion.

18. Againe, the Iewes ascribe so much credit and faith to their Cachamim or illumined Doctors, that whatsoeuer they teach, be it right or wrong, they must not enquire into the truth thereof, but receiue it as an article of their Creed, and build their faith and saluation thereupon. Thus writeth one of their owne Rabbines, to wit, Rabbi Isaac, that died in Por­tugall, [Page 75] Anno 1493. Wee are bound (saith he) to giue no lesse Rabbi Isaac Ab­bu [...]ah. li. Meno­ras ha [...]aer▪ pa. 23. col. 1. credit to euery Rabbine in their sermons, and mysticall or allego­ricall explications, then vnto the Law of Moses it selfe: and if there be found in their words any thing hyperbolicall, or contrary to nature and sence, we must ascribe the fault thereof to our owne defectiue vnderstanding, and not vnto their words. And the same is the doctrine of their Thalmud. Their speeches (saith it) are Thalmud. tract. de Sab. c. 2. p. 30. the speeches of the liuing God, neither doth one word of theirs fall to the ground in vaine: and therefore we are bound to beleeue all things whatsoeuer are written of them, or in their name, for it is the truth: neither must any man laugh at them, neither in his countenance, nor in his heart, for whosoeuer shall doe so, shall not escape punishment: and his punishment (they say) shall be this, that he shall be tormented in hell, in boyling excrements. AndLib. Brandspie­gelium. in another Booke the Iewes are commanded to say, Amen, not onely to their Prayers, but also to all their Sermons and allē ­goricall expositions. Yea, if two Rabbines contend and contra­dict Thalmud. each other, yet they are bound to beleeue both of them, be­cause the words both of the one and the other, are the words of the liuing God, though they vnderstand not each other. And in a word, so great is their madnesse, that they are not ashamedLuther in victo. contra Iud. 107. Rab. Solom. Ia [...]d. in cap. 17. Deut. vers. [...]1. Burd. synag. Iud. ca. 1. pa. 66. to say, That the words of their Rabbines are more to be regar­ded then the words of Moses law, and that if they teach that the right hand is the left, and the left the right, yet they are bound to beleeue them.

19. And is not the Church of Rome paralell to them in this case? I will not condemne them, but let their owne words be their Iudges. Thus write the Rhemists in their Annotati­onsRhem. Annot. in Acts 17. 11. vpon Acts 17. 11. The hearers must not try and iudge whe­ther their Teachers doctrine be true or no, neither may they reiect H [...]s. de expresso verbo Dei. Andrad. defend. Trid. lib. 2. Bell. de verbo Dei interpret. lib. 3. ca. 8. & 9. that which they find not in Scripture. The same is the tenent of Cardinall Hosius, Andradius, and all other of that stampe: Bellarmine affirmeth, that the people must beleeue what soeuer their Passors teach, except they broach somenew doctrine, which hath not beene heard of in the Church before: and if they do so, yet they must not Iudge of them, but referre them to the definitiue sentence of the Pope; to the which they must yeeld full consent [Page 76] without further examination. Yea, he impudently concludeth in another place, That if their ordinary Pastor teach falshood, Idem de Clericis lib. [...]. cap. 7. & another that is not their Pastor teach the contrary truth, yet the people ought to follow their Pastor erring, rather then the other, telling the truth. And another blasphemous Cardinall giueth a reason thereof; Because (saith he) if a man did not beleeue that Card. Sanct. An­gel. ad leg. Bohē. Christ is very God and man, and the Pope thought the same, hee should not be condēned. For (saith a third Cardinal) the iudgement Io. de Tur [...]ecre­mat. sum. de Ec­cles. li. 2. ca. 26. of the Pope is the iudgement of God, and his sentence the sentence of God. As if the Iudgement and sentence of God could bee erronious, which the first Cardinall supposeth concerning the Pope: or as if the Popes sentence, being erronious, could be the sentence of God, as the second affirmeth. Obserue their blasphemous absurdities. Siluester Prierias concludeth thisSiluest. Prierias contra Luther. poynt, when hee sayth, That whosoeuer resteth not on the doc­trine of the Romane Church, and Bishop of Rome, as the infalli­ble rule of God, is an Heretike. And the Canonists sticke notR. Cupers de Ec­cles. to say, that the Pope is subiect to no law, but that his iudge­ment is in stead of law, and that his actions are not to bee en­quiredExtrau. de tran­slat. Episcop. & de praebend. into: neither may a man say vnto him, though hee lead thousand soules into hell with him; Sir, why doe you thus? and that it is not better then sacriledge to call in que­stion the Popes fact, or to iudge of his actions. Thus an insal­libility of iudgement, and an impossibility of erring is ascribed vnto the Bishop of Rome▪ so that whatsoeuer hee propoun­deth, bee it right or wrong, must bee receiued vpon paine of damnation. Neither is it ascribed onely vnto him the worlds high Priest, but also to their Councills and inferiour Pastors, animated by his spirit, whose doctrine is to be heard, and not exa­mined, Bell. vt supra. Nauar. [...]chir. in I. praecept. c. II as they teach. And therefore it is esteemed a great sin amongst them, for a man to make question of any doctrine brought vnto them by any Romish Iesuite, Fryer, or Priest: & when at any time they are conferred withall about their Reli­gion, presently, not being able to answer, their refuge is to re­ferre vs ouer to their Priests; of whose learning and iudge­ment they haue such a perswasion, that though Scripture and reason be against them; yet their opinions preuaile more with [Page 77] them, then either of these. So, that hence it is most euident, that as the Iewes are bound to beleeue all that their Cacha­mim teach, and not to stand to examine what it is that they teach: so the Romanists are bound by their Religion to en­tertaine into their Creed, whatsoeuer is taught them by their ordinary Pastours, without all enquirie and search into their doctrines, whether they bee true or false. And as this is one chiese cause of the Iewes obstinacie against Christian Reli­gion: so is it also of that miserable superstition which raig­neth in the Church of Rome: for if the people were but per­swaded, that their learned Doctours might erre and deceiue, they would certainely suspect their doctrines, and try them by the touchstone of the holy Scriptures, and so at length might be reclaimed from their errours: thus they march to­gether in this point also.

20. Againe, the Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practice of praying for the dead: for they hold and teach, that prayer & sacrifice is to be offered for the dead, grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Maccabeus, who as they affirme, procured sacrifice to bee2. Maccab. 12. 40. 41. 42. 43. offered by the Priests, for the dead that had trespassed by ta­king to themselues the idolatrous iewels of the Iamnites, and partly vpon the Thalmudical traditions of diuers of their an­cient Rabbines: but they haue no ground nor warrant for the same in the word of God: for as concerning the bookes of the Maccabees, they themselues acknowledge that they are not Canonicall Scripture: and for the Scripture, we finde no such precept or example in the whole volume of the olde and new Testament: neither is it likely that God would haue omitted in the law that kinde of sacrifice for the soules of men, where he prescribeth sinne-offerings for bodily polluti­ons, and euery light trespasse, if he had thought it necessarie. That this is the opinion and practice of the Iewes, their pra­cticeMinhagim pag. 12. Orach. [...]aij in Nu. 28. Brandspiege­lium. at this day beareth witnesse: for they vse to say ouer the dead bodies a certaine prayer called Kaddish, by the vertue whereof (as they thinke) they are deliuered out of Purgatory; especially if it bee said by the sonne for his father, and if hee [Page 78] haue no sonne, by the whole Congregation on their Sabboth dayes. And that this also is the doctrine and vsage of the Church of Rome, besides their Bookes, their Masses for the quicke and the dead, their Diriges and Trentals doe suffici­ently testifie: And that they fetch this custome from the Iewes, may appeare by two reasons: first, because one mayne argument of theirs, which they call a demonstration to proue the lawfulnesse hereof, is deriued from the example of the Iewes; as we may see both in Galatinus, Coccius, and our lateGalat. de secret. Cathol. fid. Coccius Thesaur. Cathol. fid. Apolog. Cathol. fid. Bredenbach. de diss. componend. English Apologists. And secondly, because as it is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius, it is not found in all the wri­tings of the Apostles and Euangelists in the new Testament, and we may adde hereunto, neither in the olde, vnlesse by distorted and misalledged texts, which are not worth the an­swering: except onely that fore-named passage of the Mac­cabees, which notwithstanding is corrupted both by the Translatour, and also the Relatour Iason Cyreneus, as is vnan­swerably proued by our famous Country-man, Doctour Rey­nolds: Reynold. de Ido­lolat. l. 1. c. 5. sect. 8. & 9. the word (Dead) being cogged into the Text by some cunning Iuggler, which is not in the Originall, wherein lyeth the pith of the argument. And therefore it must needes fol­low, that the Romanists doe merely Iudaize herein. And for the Fathers which they alledge for the proofe of this article, let their owne Cassander giue satisfaction: who affirmeth,Cassand. consult. art. 24. that the ancient Church vsed prayers for the dead, either as thankfull congratulations for their present ioyes, or esse as re­stimonies of their hope, and desire of their future resurrection, and consummate blessednes both in their bodies and soules: and this hee proueth out of Cyprian, Augustine, Epiphanius, Chrysostome, and ancient Leiturgies.

21. Againe, they Iudaize in their doctrines of Limbus Pa­trum, and Purgatorie: for Purgatorie▪ it hath beene alreadie touched in the former section, and for Limbus Patrum, it isGalatin. Apolog. Cathol fid. Ecclesi▪ 24. 37. [...]tak contra D [...]. l. 8. p. 5 [...]7. co [...]sessed by our aduersaries themselues, that it is the tenent of the Iewish Rabbines, warranted (as they say) onely by a Text in Ecclefiasticus; which being both corrupted in the translation, as our worthy Champion Doctour Whitaker hath [Page 79] proued: and being also no part of Canonicall Scripture, doth plainely shew, that it is a mere Rabbinish conceit, hatched in their brainsick Thalmud, and not bred in holy writ. Yet our Romanists lay fast hold on the same opinion, without any other certaine ground to build it vpon. For as touching the places of Scripture collected by them, to proue this assertion, they are either so impertinent or distorted, that the meanest iudgement may easily discry their weaknesse: for either they are deriued from a word of an ambiguous signification, asBel. de Christi anima. l. 4. [...]. 10. [...] in the speach of Iacob, Gen. 37. 35. which signifieth sometimes the graue, and sometimes hell, by the confession of their great Bellarmine, or from a Parable, as that place in Luke 16. concerning Abrahams bosome, confessed by Mal­donate Maldonat. in hunc locum. to be parabolicall, because bodies are not yet tormen­ted in hell: but here is mention of a finger and a tongue: or from an allegorie, as is that place of Zacharie 9. 11. where is men­tion made of loosing Prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water, which both Salmeron and Bellarmine acknowledge to makeSalmer. in 1. Cor. 15. disp. 26. Bel. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 3. more for Purgatory then for Limbus, but in truth for neither: it signifying literally nothing else, but the deliuerance of the Israelites out of the Babylonish captiuity, and tipically the re­demption of the Elect from the bondage of Sathan and hell, which they are liable vnto: or lastly, are merely impertinent, as those places, Heb. 11. 39. 4. 1. Reg. 28. 1. Pet. 3. 19: the first,Ribera coment. in hunc locum▪ whereof intendeth the consummate and perfect blessednesse of body and soule, which the Fathers had not attayned vnto. The second meaneth not the true Samuel, but the deuill in hisAugust. de octo Dulcit▪ quaestion. shape and likenesse: and the third is to bee referred, not to Christs d [...]scension into hell, but to the operation of his Di­uinitie, which he exercised from the beginning of the world, preaching by the mouthes of iust men, as both S. Augustine Idem. Epistol. ad [...]umod [...]um. and Aquinas expound the place. How can any sound con­clusion now be drawne from Texts that are either equiuocall,Aquin. part. 3. q. 52. art. adse­cund. or allegoricall, or parabolicall, or impertinent, and all by their owne confessions? Therefore it must needes follow, that seeing this doctrine hath no sure foundation in Gods word, but is founded vpon the Iewes prophane Thalmud, that it [Page 80] is no better then a mere Rabbinish conceit.

22. Againe, they ioyne hands with the Iewes in their doc­trines of Free-will, inuocation of Angels and Saints, and me­rite of good workes: all which the moderne Rabbines hold as articles of their Creed, deriuing them from their predecessours the Pharises that went before them. Petrus Galatinus thatGala. de Arno. Cathol. v [...]nt. lib. 6. ca. 6. Rabbinish Romanist, reckoneth vp a number of them that were all Patrons of Free-will, and not as it is set free by grace, (for so we hold that a man hath free-will to good) but euen by nature before grace, as the Romanists hold. And so also of Inuocation of Saints, some of them affirming that the pureFlau. Ioseph de Bell. Iud. lib. 3. cap. 14. Rabb. Abraham in Gen. 22. Li. praecat. Iuda. soules which heare them that pray vnto them, haue a place in heauen. Others, that the Iewes vsed to interpose in their pray­ers betwixt them and God, Isaac, as an intercessour. Others, that prayers are to be made to Angels, to open the gates of Paradise, and to appease Gods wrath. And lastly, the Roma­nistsApol. Cathol. themselues affirme, that when our Sauiour cryed out on the Crosse, Eli, Eli, &c. the Iewes would neuer haue supposed that he had called for Elias, had it not been an vsuall practice amongst them to call vpon the Saints departed. Lastly, tou­chingBuxduorf. synag. Iudaic. the merite of worke, the Iewes teach, that God once e­uery yere, to wit, in the moneth of September, at what time he created the world, calleth all mens liues to an account for the yeare past, and openeth three Bookes, one wherein are writ­ten the names of notorious sinners and Atheists, called The Booke of Death: another, in which are enrolled the names of iust and holy men, called The Booke of Life: and a third, for such as are in a meane betwixt both, neither exceeding bad, nor exceeding good, but of a mixt disposition, and these haue respite giuen them till the day of reconciliation to repent in, which is the tenth day of the same month; at which time if their good doth exceed their euill, then it goeth well with them; but if their euill exceed their good, then they are registred presently in the Booke of Death. And lest GOD should be deceiued, they say, that he holdes in his hand a bal­lance, into one skale whereof he puts their good workes, and into the other their euill deeds, that he may measure out his [Page 81] rewards according to the weight of the one or the other. How ridiculous a fable is this? Much like vnto the Poeticall fiction of Min [...]s, Aea [...]us, and Radamanthus, the three Iudges of hell, whome the Poets faine to sit there, weighing the soules of men, and giuing sentence vpon them according to their poyse and weight. By this it appeareth, that the foo­lish Rabbines maintained free-will, inuocated Saints and Angels, and esteemed their workes meritorious: All which are the very opinions of the Church of Rome, belee­ued and practised of all the professours of that Religion: which is so much the more absurd, because they themselues confesse in speciall, concerning the doctrine of InuocationSuarez tom. 2. in 3. part. Thom. q. 52. art. 1. disp. 42 of Saints, that it was not taught vnto the people of the olde Testament for feare of Idolatry, nor at the first preaching of the Gospell, for feare it should seeme vnto them a hard and harsh doctrine: and in generall, that it is madnesse to relye our faith vpon the Iewish Thalmud, seeing the Thalmudicall Writers are full of impieties and blasphemies, and thereforeSixt. Senens. bi­blioth. Sac. lib. 2. § tradit. haue not onely been prohibited to be read, but also condem­ned to the fire by diuers of their owne Popes: all which not­withstanding, our Romish Rabbies fetch a demonstration for the maintenance of these doctrines, from the example and practice of the Iewes.

23. In like manner the Iewes had those that professed a monasticall and single life, which were called Essaeans, fromSigor. de repub. hebraic. l. 5. c. 11. the Greeke word [...] that is, Saints or holy men, as some suppose, because ( [...]orsooth) they tooke vpon them to be more holy then others; and therefore would not offer sacrifice with the people, because they thought them not so ho­ly as themselues. And these, as Iosephus and Philo testifie, professed continency from marriage, community in goods, and abstinence from meats, not by any warrant out of Gods word, but onely by the authority of their vnwritten traditi­ons. And doe not the Romanists imitate them in the same kind? What are their Monkish Votaries but Apes of the Iew­ish Essaeans? And what is their Monasticall profession▪ but a pretence of a state of rare holinesse and perfection? They [Page 82] vow chastitie in single life, and abhorre marriage as a state of pollution: they abstaine from meates, and professe volunta­ry pouerty, with a community of goods: and all this they do, that they may seeme more holy then others, and merite hea­uen by their holinesse, hauing withall answerable vnto them, nothing but tradition for their warrantize, without either sound precept or true example out of holy Scripture. For, grant that their Euangelicall Councils are such as they would haue them to be, and that vowes in Christianity are lawfull: yet it is certaine that the authority of Councils, and the law­fulnesse of vowes doe neither warrant nor allow their super­stitious and idle monkery, nor the blasphemous opinion ofBell. de Monac. lib. 2. cap. 6. merite, which they ascribe vnto such voluntary deuotions, nor yet the necessity of irreuocation, though by the frailty of mans nature there be an impossibility of performance. And so both in substance and circumstance they want the autho­rity of gods word to vphold them. Let then the Iewish Essae­ans, and the Romish Monks, walke together, as in one path of superstition, so vnder one cloake of hypocrisie: for that which Sigonius affirmeth of the one, that they were by Nati­on, Sigon. de Repub. hebrai [...]. li. 5. c. 11 Iewes; and by manners hypocrites, we may truely confirme of the other, that they are Christians by profession, but hypo­crites by conuersation. And as those Essaeans did farre dege­nerate from the ancient Nazarites and Rechabites, whome they pretended for their patterns: so these doe as farre and more from those ancient Monkes that liued in former ages of the Church, as is vnanswerably demonstrated by many of the learned Champions of our Church, especially DoctourD. Mort. protest. App li. 1. c. 2. 38. [...] way to the true Church. [...]g. 45 Mort [...]n, and Doctour White: to whome I referre the Rea­der for fuller resolution in this poynt.

24. The Iewish Rabbines also taught, that the damned soules in hell and Purgatory had some refreshing and rest vp­on euery Sabboth day, assoone as a certaine prayer was chan­ted out by them with sweet melodie: and therefore, that on [...]. 14. euery Friday at night there is a great shout in hell for ioy of the ensuing Sabboth, and on their Sabboth day at night a dolefull crye for griefe of their returne to their paines. Thus [Page 83] the Rabbines doted: And do not our Romish Rabbines dote in like manner? They also teach, that the damned soules haue some refreshment and ease vpon the Sabboth day: as in theLegend. Sancti Brandonis. legend of S. Brandon it is written, how that holy Abbotfound Iudas the Traytour sitting vpon a stone in a certaine Island, and demanding of him what he was, and why heesate in that place: he answered, that vpon euery Saturday at noone, vntill after Euensong vpon Sunday, he was suffered to sit there out of the hellish torments, to be refreshed and comforted during the Sabboth: Now if Iudas found this fauour, must wee not thinke that all other obtaine the like?

25. The Iewish Rabbines deuise strange tales of walkingo ghosts, for the vpholding of the walls of Purgatorie, as that Rabbi Akiba should meet once in the way, a man with a hea­uie burden of stickes on his backe, who vpon examinationBuxdorf synag. Judaic. confessed, that hee was a Purgatorie Ghost, carrying such a bundle of stickes euery day to burne himselfe: and that the Rabbi finding out his sonne, taught him to say the prayer called Kaddisch, which was so effectuall, that in a dreame this ghost returned to the Rabbi, with thanks for his deliuery, and said, that hee was now in Gan Eden or Paradise, and no longer in Purgatory. This and such like tales they tell for their Purgatorie: wherein the Romanists may behold their face as it were in a glasse: for are not their Bookes and Legends full stuft with such trash? is not this article of their Religion maintayned by this argument? are not the mindes of the vulgar possessed with such fearefull fables? I will not stand to shew how full of falshood these narrations are, nor how contrary to the ancient doctrine of the chiefest Fathers, and Primitiue Church; (that shall bee discouered in a more proper place) onely I shew how poore Purgatorie, both with Iewes and Romanists, is vpholden by walking ghosts, or else it would fall to the ground.

26. The Iewish Rabbines teach their people, to confesse one to another their sins the day before their feast of reconci­liation, which is the tenth day of the month Tisri or Septem­ber and that in a secret place of the Synagogue; where each [Page 84] receiueth mutually at his fellowes hand with a lether belt 39. blowes, and at each blow the party beaten beates themselues on the brest, and saith one word of his confession, taken out of the 78. Psalme and 13. verse: then the striker lyeth down [...], and receiueth like penance at the hands of the former: this done, they runne home, and make merry with the Cocks and Hennes of reconciliation, supping largely because of the next dayes fast. Now doe not our Romanists imitate them in this May▪game of confession, and hypocriticall penance? They must also confesse their sinnes in secret, and receiue a short penance for their long sinnes, and that once a yeere principally: with a certaine perswasion of meriting thereby remission of their sinnes, and when they haue done, doe they not returne, like the dogge to the vomit, to their old courses? If a man shall obserue them well, and compare their practices together, hee shall easily perceiue, how both of them alike turne that seuere discipline of the Church which they bragge so much of, into a mere mockage and pastime.

27. The Iewish Rabbines looke for Elias the great Pro­phet, to come before their long expected Messias. And doc not our Romish Rabbines tell vs that Elias must come before the second comming of Christ? they are both alike in this er­ronious conceit, saue that the Romanists erre worse then the Iewes, for that they will haue Elias to bee the fore-runner of Christs second cōming, whereas the Iewes expect him, accor­ding to the prophecy of Malachy, together with our SauioursMalach 45. Matth. 11. 14. application thereof, before the first comming of their Messias.

28. The Iewish Rabbines imagined, that euery one had attending vpon him two Angels, one good and another bad, the one to protect and blesse him, if hee behaued himselfe de­uoutly and reuerently in Gods scruice; the other to curse and afflict him, if hee found him failing in his duty. Our Romish Rabbines teach the fame doctrine, as if all the Angels were not ministring spirits, for the good of them which are heires of saluation: and as if a man had but one cuill spirit to tempt and [...]nn [...]y him, whereas in one man there were found a wholeL [...]ke [...] [...]. L [...]ke [...]. [...]. legion, and in one woman seuen deuils at once, as wee finde [Page 85] recorded in the historie of the Gospell.

29. The Iewish Rabbines taught that those shall be more seuerely punished, who should violate the precepts of their Scribes, then they that should transgresse the law of Moses: and doe not our Romish Rabbines affirme the same in effect, when they impose a greater punishment vpon the breach of one of their traditionall decrees, then if a man'breake the pre­cepts of Gods law? as for example, if a man eate flesh in Lent, or after a vow marrie a wife, then if hee commit adulterie or breake the Sabboth?

30. The Iewish Rabbines perswade the silly people, that they are the onely Elect people of God, who easily can keepe not the Decalogue or tenne Commandements alone, but the whole law of Moses: and therefore that the law consisting of sixe hundred and thirteene Commandements, wherof three hundred, threescore and fiue are prohibitions, as many as are dayes in a yeere or veynes in a mans body, and two hundred, forty and eight commanding precepts, iust so many as a man hath members in his body; if euery member of a man doe euery day performe one of the precepts, and omit one of the things prohibited, the whole law of Moses may bee euery yeere, and so for euer fulfilled. Thus they vaunt of their owne strength to saue themselues, and therefore seeke not for a Sa­uiour without themselues. And what doe our Romish Rab­bines but the same, when they affirme, that a man may in this state-of mortality, perfectly fulfill the whole law: yea, euen doe more then the law requireth, and so supererogate? what neede haue these of the death of Christ, to purge away their sinnes, when they can thus by the ayde of Gods grace (as they say) keepe all the Commandements, and so pay the vt­termost debt of their obedience? Let them goe together then as enemies vnto Christ in this opinion also.

31. To conclude: the Iewish Pharises fasted twice a weeke: so doe our Romish ones, saue that they alter the or­der, but not the number of the dayes: for the Iewes fast the second and fift day of the weeke: the Romanists the fourth and sixt. The Iewish Pharises vsed in a blinde deuotion, to [Page 86] beate their heads against the walls, till bloud came, to vse thornes in their skirts to sting themselues, to lye on plankes, on stones and thornes, to drench themselues of [...]n colde wa­ter for the reseruing of their chasti [...]y: so doe ou Romish P [...]a­rises, they make a shew of whipping and scourging their owne carkasses, of going barefoote & woollward, of drench­ing themselues in colde water (as we read, that Fr ar Frauncis was wont to doe) and all (forsooth) both to tame the rebel'ion of their vnruly flesh, which will not be tamed by these means of their owne inuention, hauing left the ordinance of God, and by penance to make satisfaction for their former sinnes: but it will one day bee said vnto them, who required these things at your hands. In vaine ye worship (O ye hypocrites) teach­ing [...]say 29. 13. Math. 15. 8. for doctrines precepts of men.

32. The Iewish Pharises would not conuerse with any of a different Religion, especially the Samaritanes, whoseBuxdorf. Synop. Iudaic c. 11. bread they thought it as vnlawfull to eate, as to eate Swines flesh: and for Christians, they account it a sinne to keepe faith and promise with them, to afford them any succour: yea, not to doe them any mischiefe that lyeth in their power: and therefore in their prayers one part of their deuotion is, most direfully to curse all those that professe Christian Religion. The Romish Pharises doe likewise, they damme all to hell that are not of their Religion, they denie faith to bee kept with Heretikes, they hate all that are not subiect to their Pope, but aboue all, the poore Protestant: him they curse with Bell, Booke and Candle, and abhorre him more then a Iew or a Turke: yea, once a yeere ordinarily and in publike, they curse vs to the pit of hell, which I take it to be vpon eue­ry good Friday. They say, that the Father may not nourish his owne childe, if he be an Heretike, nor the childe honour his Father, nor the Prince defend his Subiect, nor the Subiect obey his Prince: all bonds of nature, policy, religion, are pulled in pieces by these Romish Pharises.

33. The Iewish Pharises vsed not to fast without a dis­figured face, nor giue an almes without a Trumpet, nor sel­dome pray, but in the corners of the streetes and high-wayes, [Page 87] that they might bee seene of men, all for shew, nothing for substance. And are not our Romish Pharises their equals in this? Is not their religion all in ostentation? doe they hide themselues when they fast and pray? doe they not blow a trumpet before their deedes of charitie? their hypocriticall abstinence from flesh on set dayes, when as in the meane while they farse themselues with dainty fish and delicate iun­kets; their mumbling vp so many Aue Maries, and Pater Nosters, in the streetes and Market-places, their crow [...]hing at euery Crosse; and lastly, their Almes-deeds extorted by feare, either for penance of sinnes committed, or in hope of meriting the kingdome of Heauen, and imployed for the most part to the feeding of a multitude of idle Drones, Monkes and Fryers, fatted in a Cloyster, like Bores in a stye, doe proue this to be true which I haue said.

34. The Iewish Pharises vnder colour of long prayers & greatMat. 23. 14. deuotion, deuoured widowes houses: the Romish Pharises by the same pretext of holinesse, sucke downe into their pan­ches not the Cottage of some poore widdow, but the rich and faire Patrimonies of seduced Gentlemen, Noblemen, and o­thers: the Iewish Pharises compassed sea and land to gaineMat. 23. 15. a Proselite to their profession: our Romish Pharises trauell all Countries, & labour by all possible means to winne soules to their religion, and to reconcile men to the obedience of the Bishop of Rome; and when they haue wrought their purpose, as those, so these make them two-fold more the children of hell, then they were before.

35. Lastly, the Iewish Pharises like hypocrites made cleane the out-side of the cup and platter, but within were full of bri­bery and excesse; and therefore are compared by our Sauiour to whited Tombes, which appeare beautifull without, but within are full of all filthinesse. So, our Romish Pharises come to vs in sheepes clothing, giuing a bright luster of holinesse, and austerity in their externe behauiour; but inwardly are rauening Wolues, deuouring the flocke, and haue their hearts fraught with all manner of villany; as lying for aduantage, e­quiuocation, couetousnesse, ambition, vncleane lusts, and o­ther [Page 88] inordinate affections, as the secular Priests boldly ob­iect against the Loyolian Sect, and are taxed backe againe byQuodlibet per totum. them as guilty of the same crimes.

36. This subiect might be enlarged by many more parti­culars,Conclus. but that I forbeare to stirre this sinke any further, and weary the Reader and my selfe, hauing a long iourney yet to trauaile. This that hath beene spoken, I suppose to be suffici­ent, to prooue the truth of the proposition, that the Roma­nists imitate the Iewes in those things wherein they are ene­mies vnto Christ, both in respect of the legall Ceremonies, which are vanished by the appearance of the Sunne of righ­teousnes; and also in respect of their Thalmudieall traditi­ons, which were neuer found in Gods Booke, but are the foppish dotages of their superstitious Rabbines. And is it not strange, that notwithstanding all this, they should bragge themselues to be the onely Catholikes of the world, and their Church the onely Noahs Arke, out of the which there is no saluation?

MOTIVE. IIII. That Religion which derogateth from the glory of God in the worke of our Redemption, and giueth part thereof vnto man, cannot be the truth of God: but such is the Po­pish Religion: Ergo.

THe first proposition, as it is infallibly true of it selfe, soMAIOR. is it without all question and controuersie betwixt vs and the Romanists; for both confesse, that the end of true Religion is, that God might be glorified: and therefore whatsoeuer doth rebate from that end, cannot possibly be the truth: Especially, seeing the Lord himselfe protesteth, that [Page 89] he will not giue his glory to another, Esay 48. 11. And Paul af­firmeth, that the end of all our actions should bee the glorie of God, 1. Car. 10. 31. Therefore passing ouer the Maior with silence, it is necessary that the Minor or second proposition bee strengthened and confirmed, whereon the hinge of the Controuersie hangeth, & the whole pith & substance of this fourth Argument doth consist; which by the assistance of Gods good spirit (whose ayde I humbly implore, and of my Lord and Sauiour Christ Iesus, whose glory I now labour to maintaine) I doubt not but to make so cleare, as is the Sunne at Noone-day, all cloudes, mists, and fogges, being vtterly dispersed.

2. That the Romish Religion doth derogate from the glo­ryMINOR. of God in the worke of our redemption, may by foure maine and fundamentall doctrines of their Religion most eui­dently be demonstrated, (besides many other poynts of les­ser consequence) to wit, their doctrines of Free-will, of Iu­stification, of merite, and of satisfaction.

3. For the doctrine of Free-will, this is the generall de­terminationI. of the Church of Rome, that in the act of regene­ration and conuersion, mans will doth naturally cooperate with the grace of God, and that it is not meerely of superna­turall grace that a sinner is regenerate, but partly of naturall free-will, and partly of grace: whereas, we on the contrary defend, that the regeneration and conuersion of a sinner is wholly of the grace of God, and that mans will in that great worke is meerely passiue, and not actiue, yea, starke dead, vntill it be excited and quickned by the grace of God: This in briefe is the difference betwixt the Romanists and vs in this poynt. Now, here a double taske lyeth vpon mee; first, to proue this to bee their doctrine; and secondly, to shew how this doctrine tendeth to the empeachment of Gods glorie.

4. That this is the doctrine of the Church of Rome, let the Councill of Trent, which they call their Church represen­tatiue, and which being approued by the Pope, cannot erre, as they affirme, be Iudge. Thus it decreeth, and bindeth the [Page 90] decree with a curse: Si quis dixerit, &c. (that is) If any man Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. c. 6. can. 4. shall say, that mans free-wil being mooued and stirred by God, doth nothing cooperate by assenting to God, moouing and calling it, whereby it may dispose and prepare it selfe to the obtaining of the grace of iustification, and that it cannot dissent if it will: but like a thing without life, is not at all actiue, but meerely passiue, Ana­thema sit. Let him be accursed. This Riddle of the Councill of Trent (for so most of the decrees thereof are rather to bee termed, then Canons of faith) is thus expounded by Andra­dius Andrad. Orthod. explicat. interpretation, who was present at the same Councill, and knew the meaning of those holy Fathers; to wit, that there is in euery man by nature a power and ability, Ad inchoandas & perficiendas spirituales actiones, (that is) To beginne and to effect spirituall actions; but that power and ability is so fettered with the chaines of sinne, that vnlesse grace come and helpe to set it free, it can doe nothing: as a man weighed downe with yron shooes, though he hath power in himselfe to go, yet cannot, except his yron shooes be put off: or as a bird caught in a snare, hath power to flie, yet cannot, except the snare be broken, &c. By these two simili­tudes, he illustrateth the sentence and meaning of the Coun­cill: whereby it euidently appeareth, that this is the plaine doctrine of the Church of Rome, that of the regeneration and conuersion of a sinner, the spirit of God is not the sole cause, but that with the spirit Mans free-will doth concurre, and so both together make the ioynt efficient cause.

5. The later Romanists, and especially the Iesuites (to passe ouer the grosse positions of the former Schoolemen) do more plainely deliuer the meaning of their Church concer­ning this poynt. Let vs heare Bellarmine speake: Cooperamur Bel. li. 6. de grat. & li. arb. ca. 11. Deo, &c. We cooperate with God (saith he) not onely as our Ad­uersaries would haue after iustification, but euen in very iustifi­cation it selfe, and in the beginning of faith. And after he per­emptorily concludeth; Non nisi cooperantibus nobis Deus salutem nostrum operatur [...], (that is) God doth not worke our sal­uation without our owne helpe, cooperating with him. We are be­holding to Bellar. for setting down plainly our opinion. For this we hold, that after the first grace, wherin we are meerely [Page 91] passiue, we then begin to will and worke our owne saluation; but yet not of our selues, as from our selues, but onely of his grace, wherewith as we are preuented to beginne, so we must continually be accompanied that wee may perseuere: for if God withdrraw his grace neuer so little, we are [...]ure to sinke, as Peter did in the water: which is the very opinion of Saint Augustine, for in his Enchiridion ad Laurentium thus hee saith, Deus nolentempraenenit vt velit, volentem sequitur, ne Aug. Ench. ca. 32 frustravelit; (that is) God preuenteth a man being vnwilling, that he may will; and followeth him being willing, lest he should will in vaine. And of Saint Hierome, who thus speaketh Non Hier. ad C [...]ese­phont. sufficit mihi quod semel donauit, nisi semper donauerit, peto vt ac­cipiam, & cum accepero, rursus peto, (that is) It is not sufficient for me that he hath giuen me (grace) once, vnlesse he doe alwaies giue; I pray that I may receiue, and when I haue receiued, I pray againe. And againe of Saint Augustine, Hominis non libera, Aug. cont. 2. epist. Pelag. lib. 3. ca. 7 sed Dei gratia liberata voluntas, (that is) Mans will is not free, but freed by the grace of God. And in another place, Ea­tenus libera, quantenus liberata, (that is) It is so farre-forth free, as it is freed, and no further.

6. But to proceed, Coster another Iesuite, is a little moreCost. Ench. de lib. Arbit. page 208. plaine and grosse, Liberum arbitrium, &c. Free-will (saith he) doth prepare it selfe to iustification, by the ayde of God, not yet inhabiting, but onely moouing and helping, not onely suffering, but also working and doing. And againe in the same place, Man being fallen into the darke pit of sinne, that he may be drawne out againe, doth not onely receiue and suffer, but coworketh with the grace of God, and prepareth himselfe by beleeuing, trusting, and vndertaking the duties of piety, vntill arising vp to the Sonne of Righteousnes, he be replenished with the diuine light of grace; as Ieremie, being baled out of the dungeon, helped those which pul­led him out, by putting the cloutes and cordes vnder his arme­holes. Salmeron, another Iesuite, is yet more palpable, Liberum Salmer. tom. 3. page 38. arbitrium non partem &c. Free will (saith hee) doth not worke one part, and the grace of God another; but to euery action is ex­tended aswell free-will as grace. But Ecchius surpasseth all theEcchius Enchir. rest for plainenesse, for thus he writeth, The beginning of our [Page 92] saluation we haue from Gods mercy, but to yeeld to Gods whole­some inspiration is in our power, &c. Thus with an impudent forehead, they marry together Gods grace and mans will in the act of Regeneration, betwixt which, a diuorce was made by the fall of Adam, and so remaineth irreconciled, till we be engrafted into the second Adam by faith.

7. Hence it is, that the Councill of Trent is bold to af­firme,Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. c. 4. that when equall grace is offered vnto two, that one is con­uerted, and the other remaineth in his infidelity: the cause is in their wills, in that one entertaineth, the other reiecteth the grace that is offered: And to hold this (saith Molyn [...] another Iesuite)Molyn. disput. 12 is a matter of faith. And this is the doctrine of Thomas their great Clerke. It is in the power of our free-will (saith he) to hinder Aquin. cont. Gent. lib. 3. c. 159. Ruard. art. 7. Pro. 10. explicat. art. Louan. or not to hinder the receiuing of diuine grace. And another more fully and foully thus dareth to speake. If it be demanded why this man is conuerted and that man is not, the helpe of God being giuen alike to both, the reason is to be assigned to free-will, namely because the one would bee conuerted, and the other would not: And this also Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth. Gods moti­on Bel. de quot▪ et lib. arbit. lib. 6. cap. 15. (saith he) leaueth man altogether free to be conuerted, or not to be. Lastly, they doe not onely hold, that we haue a power in our wills, to moue towards our owne conuersion, and free­ly to will or nill the accepting of Gods grace offered, but also to perseuere to the end after grace receiued. This the IesuiteMolyn. disput. de lib. arbit. Molyna doth in expresse words set downe, when hee saith, That the perseuerance of men in good, dependeth vpon their owne free cooperation, and the dayly particular diuine helpe. And this is the common receiued doctrine of the Church of Rome.

8. Now out of all these their opinions, three materiall obseruations doe arise: first, that that Helena of theirs, the merit of congruity, though in word it be reiected by some of the finer Iesuites, yet in substance and in truth is still retayned: for, whereas the Schoolemen say grosly, that a man by doing what he is able by the power of his nature, doth of congruity merit effectuall grace, the Councill of Trent and the later Di­uines choose rather to say, that hee doth dispose and prepare himselfe to grace, which indeede is in effect all one: for, to [Page 93] merit grace: and to dispose a mans selfe to grace, is in diuersity of words, but one and the same sense: and this Bellarmine in­genuouslyBel. de Iustif. lib. 5. cap. 22. confesseth, when he saith, that a man not yet recon­ciled, may by the workes of penance obtaine and deserue, ex con­gruo, of congruity, the grace of iustification. Thus they say and vnsay what they list, and gainesay each other, and indeede are in such a labyrinth, that they know not what to say: Second­ly, that howsoeuer they magnifie the grace of God in word, and affirme nothing more frequently, then that without Gods grace, preuenting, assisting and following vs, we can doe no­thing, yet in very deede they ascribe well-neere as much po­wer to free-will, as to the grace of God: yea more, for they make the efficacie of the first grace, to depend vpon the free consent of our will, and make it as it were the Porter to let in, or shut out grace at it pleasure: which is one of the most pre­sumptuous conceits, that euer was vttered by the mouth of man, and full of blasphemy. Thirdly and lastly, that this first grace which they say, doth work with free-will, in the first act of our new birth, and help & assist it, is not intrinsicall and in­habitant, but barely outward & prouocant. In respect where­of, Coster compareth grace to a staffe in a mans hand, which at his owne will he either vseth for his helpe, or throweth away; and to a friend, who finding a man in a deepe pit, perswadeth him by di­uers reasons to be willing to be pulled out. And in expresse words the same Iesuite saith, that this grace is onely the impulsion and motion of the holy Ghost, being yet without, and standing knocking at the doore of our heart, not being as yet let in. And Bellarmine auoucheth the same, when hee saith, that it is but onely a perswading, which doth not determine the will, but in­clineth it in manner of a propounding obiect. And thus vnder colour of the name of grace, they insinuate into mens soules the poyson of their doctrine, attributing in word all to grace, when indeede they meane nothing lesse.

9. These things being thus discouered, let vs now come to see, how by this doctrine the glory of God is defaced: which that it may more clearely appeare, two grounds are to be laid:Esay 48. 11. & 42. 8. the first whereof is, that God is so iealous of his glory, that he [Page 94] cannot endure any copartner or sharer with him therein. The second is, that in cases where grace & nature seeme to worke together, the godliest course is to magnifie the grace of God,1. Cor. 4. 7. and to debase the nature of man, yea, to ascribe all to grace, and nothing to nature, because this sauours of humility, whereas the contrary hath a manifest taste of pride. These grounds being setled in our mindes, let vs come to the exami­nation of their doctrine. And I pray you, touching the first ground, doth not this doctrine of theirs make man to part stakes with God? In his glory, whereas our doctrine doth ascribe all the glory in solid, and whole to God onely: let any man iudge whether ascribe more glory vnto God, wee, that affirme that God is all in all to the effecting of our rege­neration, or they that say, that our will doth cooperate with his grace, or else it can doe nothing: we that say, that we are starke dead to Godward, till God put life into vs by his spirit; or they that say, wee are but sicke and halfe dead, and are but onely helped and assisted by his spirit: wee that teach, that a man can no more prepare himselfe to his owne iustification, then a dead man to life, or they that teach; wee may by our naturall powers either merit of congruity, or prepare our selues to our iustification. Lastly, wee that ascribe the whole worke of our saluation to God onely, or they that attribute some part thereof to their owne free-will. If this bee not to derogate from Gods glory, what can be? for apparently they share the great and glorious worke of our regeneration be­twixt God and man, grace and nature.

10. Would it not (thinke you) be a great impeachment to Gods glory, if in the worke of our creation any should teach that God alone did not create vs, but that we our selues were coadiutors with him: so in the worke of regeneration▪ which is a second creation to attribute part to Gods spirit, and part to free-will, is it not a great blemish to the glory of God? for, either it must be said, that God could not doe it of himselfe alone, or that he would not: If the first, then they blaspheme in derogating from his power: if the second, then they dote in saying, God is not willing to maintaine his owne glory, [Page 95] or that he is willing to impart it vnto others, contrary to his owne word and will reuealed in the Scripture, which way so euer they turne themselues, they fall into the pit of impiety▪ and make themselues guilty of high treason against the di­uine Maiestie.

11. Againe, when our Sauiour raised vp Lazarus from the graue, where he lay stinking foure dayes, if it bee true which some write, that Lazarus life was stil remaining in him, and that his soule and body was not parted, and so our blessed Sauiour did but excite and stirre vp that life, which was as it were asleepe, and did not inspire into him a new life, and couple together his soule and body againe being deuided, is not the glory of this miracle mightily darkened and extenua­ted? This is our very case, wee say that a man is starke dead and buried in the graue of sinne, and till a new life of grace be inspired into his soule, he cannot moue the least haires bredth to heauen-ward▪ our aduersaries say, that he is not dead, but maymed and wounded like the man, that betwixt Iericho and Ierusalem fell among theeues; and therefore needes not to be reuiued, but onely to be healed and helped with the oyle and wine of grace powred into his wounds, he himselfe coopera­ting with his owne free will: who seeth not that by this do­ctrine of ours, God is more glorified, and by theirs more de­based? for the lesse and easier the worke is, the lesse is also the glory of the worke-man, and the greater and harder the worke, the greater his glory: but it is a lesse worke to heale a man wounded, then to raise a man dead, and therefore lesse glory ascendeth vnto God by their doctrine, then by ours. But what doe I say lesse? when indeed to giue any part of the Creators glory to the creature, is vtterly to take all from the Creator: for hee will haue all or none, as Tertullian notablyTertul. aduers. haeres. obserueth, when he saith, That true faith requireth this in de­fending the true God, that whatsoeuer is his, we make it onely his, for so shall it bee accounted his, if it bee accounted onely his, by which rule, the faith of the Romane Church cannot bee the true faith.

12. And againe, according to the second ground, if to [Page 96] giue all the glory to God, and none to our selues, sauour of humility, but to deuide stakes betwixt God and our selues, hath a taste of pride: then it must needs follow, that God is more honoured by the one then by the other, because by hu­mility God is honoured, and by pride dishonoured: and therefore the Apostle saith, that hee resisteth the proud, and gi­ueth 1. Pet. 5. 5. grace to the humble: for what cause? but because the proud man seeketh his owne glory, whereas the humble de­uesteth himselfe of all, and layeth it downe at the foote of God: the proud man reioyceth in himselfe, but the humble reioyceth in the Lord alone, according as it is written, Let 1. Cor. 1. 31. Ier. 9. 24. him that reioyceth, reioyce in the Lord. Now the Romanists that magnifie free-will, haue iust cause (their doctrine being pre­supposed to be true) to reioyce in themselues, which is an ar­gument of pride: for, whereas our Sauiour saith, Without me Ioh. 15. 5. ye can doe nothing, they may say, Yes something, for wee can either admit or reiect thy grace by our owne power: and whereas the Apostle saith, Who hath separated thee, what hast 1. Cor. 4. 7. thou which thou hast not receiued? they may say, I haue separa­ted my selfe in doing that which I was able, and so made my selfe fit for grace, and this power I haue not receiued from Gods speciall fauour, but from my owne free will. All which kinde of speeches, as they are full of pride and fleshly vanity, so they are stuffed with impiety and blasphemie, and mani­festly tend to the dispoyling of the diuine Maiestie of that glory, which is onely due vnto him. And therefore I con­clude with two notable sayings, one of S. Augustines, and another of Cassander, a learned Reconciliater of late time; Tutiores viuimus (saith the Father) si totum Deo damus, &c. August. de bono Perseuer. c. 6. that is, We liue more safely if we attribute all wholy to God, and not commit our selues partly to God, and partly to our selues. And this is the part of a godly minded man (saith the Reconciliater) to attribute nothing to themselues, but all to Gods grace: whence Cassand. consult. de lib. arbitr. it followeth, that how much so euer a man giueth to grace▪ yet in so doing, hee departeth not from pietie, though hee detract some­thing from nature and freewill: but when any thing is taken from Gods grace, and giuen to nature, which belongeth to grace, that [Page 97] cannot be without eminent danger. So that by the confession both of this learned Romanist, and also of that reuerend Fa­ther, our doctrine in the poynt of free-will, is both more a­greeable to piety, and respectiue to Gods glory, then theirs is; and therefore in reason to be preferred before it.

13. The next doctrine whereby the glorie of God is dar­kened,2. and the dignitie of Christs merites blemished, is their doctrine of Iustificatiō, which I ioyne next vnto Free-wil, be­cause their sophistry & cunning in this great & maine pillar of Religion cannot well be discerned (they so palliate the matter with faire glosses & goodly words▪) except their opinion tou­ching the power of Free-will be first apprehended. And here, before I enter into the bowels of this poynt, it is to be obser­ued, that most of them vaunt and bragge that they doe much more magnifie Christs merites by their doctrine of Iustifica­tion, then we doe: which, how true it is, the discourse fol­lowing (I hope) shall so manifest, that euery indifferent man shall be able to say truely of them, as Saint Augustine said of the Donatists, These are the words of men, extolling the glory Aug. cont. lit. Pe­til. li. 2. ca. 84. of man, vnder the name of Christ, to the abasing of the glory of Christ himselfe.

14. The doctrine therfore of our Church touching the iusti­fication of a sinner, is in effect thus much. That a sinner is iusti­fied that is accepted into the fauour and loue of God, not by any thing in himselfe, or from himselfe, but by the perfect and vnspotted righteousnes of Christ Iesus, imputed vnto him by the meere mercy of God, through the couenant of grace, and apprehended on his behalfe by the hand of faith. The reason whereof is, because that which must satisfie Gods iustice, and reconcile a sinner vnto him, must haue these two properties; first, it must be of infinite weight and value, to counterpoyse with the rigour of Gods iustice: and secondly, it must be of sufficient ability to performefull and perfect obedience to the law of God; so that a perfect satisfaction bee made both in respect of the obedience which the law requireth, and also of the punishment that it inflicteth. Now, no righteousnesse of man is thus qualified, but is both imperfect and vnsufficient; [Page 98] no, not the righteousnes of Angels themselues, being, though excellent, yet [...]finite Creatures, sauing the righteousnes of Christ Iesus onely, who is both God and Man; and therefore his righteousnes onely, and none other, is that whereby a sin­ner must be iustified before God.

15. From this it appeareth, that when we say that a man is iustified by faith, our meaning is not, that faith is the cause of our iustification, but onely the instrument and hand to appre­hend that righteousnes of Christ whereby we are iustified: & when we say, faith alone iust fieth; we meane that it alone is the instrument of our iustification, because it alone layeth hold vpon the righteousnes of Christ, and applyeth it to our selues: not that it is euer alone, but alwaies accompanyed with charity and patience, and zeale, and temperance, and other fruites of the spirit: for we hold, that the true iustifying faith is euer m [...]re grauida bonorū operū, as one of their own fauourites affirmeth, that is, full of good workes, and euerRoff. art. 1. ad­uers Luther. anon ready to bring them forth, as occasion serueth. Neither doe we deny, as some of them falsly slander vs (though manyStaplet. li. 9. de Iu [...]fic. ca. 7. Bell. lib. 4. de Iu­stific▪ cap. 1. of their chiefest Writers gaine-say their fellowes, and affoord vs that fauour to speake the truth of vs) but that euery one that is iustified must also be truely sanctified, and that saluati­on is not obtained by iustification alone, but by sanctificati­on also: yet wee make sanctification and good workes not to be the causes, but the effects; nor the roote, but the fruit; nor the anticedents, but the necessary consequents and atten­dants of our Iustification. And as Bellarmine truely distingui­shethBell▪ Ibid. to be necessary, Necessitate praesentiae, non efficientiae, by a necessity of presence, not of efficacie, as if they wrought our saluation. In a word, In the act of iustification, wee say that workes haue no roome, because both they are imperfect, and also are not done by our own strength; but being once iustifi­ed, we must needs repent, and become new creatures, walking not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. And this is the doctrine of our Church concerning Iustification.

16. Now let vs heare what they say, and then weigh both doctrines in the ballance of the sanctuary, that wee [Page 99] may see which of them bringeth most glory to the me­rits of CHRIST, and to the power of his satisfacti­on. I will plainely and sincerely (God willing) set downe the summe of their doctrine. First therefore they teach, that there is a double iustification, the first whereby a man ex in­iusto Cost. Ench. [...]ecā. disp. Theolog. fit iustus, of an vniust and wicked man is made iust and good, and of a sinner is made righteous; the second wherby a man being iust is made more iust, and doth encrease in iu­stice and sanctity, according to that Reuel. 22. 11. He thatReuel. 22. 11. is iust, let him be more iust. Concerning the first iustification, some of them affirme, that it is the free gift of God, and de­serued by no precedent workes; others that it is merited by congruity, but not by condignity: but of the second, theyCens. Coloniens. pag. 140. 141. Becan. Ibid. say, that it is gotten and merited by our workes. But before both these, they make certaine preparations and dispositions, whereby a man by the power of his owne free-will stirred vpConcil. Trident. Sess. 6. cap. 6. Bel. lib. 1. de Iust. cap. 13. by grace, doth make himselfe fit for iustification, namely, by the acts of faith, feare, hope, loue, repentance, and the pur­pose of a new life; all which a man must haue before hee re­ceiue the first grace of iustification: and for the obtaining whereof, he needs not any grace internally infused, but one­ly offered externally. Whereupon they are bold to affirme, that the act of Iustification doth emane and proceed, Simul Molina. disput. ab arbitrio & à Deo, Both from free-will, and from God. Now the causes of iustification, the Councill of Trent maketh to be these; the finall cause, Gods glory, and mans saluation; the efficient, Gods mercy; the meritorious cause, Christs merits; the instrumentall, the Sacrament of Baptisme; but the formall cause, which is the chiefest and [...], Dat esse rei, giueth being to the thing, as the Logicians speake, they make to be an inherent righteousnes wrought in vs, and in­spired into vs by the Spirit of God. And this in briefe is the doctrine of the Church of Rome, touching the iustification of a sinner.

17. Wherein let vs obserue three maine and fundamentall differences, betwixt their doctrine and ours; in all which they raze the foundation, and dedignifie the merits of Christ, and [Page 100] the mercy of God, to extoll the dignitie of man. The first in their preparations, wee hold that a man cannot any wayes dispose himselfe vnto grace, but is wholly fitted and prepared by God; and that those acts of preparation (as they call them) are not fore-runners of iustification, but rather fruites and effects thereof, they teach the contrary, as I haue shewed. The second difference is, that the workes of a man iustified do not merit increase of grace, which they terme the second iustifica­tion: but as the beginning of grace is from gods mercy alone, so the increase and augmentation thereof and perseuerance therein, is onely to be ascribed to the worke of Gods spirit, according to that of Saint Paul, Phil. 1. 6. He that hath be­gunne Phil. 1. 6. this good worke in you, will performe it vntill the day of Ie­sus Christ: this we hold, they the contrary. The third diffe­rence is in the formall cause of our iustification, which they maintaine to be an inherent righteousnes within vs, euen the righteousnes of Sanctification. We on the other side affirme, that the formall cause of our iustification, is the righteousnes of Christ Iesus, not dwelling in vs, nor proceeding from vs, but imputed vnto vs by the mercy of God.

18. Hauing thus layd open both our doctrines, let vs ex­amine and trye which of them giueth most glory vnto God, and most exalts the merites of Christ, for that must needs be the truth; and which lifteth vp highest the proud nature of man, for that must needs be falshood and errour: especially, seeing that Gods dignity, and the dignity of man; Christs merits and mans, are as it were, two skales of a ballance, wh [...]reof the one rising, the other falls, the one lifted vp, the other is pressed downe. First therefore, touching the workes of preparation, whether doe they more magnifie Gods mer­cie, that say a man cannot prepare and dispose himselfe at all to grace, but is wholly disposed and prepared by God; or they that affirme that a man can prepare himselfe by his owne endeuour, assisted outwardly with the grace of God? the one makes Gods mercy the sole cause of iustification, the other but the adi [...]vant and helping cause. And whether doe they aduance most the dignity of man, that say, that a man can do [Page 101] nothing of himselfe for his owne iustification, or they that say that a man can doe something to the preparation of himselfe to that great worke; the one attributeth some dignity to man, the other, none at all; we affirme the one part, the Romanists the contrary: and therefore our doctrine tends more to the debasing of mans worth, and consequently to the exalting of Gods glory, then theirs doth.

19. True it is, like Ferrimen, that looke East and go West, they with their great Grand-father Pelagius, talke of grace, when they meane nothing but nature, and so deny indeede that which they affirme in word, if the matter bee examined according to truth. For Pelagius confessed a necessity of graceAug. cont. Pelag. & Celest. lib. 1. cap. 31. 33. in all spirituall actions, and yet was condemned for an enemy to grace, by the Church of God, because hee vnderstood not by grace the sanctifying worke of Gods spirit, but an outward moouing and perswading power, assisting mans free-will to the effecting of his owne saluation. The very same is the do­ctrine of the Romanists, as hath beene declared, and therefore wee may iustly condemne them as enemies to the grace of God, whatsoeuer they bragge and vaunt to the contrary.

20. Secondly, touching the second iustification, which standeth, as they say, in the augmentation and encrease of our iustice: let the most partiall Reader iudge, whether tends most to the magnifying of Gods glory, their doctrine which teacheth that wee merite the encrease of our iustice by our owne workes: or ours, which teacheth, that both the seed and the growth, both the roote and the fruite, both the be­ginning and encrease of all righteousnesse, is the worke of Gods spirit alone, preuenting, assisting, and vpholding vs to the end; and that these seuerall workes of grace are bestowed vpon vs, not for any merites of our owne, but simply and en­tirely for the merits of Christ Iesus. I, but they will say, works doe not merit iustification, because they are ours, but because they are works of grace, which grace floweth from the foun­taine of Christs merits, and so they attribute asmuch, or more, to grace and Christs merites, then wee doe. To which I answere, two things: first, if they held that these workes [Page 102] were merely from grace, they said something to the purpose, but affirming as they doe, that they are partly from grace, and partly from the power of free-will, as two ioynt causes, this their something is nothing, but a vizard to couer the vg­ly face of their errour. Secondly, let this be granted, that their doctrine is, that they proceede onely from grace, neuerthe­lesse being wrought in man, and acted by man, they must needes bee called, and be indeede in part mans workes, be­cause man doth cooperate with grace; and therefore to make them meritorious absolutely of grace, must needes tend in part to the exalting of mans dignitie, and consequently in part to the impeachment of Gods. For, let an answere bee giuen to this question, by what meanes doth a man continue in iustice, and encrease in holinesse: Wee answere with Saint Paul, By the grace of God onely, who as hee hath begun that Phil. 1. 6. good worke in vs, so will performe it vntill the day of Iesus Christ: but the Romanists will answere, that this is done by the me­rit of our owne workes: which workes howsoeuer they mayBecan. disput. pag. 195. colour the matter, by saying, they are works of grace, and re­ceiue power frō Christs merits, yet being the works of man al­so, by the power of his free-will, who seeth not, but that Gods glory is greatly blemished hereby, and mans worth extolled?

21. Thirdly, touching the forme of iustification, which of vs doth most honour to God? they which teach that it is an inherent righteousnesse habituated in vs, or wee that say, that it is Christs righteousnesse imputed vnto vs? wee attri­bute all vnto Christ, and nothing to our selues: they share the matter betwixt Christ and our selues: for this inherent righteousnesse, though it proceede from Gods spirit, as they say, and is a worke of grace, yet in three respects it may bee called our righteousnesse by their doctrine: first, in respect of the roote and spring of it, which is, as they affirme, partly grace and partly nature. Secondly, in respect of the subiect, which is the soule of man, which may bee also called the in­strument by which it is effected; and that not a dead subiect or liuelesse instrument, as we say mans nature is, till it be liued and quickned by Gods spirit, but of it selfe liuing and quicke, [Page 103] and fit for so great a worke. Thirdly, In respect of the medium or meane, by which it is attained, which they hold is the me­rit of our owne workes, as I haue sufficiently discouered out of their owne bookes. Now then, if this inherent righteous­nesse bee in part our owne, and not wholy Christs, but the righteousnesse imputed be wholy and entirely Christs, and not in any respect ours, saue that it is giuen vnto vs, and made ours by imputation; who can doubt but that this our doctrine is farre more auaileable for the aduancement of Christs glory, and debasing of mans excellencie, then theirs is? Adde here­vnto, that it must needes be a dishonour to God, to say, that an vnperfect, a polluted and a stayned righteousnesse, such as the best of ours is, can satisfie the absolute and most exact iustice of God: but it is an extolling glory to Gods iustice, to say that it cannot be answered, but by the most perfect and ab­solute righteousnesse that euer was in the world; such as the righteousnesse of the Sonne of God is, who taking our flesh vpon him, performed in the same, all righteousnesse, that the strictest iustice of God required, for our sakes.

22. All which things layd together and diligently weigh­ed, we may see what caused all the Saints of God, when theyEsay 64. 6. Dan. 9. 13. Psal. 143. 2. Rom. 7. 14. 19. 20. 1. Cor. [...] ▪ [...]. &c. came to pl [...]ad their causes, before the tribunal of Gods iudge­ment, to disclaime all their owne righteousnesse, and to lay fast hold vpon the righteousnes of Christ the Mediatour, and the mercies of God in him, who is the fountaine of all mercy; euen this, because they perceiued that by this deiecting and despoyling of themselues of all worthinesse, Gods glory was greatly magnified, as also when they examined their best workes by the rule of the law, their owne consciences told them, that they were not able to abide the trial, if they should bee weighed in the ballance of iustice, and not of mercy. Therefore this is the common voyce of all Gods Saints: Enter Psal. 143. 2. not into iudgement with thy seruant, O Lord, for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified: to which, in a sweet harmony ac­cord all the Fathers. Who will glory concerning his righteousnesse Origen in Rom. cap. 3. (saith Origen) seeing he heareth God saying by his Prophet, All your righteousnesse is as a cloth of a menstruous woman, our per­fection [Page 104] it selfe is not voyd of fault (saith Gregory) vnlesse the se­uere Gregor. moral. l. 5. cap. 8. Iudge doe weigh it mercifully in the subtill scales of his iustice: Who so liueth here, howsoeuer iustly he liue. yet woe vnto him (saith S. Augustine) if God enter into iudgement with him: if our iustice Aug. in Psal. 42. Bernar. in fest. omnium San­ctor. ser. 1. Bel. de Iustific. lib. 5. cap. 7. be strictly iudged (saith S. Bernard) it will bee found vniust and scant. And this infallible truth wr [...]ng out of Bellarmine him­selfe, though vnawares, this plaine confession: Tutissimum est in sola Dei misericordia conquiescere, &c. that is, it is the safest course to repose our confidence (what in our owne righteous­nesse? no): in the sole mercy of God. Is it the safest course for mans saluation? so is it for the aduancement of Gods glory, for the one is subordinate to the other: who then that hath but common sense, will not chuse rather to repose the hope of his saluation on Gods mercy, then on his owne righteous­nesse? at least-wise if hee regard either Gods glory, which all should, and that aboue all, or his owne soules health, which should be next to the other in our desires.

23. By this it may appeare, what a vaine bragge that is of some of them, who boast that they doe much more magnifie Christ and his merits then we doe, because wee make themD. Bishop cont. Refor. Catholic. (say they) so meane, as that they serue the turne onely to couer and hide sinne: whereas they contrariwise do so highly esteeme them, that they hold them able, both to purchase at Gods hand an inherent righteous [...]esse: and to giue it such force and value, that it can make a man iust before God, and worthy of the kingdome of heauen. In which braue vaunt, there lye lurking no l [...]sse then three grosse absurdities. First, they lay a false [...]mputa [...]ion vpon our doctrine, that wee should hold Christs merits to be so meane, as to serue onely to couer and hide sinne; whereas wee expresly teach, and that with one consent, that for the merits of Christ, not onely our sinnes are pardoned, but also that grace is inspired into our soules, and sanctification, and new obedience, and Christ is made vnto vs of God, wisedome, righteousnesse, sanctification, and re­demption: 1. Cor. 1. 30. by which it appeareth, that we ascribe euen as much in this regard to Christs merits, as they do; and therefore this is a mere cauill and slander, hatcht by them to breed disgrace [Page 105] to our Religion. Next, they contradict themselues: for to say, that Christ giueth strength to our righteousnesse to purchase heauen, is to affi [...]me, that without our helpe, Christs righte­ousnesse was not of sufficient valew to make that purchase: and yet the same men say, that Christs righteousnesse was of infinite valew. Now if it were of infinite valew, then it made the full and perfect purchase it selfe: and if it made the full purchase, then he need not giue strength to our righteousnes to doe the same. Thus either the one or the other must needes be false, except we will haue a double purchase of one and the same thing, and a double satisfaction of the same debt, which is in no case agreeable to the iustice of God. Lastly, they shew their arrogancie, in that they scorne to receiue the king­dome of heauen, as an almes and free gift from God of his mere mercy towards them: but they will haue it like sturdy and proud companions, as a due vnto their deserts, or a re­compence to their seruice: nay, they will not haue it fromBel. de purgat▪ lib. 1. cap. 14. Christs purchase alone, but they will bee ioyned purchasers with him, or else they will haue none of it: then which, what can be greater arrogancie? And thus by this vaine vaunt they fall into diuers palpable absurdities, and plainely discouer, that it cannot any way be auoyded, but that by their doctrine of iustification, they doe exalt the dignity of man, and pull downe the glory of Christ our Sauiour.

24. The third doctrine whereby they derogate from Gods3. glory, is their monster of merit, which I put in the next place, because it issueth from the two former, as the Progenitours thereof, the doctrine of iustification by inherent righteous­nesse, being as it were the mother of it, and that of free-will the Grand-mother: and so it cannot be, the fountaine being poysoned, but that the waters streaming there-from, must needes be infected: and because malum crescit eundo, an euill groweth worse by propagation, and the daughter commonly exceedeth the mother in naughtinesse, therefore this doctrine is firre more blasphemous, then either of the former, and ex­ceedeth them, both in derogating from Gods glory, and set­ting vp mans dignity against God. And the Proctors of the [Page 106] Romish Court, in no subiect doe more throat it out, then they doe in this, nor take more paines in any, as if their liue­lyhood lay vpon it. And yet, if we draw neere vnto them, we shall easily perceiue, that all is but a vaine blast of words puf­fing vp the proud heart of man, and pulling downe the glory of Christ, as I hope I shall plainely and briefly manifest by the discourse following.

25. Their doctrine touching the merite of workes, is in briefe this, that there is such a dignity, excellency, and per­fection in the workes of the Regenerate, that by the rule of iustice they doe not onely deserue temporall and spirituall blessings here in this world, but also eternall life and euerla­sting blisse in the world to come. In which doctrine, these three poynts are to be considered: first, that they make the good workes of the faithfull absolutely and perfectly good,Bell▪ de iust. li. 4. cap. 16. able to stand out with the iustice of God, and answere the full rigour of the Law: secondly, they make them proportiona­ble to the reward, for betwixt meritum and debitum, properly taken, as they doe, there is alwaies a Geometricall proporti­on: and thirdly, they place this meritorious dignitie in the worke done, as it is a worke, and that not passiuely, as it is wrought in vs by grace, but actiuely as it worketh by free­will, as hath beene shewed.

26. That all these things are thus, as I haue said, let vs heare themselues speaking in their owne words. The workes of the Bell. de Iust. li. 4. cap. 16. iust (saith Bellarmine) are simply and absolutely good. And in another place, They are so good and so perfect, that God were Idem lib. 5. cap. 16. & 17. vniust, if he should not reward them with eternall life: and, that not onely in respect of Gods promises, but euen in respect of the workes themselues. And to prooue this, hee produceth seuen strong reasons, as he thinketh, but indeed weake ones, if they be throughly examined. Andradius, the approoued inter­pretour and defender of the Councill of Trent, goeth further,And. Orthod. [...]x­pl c. lib. 6. and saith, that the heauenly blessednes, which the Scripture cal­leth the reward of the iust, is not giuen them of God gratis, and freely, but is due to their workes, yea God hath set forth heauen to sale for our workes. Bellarmine also calleth good workes, Mer­catura [Page 107] regni coelestis, the purchasing of Heauen. The Rhe­mists Rhem. Annot. 2. Tim. 4 8. Heb. 6. 10. are yet more insolent: Good workes (say they) are truely and properly meritorious, and fully worthy of euerlasting life, hea­uen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace, and that God should be vniust, if Ruard. Tapper in expli. art. Louan. tom. 2. art. 9. he rendred not heauen for the same. But Ruardus Tapper is yet more impudent, for he saith, God forbid that the iust should ex­pect eternall life, as the poore man doth an almes, it is much more glorious that they should haue it as Conquerours and Trium­phers, Greg. de Valen. tom. 3. disp. 7. q. 2 de Indulgent. as the prize due vnto their labours. Gregory de Ʋalentia goeth yet further, and saith, That the workes of the faithfull, beside their strength of meriting, haue also a power of satisfying for the punishment.

27. Touching the proportion of our workes, with the re­ward, Bellarmine saith, That in a good worke proceeding from Bell. de Iust. li. 5▪ cap. 17. grace, there is a certaine proportion and equality, to the reward of eternall life, and that not only in regard of the promise and ac­ceptation, but euen of the worke it selfe. And this he proueth in the place quoted by many arguments, which are worthy to be read, that we may see the very pith and substance of their opinion, touching the merite of workes. True it is, Bellarmine doth not make this proportion an absolute equality betwixt the worke and the reward, according to the rule of commutatiue Idem li. 5. ca. 16. iustice, but onely by the rule of distributiue iustice, which hath respect not so much to the worke, as to the worthinesse of the person working. But herein he crosseth other his fellow Ie­suites; For Suarez saith, That a supernaturall worke procee­ding Suarez. tom. 1. in Thom. 3. d. 41. Sect. 3. Cost. Ench. ca. 7. from grace, within it selfe, and of it owne nature, hath a pro­portion and condignity with the reward, and a sufficient valew to be worth the same. And C [...]ster affirmeth, that the reward which God giueth to our workes, belongeth after a sort both to commutatiue and distributiue iustice, though the distributiue part of iustice, which requireth the dignity of the persons, doth more shine forth in it then the commutatiue, which considereth the equality of workes. And the Rhemists, That our workes of their Rhem. Annot. in 1. Cor. 3. 8. very nature deserue eternall life, the reward whereof is a thing equally and iustly answering to the lyne and weight of the worke, [Page 108] rather then a free gift. Yea, he crosseth himselfe, for in the se­uenteenth chapter, he auoucheth that the proportion betwixt the worke and the reward, is ratione operis, in respect of the worke. Now I confesse that some of them affirme indeed, the reason of meriting of our workes, to arise partly from this that we are adopted the sonnes of God, and haue vnion with Christ, and so they are made meritorious by the dignity of the person which worketh them: and partly because they proceede from grace; and also, partly by reason of the promise which God hath made vnto them, whereby hee bindeth himselfe that he will reward them: but let all theseAndr. Orth. ex­plicat. lib. 6. Caiet. 1. 2. q. 114. Bayus de merit. lib. 2. ca. 1. & 4. be granted (though all of them bee denyed by many of their owne Writers, who attribute merite to the worke, without relation either to the person, or to grace, or to the promise) yet it will not free their doctrine from palpable impiety, as the sequent discourse shall (I trust) make apparant. After that I haue in opposition to this doctrine set downe the summe of that which we hold touching the dignity of good workes. I omit to name their merit of cōgruity, because most of them­selues are ashamed of it.

28. This is therefore that doctrine which our Church maintaineth concerning good workes: First, wee beleeue assuredly that good workes are necessary to saluation, but so, Vt via regni, non causae regnandi, as the way to the Kingdome,Bern. de grat. & lib. Arbitr. not causes of raigning, and as signes of our Election, and fore­runners of our future happinesse, as Saint Bernard testifieth. This with one consent we all teach, and the Romanists that slan­der vs with the contrary assertion, cannot produce so much as one sentence out of any of our Writers, which being right­ly vnderstood, doth import the contrary, as shall be hereafter fully proued. Secondly, wee hold, that as they are necessary in respect of vs, so they are acceptable and well pleasing to God, not for their own sakes, but for our faith-sake in Christ, in whome onely the Lord is well pleased, both towards him­selfe and all his members. Thirdly, we beleeue that they are not onely thus acceptable and well pleasing in Gods sight, but also that the Lord will reward them assuredly both in this [Page 109] life with temporall blessings, and in the life to come with e­ternall happinesse; according to that of our Sauiour, Who­soeuer Mat. 10. 42. shall giue vnto one of those little ones to drinke a cup of cold water, in the name of a Disciple, he shall not lose his reward. But lastly, we constantly assure our selues, that this reward is not giuen of God for the merite or desert of the worke, but of the meere grace and mercy of God for the merits of Christ: ac­cording to that of Saint Bernard, The mercy of God is my me­rite: Ber. in Cā. ser. 61 Aug. de grat. & lib. arbit. cap. 9. and of Saint Augustine, God bringeth vs to eternall life, not for our merits, but for his owne mercy. For a reward is not onely taken for a due debt in Scripture, but also for a free gift, as may appeare by comparing Mat. 5. 46. with Luk. 6. 32.Mat. 5. 46. Luke 6. 32. In the one place wherof the Holy Ghost vseth the word [...], in the other [...], speaking of the one and the same thing. So that the summe of our doctrine is this in few words, wee re­nounce not good workes, but the merit of workes: and wee verily beleeue that Christ is the store-house of all merite, and that out of him there is no merite to be found in any, no not in the iustest that euer liued: and yet the merits of Christ, as his righteousnesse, are made ours by imputation; and in that sense onely we may bee said to merit and deserue eternall life. As for our best workes, though they bee wrought in vs by grace, yet passing through the corrupt channell of our de­filed nature, they get themselues such a tincture and staine, as in regard of the corruption which cleaueth close vnto them, they can deserue nothing at Gods hand, if he should lay them to the rule of his iustice, and not weigh them in the ballance of his mercy. This is our doctrine: and that it is so, I appeale to Bellarmine himselfe, who confesseth, that by faith alone wee Bell. de iust. li. 4. cap. 1. doe not exclude other vertues, but the merit of them; and that we make good workes necessary to saluation, Necessitate prae­sentiae, non efficientiae, as he termeth it, By necessitie of their pre­sence, not by necessitie of efficiencie. Let vs therefore now come to the examination of both these doctrines, and search which of them doth giue most glory to God, and honour to Christ our Sauiour in this maine pillar of our Redemption.

29. And first, doth not that doctrine tend manifestly to [Page 110] the embasing of Gods mercy, which teacheth men not to re­lie wholly vpon that for their saluation, but partly vpon their owne merits? Especially, seeing grace and workes, merit and mercy, cannot stand together, no more then light andRom. 1 [...]. 6. darknes, as the Apostle teacheth, If it be of grace, it is no more of workes, or else were grace no more grace; but if it be of workes, it is no more grace, or else were worke no more worke. So may we truely say, If saluation be of mercy, then it is not of merit, or else were mercy no more mercy; but if it be of merit, it is no more of mercy, or else were merit no more merit: and so by kindling the fire of merits, they vtterly dry vp the foun­taine of mercy. And for that cause Saint Bernard maketh theQuo supra. mercy of God his onely merit. And Saint Augustine disclay­ming all merits, and laying clayme onely to Gods mercy, saith as before; God bringeth vs to eternall life, not for our me­rits, but for his owne mercie: And in another place, His pro­mise Aug. in Psal. 88. is sure, not according to our merits, but according to his Chrysost. in Colos. hom. 2. mercy. And Chrysostome saith, That no man sheweth such con­uersation of life, as that he may bee worthy of the Kingdome of heauen, but it is wholly the gift of God. In all these places merit is opposed vnto mercy, as things of their owne condition in­compatible, and therefore one must needes exclude the o­ther.Aug. cont. Pelag. & Celest. lib. 2. cap. 24. And sure in reason it must needs be so, for mercy is free, Grace is not grace in any sort, if it be not free in euery sort (sayth Augustine) but merit requireth the reward of debt: Mercies obiect is misery and vnworthinesse, but merit is dignity and worthinesse, and therefore cannot bee the obiect of mercy: Mercy reioyceth against iustice, but merit appealeth vnto iu­stice, and challengeth God of vniustice, if it bee not recom­penced. Lastly, in mercy, God is the Agent, and sinfull Man the Patient; but in merit, righteous Man is the Agent, and God the Patient. And therefore, betwixt these two things, Merit and Mercy, there is such a disproportion and contrari­ety, that they cannot be reconciled together.

30. I but they say, our workes are not meritorious of themselues, but partly as they proceede from grace, and are wrought in vs by Gods Spirit, and so it is Gods mercy, that [Page 111] we are enabled to merit; and partly by vertue of Gods pro­mise, whereby hee hath engaged himselfe to crowne those merits with glory, which he hath wrought in vs by grace: to which double obiection I returne this double answere. First, if all good workes issue from the roote of grace, as they doe indeede, then how can we merit thereby, seeing that which doth merit, must bee our owne, and not anothers, especially his of whom we looke to merit? (So saith Hilary) it is for him Hilar. de trinit. lib. 11. to merit, who himselfe is to himselfe the Author of getting his merit: and therfore if it be true which they affirme, that Gods grace is the onely fountaine of all good workes (as without doubt it is) it is so farre from following thence, that therefore our workes are meritorious, that it followeth by mere ne­cessary consequence, that therefore they are not meritorious. And this conclusion is made by diuers of the ancient Fathers themselues, We haue nothing to reioyce or glory of (saith S. Cy­prian)Cyprian ad Quir. lib. 3. c. 5. Bern. in annun. ser. 1. therefore nothing to merit, because we haue nothing of our owne: The merits of men are not such (saith S. Bernard) as that life eternall by right is owing for them (and why?) because all merits are the gifts of God; and so man is rather a debter to God for them, then God to man. And S. Augustine, Eternall life should Aug. epist. 105. be rendred as due vnto thee, if of thy selfe thou hadst the righte­ousnesse, to which it is due: but now of his fulnesse wee receiue not onely grace now to liue iustly in our labours to the end, but also grace for this grace, that afterward wee may liue in rest without rest. So then, if our good works arise only frō Gods grace, this maketh plaine against all merit, as they know well enough, and therfore (behold their fraud, and the mysterie of iniquity) though they shadow the matter with goodly words of grace and mercy, yet vpon free-will they hang the vertue and effect of this grace, and from that fountaine doe they deriue vnto man all this merit, which they talke so much of: and so how­soeuer they ascribe vnto Gods grace the cause of merit, yetBel. de Iustific. lib. 5. cap. 10. in very deede with them, it is free-will that maketh a worke meritorious.

31. Secondly, I answere, that when God doth promise to reward our workes with eternall life, eternall life is due to vs, [Page 112] but not for our workes sake, but for his promise sake: for ma­ny things are due by promise, which haue no reference to any desert. As if the King should promise one of his ser­uants a thousand pound of his mere liberality, for keeping a Hawke, he is bound to pay him so much: but is it from the seruants desert, or from the Kings bounty? So God pro­miseth eternall life to our workes, and by reason of his pro­mise, wee may challenge it as our due, but yet it is not for our worke, but for his word sake, as Saint Augustine con­fesseth, when he saith: God is become a debter, not by receiuing Aug. de verbis Apostol. ser. 16. any thing from vs, but by promising what it pleased him: therfore a reward giuen by promise, is so far frō importing desert, that it rather ouerthroweth the very foundation thereof, by be­ing a worke of mercy: as the same Augustine saith in another place: The promise is sure, not according to our merits, but ac­cording to his mercy. The doctrine of merit then vndermineth the mercy of God, which way so euer they turne themselues, whether to grace, as the cause of the worke, or to Gods pro­mise, as the cause of the reward.

32. Againe, by this doctrine, not onely the mercy of God is darkened, but also the merits of Christ quite euacua­ted, and made of no force: for if Christs merits were suffici­ent, what neede there then any supply of our owne: if our owne merits be necessarily required, then Christs merits were not sufficient. If Christs merits were perfect, then mans me­rits cannot be added vnto them, for that is perfect, to which nothing can be added: but if mans merits must bee added to them, then it followeth, that Christs were not perfect; and so no merits at all: for this property is required in a merit, that it bee perfect: and so either they must denie the necessity of our meriting, or confesse the vnsufficiencie of Christ: either they must acknowledge Christs merits to be vnperfect, or ours to be vnnecessarie, yea none at all. I but (they will say) Christ did not onely merit the pardon of our sinnes, but also that our workes should be meritorious of life euerlasting: and by this (sat they) are Christs merits more magnified then by vs, because the greater the gift is, the greater is the glory of [Page 113] the giuer: so that our meriting doth not argue any want in his merits, but rather proue a greater efficacie to be in them: for to this end will hee haue vs to merit, partly that we may shew our selues like vnto him, and partly to traine vs vp in good workes by this spurre. All these are but shifts, and in­deede mere cauils, for first, to say, that Christ did not alone merit for vs eternall life, but also grace, that so we might me­rit eternall life for our selues: what is it, but to make vs our owne Sauiours; for all our merits come from grace and free­will ioyned together, as hath beene shewne, and grace is no­thing with them, except free-will concurre with it: for they teach, that we may receiue it if we will, and when we haue it, we may merit, if we will, eternall life, or else goe without it. What is this (I say) but to affirme, that a man is not saued by Christs merits, but that by the helpe of grace hee doth saue himselfe by his owne merits? and so they shoue Christ out of his office, and put themselues in his roome.

33. Secondly, I answere, that the efficacie of Christs me­rits, is greater in purchasing eternall life for vs by himselfe alone, then in giuing vs ablenesse to merit it for our selues; because it is a greater glory, and a token of greater power, to effect a thing immediatly without meanes, then by the me­diation or vsurpation of any meanes whatsoeuer. In the for­mer, all the honour is to the worker, in the later there must needes be some glory ascribed to the meanes, and some po­wer attributed vnto them: and therefore to say, that Christ hath onely merited by himselfe without vs eternall life for vs, is to giue the entire and perfect glory vnto him, and none vn­to our selues: and to affirme, that hee merited to make our workes meritorious, is to derogate from his glory, and to de­tract from the efficacie of his death and passion.

34. And here we may see the vanity of Bellarmines asserti­on, who to proue, that by this doctrine of theirs, they ascribeBel. Ibid. more efficacie to Christs merits then we doe, bringeth in this similitude, Sicut quòd Deus, &c. that is, As in that God vseth the Sunne to lighten the world, fire to heat it, ayre and raine to re­fresh it, is not an argument of weakenesse in God, that hee cannot [Page 114] doe all these things by himselfe without them, but rather of his omnipotencie, in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe, but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them: so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits, to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen, then if hee did it for vs without our workes. I, but by Bellarmines leaue (that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie) the power of God had beene more manifest, and his omnipoten­cie more conspicuous (I doe not say had beene greater) if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe, then it is by the glasse of the creatures. As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai, and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth, his glory was more famous and fearefull, then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses, though written with his owne finger, as the other was spoken with his owne mouth. And therefore it is said, Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce, that they desired, that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person, but by his seruant Moses. Adde here­vnto, that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose, and therefore we must not dispute (as Bellarmine doth) whether it should haue beene a greater to­ken of his omnipotencie, if hee had, or if hee had not created them; but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome, know­ing, that his thoughts are not like ours, nor his counsels like ours, Esay 5 [...]. 8. 9. but as the heauens are higher then the earth, so are his wayes higher than ours, and his thought aboue our thoughts: but for the merits of Christ, he hath reuealed in his word, that in them onely wee are to finde saluation: and therefore wee must be­leeue, that he is most glorified by that doctrine, which teach­eth vs to rely onely vpon them: and as for the power in them, to cause vs to merit, it is no where to be found in Scripture, and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory: besides, to say, that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit, is plaine blasphemie, for, who hath giuen any thing to God, Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good Rom. 11. 25. Psal. 16. 2. decdes, Psal. 16. 2. Indeede, we doe glorifie God by our good [Page 115] workes, but that is not by encreasing, but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory: but the Romanists say, that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits, which must needes be a most blasphemous speech. In a word, seeing we doe not finde in Scripture, that Christ died to giue merit to our workes; but to purchase pardon to our sinnes, and ob­taine life for vs; wee must bee content to thinke that this ser­ueth most for his glorie, and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto.

35. Lastly, where did we euer read, that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting? we read, that wee must bee holy as he is holy, and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke, and patient as he was patient; to wit, in quality, not in quantity, in imitation, not in perfection: but to merit as he did, is no where to be found: nay, it is a thing impossible, for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse, that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omni­potent God, and it must bee of infinite valew, that can pur­chase that infinite reward. And therefore it was necessarie, that he which should be our Redeemer, should also be God, because neither Angell nor Archangell, nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price, which might be suffi­cient to merit the kingdome of heauen. It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie, to say, that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting: for it maketh euery man a Iesus, that is, a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe. Therefore to conclude, I say with S. Bernard, Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntou­ched, Bern. in Cant. ser. 13. he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone, he hath freed the captiues alone, hee hath fought and conquered alone: and with S. Augustine, To whom we are endebted for that we are, to him we August. in Psal. 144. are endebted, that wee are iustified: let none attribute to God his being, and to himselfe his iustifying; for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe, than that which thou giuest vnto God; thou giuest the lower thing vnto God, and the higher to thy selfe, giue all to him, praise him in all. This wee doe by our doctrine, and they the contrary: and therefore it is most ma­nifest, that by this doctrine of theirs, mans glory is exalted, [Page 116] and Christs defaced, mans merits lifted vp, and Christs pulled downe, which cannot stand with the truth and sinceri­ty of Christian Religion.

36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dis­honor4. of God, & the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption, is their paradox of humane satisfactions: by which they teach, that Christ by his death hath made satisfa­ction for the guilt of our sinnes, and the eternall punishment due vnto them, but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God, for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Pur­gatory: whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue, that by Christs death and passion, a perfect and all-sufficient satis­faction is made to the iustice of God, for all the sinnes of men, and for all the punishment thereof, both eternall and temporall. As for our doings or sufferings, we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith, and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mor­tification. And touching offences against our brethren, we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes, either by confession, restitution, or punishment, as the case shall require; yea, wee acknow­ledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church, or any part thereof, when as we haue gi­uen iust scandall and offence there vnto. But in all these wee denie, that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes, or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof, either temporall or eternall; that to do, is only proper and pe­culiar to the Crosse of Christ: for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punish­ments, but also temporall; so the obedience and merit of the second Adam, hath made satisfaction to God for both.

37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places, as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes. And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them: And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall; for there it is said, that he tooke vpon him our infirmities, and bore our sicknesses. And with the holy Fathers; for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth, [Page 117] That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes, are the punishments of Aug. de pe [...] ­mer. & remis. li. 2. ca. 34. Origen hom. 16. in Gen. Tert. Apol. c. 41. sin; but after forgiuenes are the fights & exercises of the iust. And Origen, That which is to the iust, the exercise of vertue, is to the vniust, the punishment of sin. And Tertullian, The plagues of the world are to one for punishment; to the other for admonition & ad­uertisement: and this is the very substance of our doctrine.

38. As for our aduersaries, they blush not to affirme, euenConc. Trid. ses. 4. sub. Iul. cap. 8. the Councill of Trent it selfe, that when God forgiueth a sinner, yet he forgiueth not all the punishment, but leaueth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away, and that the bloud of Christ doth not serue to acquite vs from the temporall pu­nishment, Bell. de poeniten. lib. 4. cap. 6. but that we must acquite our selues, either by our owne works, as prayer, almes, & fasting, &c. or by our suffrings, either in this life, or in Purgatory. Yes, some of the chiefest of them areGreg. de Valent. tō. 4. disp. 7. q 14. bold to auouch, that the recōpence made by satisfaction, respec­teth not only the temporall punishment, but some part of the offence also, and the wrath of God. And others say, That a sinner by the Caict. Soto. Suar. tom. 1. d. 4. l. 9. grace of God may satisfie for his sinne condignely, and equally, and by that satisfaction obtaine pardon. And that which is more then all the rest, some of them affirme without blushing, that Christ by his sacrifice on the Crosse satisfied onely for originall sinne, and not for actuall after Baptisme. Bellarmine indeed isBell. de missa. li. 2 cap. 2. ashamed of this doctrine, as he might well bee, but yet it is plainely maintained by Gregorie de Ʋalentia. And this in briefe is the dunghill of Popish satisfactions, from whence steame forth like vapours, their Purgatorie, and Pardons, and Penance, and much more such like trumpery.

39. But let vs leaue them to their manifold errours, and come to the examination of this one poynt, whether they or we bring more dishonour to the Crosse of Christ. And to the purpose, first, the very nature of satisfaction, which as they affirme, is the yeelding of a sufficient recompence to God for a trespasse committed, is inough to prooue that their doctrine tends to the singular impeachment of the Crosse of Christ: for if Christ hath made a full and perfect satisfaction vpon the Crosse, as without all doubt he did, he himselfe contesting in that his last speech, It is finished; then what neede any additi­on [Page 118] of humane satisfactions? If there be such a necessity of humane satisfactions, as they make, then Christs satis­faction must needs be imperfect, and so no satisfaction at all: for an imperfect satisfaction is no satisfaction, as the very word it selfe implyeth, importing a sufficient recompence to be made to the party offended: And if it be perfect, it must be full and absolute, that is, such as needeth nothing else to be added vnto it. But they require something to be added to Christs satisfaction; and therefore must needs hold that it is not a full, perfect, and absolute satisfaction: for it implyeth a manifest contradiction to affirme any thing to be a full and perfect cause of it selfe alone, and yet to adde another to it, as a ioynt cause to produce the same effect.

40. But they will answere, that mans satisfaction is not to supply the want of Christs, but to apply it vnto vs, and to ful­fill his will and ordinance: for Christs satisfaction (say they)Cost. Ench. p. 395 Bish. contra Refor. Cathal. Bell. de poenit. li. 4. cap. 14. is of infinite value, and might aswell haue taken away the tem­porall punishment, as the eternall, but that God will haue it other­wise, for the mortifying of sinne in vs, and making vs conformable to Christ our head. This answere of theirs may seeme to carry a shew of sound reason, but in very deed it is but a shift, and a golden couer to blanch the vglinesse of their doctrine, for it were odious for them to say plainely, that Christs satisfaction stood in need of a supply, or was any wayes imperfect; and therefore they would not haue men to thinke so of them, though in truth they both thinke and speake so of Christ, when they a little forget what they are a doing, and by infal­lible consequence their doctrine concludeth no lesse: for plaine speech thus writeth Gabriel Biel, Though the passion of Biel. ca. 3. d. 19. art. 2. concl. 5. Christ be the principall merit, for which the grace of God, and the opening of heauen, and the glory thereof be giuen; yet it is neither the sole nor totall meritorious cause, but alwaies there con­curreth some worke of him that receiueth the grace. And Mile­tus, Milet. li. Discuss. Christ indeed is the generall cause of our saluation, but yet particular causes are to be added to this, and so he is not the totall and whole cause. And Bellarmine himselfe by consequenceBel. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 14. confesseth as much, when he saith, that a righteous man hath [Page 119] right to the Kingdome of heauen by a two-fold title, one of the merits of Christ, another of his owne merits. These bee plaine speeches, and shew what their meaning is: so that howso­euer they gloze ouer the matter with goodly words, yet it is nothing but poyson in a painted boxe, wherewith the igno­rant may be infected, but the skilfull are able to discerne their fraud. And here obserue the contrariety of Bellarmines speech to another saying of S. Bernard to the same purpose. Christ Bernard. (saith Saint Bernard) hath a double right vnto the kingdome of heauen, one by inheritance, as he is the Sonne of God, another by purchase, as he bought it by his death, the first he keepeth to him­selfe, this latter he imparts to his members. This by S. Bernards Diuinitie is all the right that a faithfull man hath to the king­dome of heauen, by Christs purchase: and vpon this onely doth that good man, and all other of Gods children relie: but Bellarmine giueth him another title, to wit, by purchase of his owne merits, which as it is a straine of his owne wit: so let him keepe it to himselfe, and make merry with it, for wee will haue nothing to doe with it.

41. As for that which they say, that our satisfactions serue not to supply the want, but to apply the efficacie of Christs vnto vs, is a more ridiculous and shifting deuice then the other: for first, how can that be, when as sinne is first pardo­ned, which is by the satisfaction of Christ? and then long af­ter commeth our satisfaction, if not in this life, yet sure in Purgatorie. The applying of a thing, is a present act, arising betwixt the agent and the patient, therefore if our satisfacti­on doe apply Christs vnto our soules, then it followeth, that Christ hath not satisfied for our sinnes, till wee haue satisfied for the temporall punishment of them, which is flat contrarie to their owne principles. Secondly, that which applieth, hath relation to that which is applied, as to the obiect: but our sa­tisfaction hath no relation to Christs satisfaction, as the ob­iect, but is onely referred to the temporall punishment, and to the iustice of God, as they affirme, therefore it cannot ap­ply it vnto vs. And lastly, how dissonant is it vnto reason, that a satisfaction should apply a satisfaction, as if one medi­cine [Page 120] should apply another to the patient. It is the hand that applieth the medicine, and not another medicine: so it is faith that applieth Christs satisfaction vnto our sinnes, and not our satisfaction. Nay, except the merits of Christ be applied to our best works and sufferings, they cannot stand before Gods iustice, neither can they be meritorious, as they themselues confesse: so that it will follow by this doctrine, that our satis­factions are both the hand to apply Christs, and the thing to which it is applied. All which is most repugnant, not only to Religion, but euen to reason it selfe.

42. Lastly, when as Bellarmine affirmeth, that ad maio­rem, Bel. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 10. &c. that is, for the greater glory of God who is satisfied, and the greater honour of man satisfying, it pleased Christ to ioyne his satisfaction to ours: He plainely discouereth the scope of their doctrine, to bee the aduancement of the dignity of man; whereunto indeede he ioyneth the glory of God (for else all men would cry fie vpon such a Religion:) but yet it both detracteth greatly from the glory of God, in ascribing some dignity vnto man, and peruerteth the true end of the Gospel, which is not the partial, but the entire honor & glory of God: For, as S. Paul saith, Gods power is most clearly seene in our weak­nes, 1. Cor. 12. 9. Dan. 1. 7. and his righteousnes in the confession of our shame, & his glo­ry in our basenes and vilenes, that no flesh might reioyce in his pre­sence, but that he onely might be exalted at that day. But by this1. Cor. 1. 29. Romish doctrine, euery iust mā may reioyce in his own digni­ty, & may lift vp himselfe in the presence of God; as if he were the ioynt cause of his own saluation together with Christ, and that Christs satisfaction had beene nothing auaileable to him, except he had applied it to himselfe by his owne satisfaction.

43. Thus they deuide saluation, as it were party parpale betwixt Christ and man, and paralell them together. And whereas they say, that we must be like vnto Christ, as in me­riting, so in satisfying; what doe they but intrude man into the fellowship of Christs office? for our imitation of Christ standeth in a conformity to his conuersation and life, and of those things onely which concerne his person, and are imi­table, but not in being like vnto him in his office: and there­fore [Page 121] when they say, that we must be like vnto Christ in satis­fying, they make euery man that is saued, a Iesus and Saui­our to himselfe, because they make him to imitate him in those things, wherein consisteth his being our Christ. Then which, what can be more contrary to the honour of Christ?

44. These bee the foure principall poynts, whereby the glory of Gods mercy, and Christs merits, and the holy Ghosts grace is greatly defaced, and in stead thereof, mans nature and merits exalted. Besides these, there are diuers other do­ctrines of the Church of Rome, which bring forth the same fruit, some of which, I will onely name, and so conclude this th [...] argument. And first, by the doctrine of the Popes su­premacie, they detract from the power of Christ, and conse­quently from his glory: for both they endow the Pope with those titles, which properly belong to Christ, as to be the Fa­ther Bel. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 17. in Gods family, the vniuersall Pastor, the head of the Church, the husband and bridegroome of it: and all other names which are giuen to our Sauiour Christ in holy Scripture (whereby it is shewne, that he is aboue the Church:) and also they attri­bute the same power to the Pope, which belongeth properly to Christ, as to pardon sinne, to dispense with the law of God, to open and shut the gates of heauen, not ministerially, but absolutely and iudicially, to depose Kings, and to dispose of Kingdomes, and such like. Now, what a dishonour is this to him, in whose thigh is written this glorious title, The King of Kings? Hee must not be the onely head of the Church, but the Pope must be a ioynt head with him, nor hee the sole Go­uernor, but the Pope must be his Vicar: nor the sole husband of the Church, but the Pope, in his absence, must be her hus­band in his roome. Could a mortall man endure this iniurie? And doe wee thinke that the Sonne of God will beare it? Ei­ther Christ is not able to gouerne alone, or not willing; they will not say not able, lest their blasphemy should be too too odious: and if they say, not willing: how can hee not be wil­ling to maintaine his owne glory, or not bee vnwilling to be confederated with a sinfull Pope (for so often they are) in the disposition of his Kingdome? Let them make the best that [Page 122] they can of it: yet it appeareth, that Christs gouernment is diuided betwixt the Pope and him, and so must the glory also needs be diuided,

45. Secondly, by their doctrine of the Inuocation and In­tercession of Saints, what doe they but diuide the office, and so the glory of the Mediatour-ship, betwixt Christ and them? for they teach that Christ is our Mediatour of Redemption, but the Saints Mediatours of Intercession, whereas we with the Scripture make Christ Iesus to be the onely and sole Me­diatour both of Redemption and Intercession. Wee honour the Saints, but wee pray vnto God alone in the name of his Sonne; they adore the Saints, and make their prayers vnto them as well as vnto God: yea, more prayers do they powre out by numbers vnto them, then vnto God. What is to dis­honour God and Christ, if this be not?

46. Thirdly, by their doctrine of traditions, they derogate greatly from the glory of Gods mercy towards his Church: for they hold that the written word is not sufficient for a Christian man to saluation, without the helpe of Ecclesiasti­call traditions: whereby they plainely insinuate, that either God had not that care of his family the Church, as he might haue had, seeing hee left not for it a perfect and certaine rule for the gouernment thereof, but sent it ouer to vncertaine traditions; or that wisedome which all Law-giuers labour to attaine vnto, seeing hee could not at the first prouide for all future occasions; or that loue that he would not: one of these doth necessarily follow from their doctrine.

47. Lastly, by their doctrine of worshipping of Images, whereby they giue vnto stockes and stones part of that religi­ous worship which is due vnto God. We teach that all reli­gious worship is due vnto God alone. They on the contrary maintaine, that latria, that is, diuine worship is Gods due; but dulia, that is, seruice is to be giuen to Images. Yea, that the Crucifixe is to be worshipped with diuine worship, which is due onely to God. Who seeth not what manifest iniury they offer to Gods glory, by this superstitious worship of dumbe and dead Images?

[Page 123]48. And thus, omitting many other like poynts which might be inserted in this place, I hope that the Minor propo­sition is sufficiently demonstrated, that the Church of Rome doth by many doctrines derogate from the glory of God, and the merits of Christ. And therefore the conclusion must needs follow, being built vpon an vnmooueable foundation, that, that Religion which maintaineth such doctrines, is not the truth of Christ, but the seduction of Antichrist.

MOTIVE. V. That Religion deserueth to be suspected, which refuseth to be tryed by the Scriptures, as the perfect and alone rule of faith, and will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe: But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome: Ergo.

THe first proposition in this Argument, though it be mostMAIOR. true, and cannot without any shew of reason be contra­dicted: yet that it may be without all doubt and exception, it shall not be amisse to strengthen the same by sound and e­uident proofes, deriued both out of Gods word, and consent of ancient Fathers. The Proposition consists of two parts, first, that it cannot be the true Religion, which will not abide the alone tryall of the Scriptures. Secondly, that it will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe; let vs consider of both these seuerally.

2. And concerning the first, if the Scripture be the foun­taine of all true religion, the foundation and basis of our faith, the Canon and rule of all the doctrines of faith, and the touch-stone to trye truth from falshood, then to refuse to be iudged and tryed by the Scriptures alone, is, plainely to dis­couer that there is something in it which issued not from that fountain, which is not built vpon that foundation, which is so oblique and crooked, that it dares not to be applyed to that rule, and which is counterfeit, and dares not abide the touch­stone. Now that the Scripture is such, as I haue said, let the Holy Ghost, speaking in the Scripture, beare witnesse, Search Ioh. 5. 39. [Page 124] the Scripture (saith our Sauiour) for in them you thinke to haue eternall life, and they be they which testifie of me: therefore the Scripture is the fountaine of all true religion: for, what is the Religion of Christians, but the right knowledge of Christ Iesus? This caused Saint Paul to say, I desire to know 1. Cor. 2. 2. nothing, but Christ Iesus, and him crucified. Againe, the Scrip­tures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation, through faith in 2. Tim. 3. 15. Christ Iesus: and are profitable to teach, to improue, to correct, and to instruct in righteousnesse, that the man of God may be ab­solute, and perfect to euery good worke. Therefore the Scripture is the onely fountaine of true Religion: for what is true Reli­gion, but spirituall wisedome and holy perfection, the one in contemplation, the other in action, the one in knowledge, the other in practice: for these [...] two ioyned together, do make a man truly religious, but the Scriptures afford both, as it is cleare in that saying of S. Paul, and may be confirmed by ano­ther like speech of Salomon, who affirmeth, that the comman­dements Pro 2. 9. of God will make a man to vnderstand righteousnesse, and iudgement, and equity, and euery good path. Righteousnesse and iudgement pertaine to knowledge, equity, and euery good path belong to practice. And for this cause, Origen com­pareth the Scriptures to Iacobs Well, from whence not onely Ia­cob, Orig. in Mat. 4. and his sonnes, that is, the learned and the skilfull, but his sheepe and cattell, that is, the simple and ignorant doe drinke, that is, deriue vnto themselues the waters of life and saluation: and therefore where the knowledge of the Scriptures flouri­shed not, as among all the Heathen, both Romanes, Greci­ans, and Barbarians before their conuersion, there no true Religion shewed it selfe, but their Religion was all false and deuillish: for, in stead of the true God, they worshipped dumb creatures, and mortall men: yea, deuils themselues, as La­ctantius Lactant. de falsa Relig. sheweth. All which proceeded from hence, that they had not the word of God for their guide, which is the onely fountaine and well-spring of true Religion.

3. Againe, as it is the fountaine from whence, so it is the foundation vpon which our faith relieth, whether wee take faith for the act of beleeuing, or for the matter and obiect of [Page 125] our beliefe. Ye are built (saith S. Paul) vpon the foundation of Ephes. 2, 19. 20. the Prophets, and Apostles, Christ Iesus himselfe, being the chiefe corner stone. By the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, is meant the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine, as all Ex­positours that I haue read; yea, their owne Aquinas and Ca­ietane, Aquin. Caietan. with one consent auouch: and to bee built vpon this foundation, is to haue our faith to relye and depend vpon it onely, as a house relyeth onely vpon the foundation, and without a foundation cannot stand: that therefore is no do­ctrine of faith, that is vpholden by any other foundation, nei­ther hath that any good foundation, which is not built vpon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine; they build vpon sand, that build vpon humane traditions, euery stormy puffe of winde will shake the house of that faith: but they which heare the word of Christ, and keepe it, build vpon a rocke, against Math. 7. 23. which, neither the raine, flouds, nor windes, no not the gates of hell are able to preuaile; because they are grounded vpon the rocke: which rocke indeede is Christ, to speake properly, as1. Pet. 2. 7. not onely S. Peter confesseth, 1. Pet. 2. 7. but euen Christ him­selfe, that is this rocke: Math. 16. 18. when hee saith, Ʋpon Math. 16. 18. this rocke will I build my Church: that is vpon this truth, that Christ is the Sonne of God: yet the word of Christ may also be called the rocke, because it is as firme and durable as Christ himselfe. And that wee may know, that Gods word1. Pet. 1. 25. onely is the foundation of faith, S. Paul telleth vs plainely, that faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. If anyRom. 10. 17. of them say (as they doe) that the word of God is not onely that which is written in Scripture, but that which is vnwrit­ten, deliuered by tradition: let them shew as good reasons, to proue their traditions to be the word of God, as we doe to proue the Scripture, and we will beleeue them: but since they cannot, let them beare with vs, if we vnderstand the Apostles words, as spoken onely touching the written word, and the rather, because we haue for the warrantize of our interpreta­tion, both S. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter, verse 8. when he saith, This is the word offaith which we preach. Where heeRom. 10. 8. sheweth what is that word, which is the ground of our faith, [Page 126] namely, the word preached. And S. Peter, who hauing mag­nified1. Pet. 1. 25. the word of God, with this commendation, that it en­dureth for euer, presently expoundeth himselfe of what word hee spake, saying, And this is that word which is preached amongst you: That is, the word of the Gospell, which was not in part, but wholy and fully, as preached by mouth, so committed to writing. And thus S. Basil also interprets it,Basil in [...]. for he saith, Quicquid est vltra scripturas: Whatsoeuer is out of the Scriptures diuinely inspired, because it is not of faith, is sinne: for faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Now from hence thus I reason. If the word of God written, be the onely ground of faith, then that Religion which will not ac­knowledge it, dependance onely vpon the word written, is not to be beleeued, but to be suspected as erronious: but the word written is the onely ground of faith, as hath beene proued: therefore that Religion which disclaymeth it depen­dance only vpon the word, deserues iustly not to be beleeued, but to be suspected as erronious: And in this regard, the Ro­mish Religion, though it be in our Pater noster, to wit, vnder the last petition, Deliuer vs from euill, yet it should neuer come into our Creed, to repose our faith and our saluation vpon it.

4. Thirdly, the Scripture, as it is the fountaine and foun­dation of true Religion: So it is the rule of faith, and the touchstone of doctrines, and the ballance of the Sanctuarie, to weigh truth and falshood in, that the one may be discerned from the other. This the Prophet Esay teacheth, when heeEsay 8. 20. calleth vs to the Law and to the Testimonie, saying, that if any speake not according to that word, there is no light in them. From which place thus I reason: that whereunto we must resort in all controuersies, and doubts for resolution, that is, the rule of faith: but such is the Scripture, by the testimonie of the Prophet: therefore the Scripture is the rule of faith. In like manner, we may conclude, out of S. Peter, who saith, that We 2. Pet. [...]. 19. haue a more sure word of the Prophets, whereunto wee must take heede, as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place, till the Day­starre arise in our hearts. If the word of the Prophets was a sure direction to the Church of God, before the Gospell was [Page 127] written; then much more is the whole Scripture, contayning the word of the Prophets and of the Apostles together; but S. Peter affirmeth the first, therefore the second must needs fol­low. For this cause when one asked our Sauiour, what hee might doe to bee saued, hee referred him to the Scripture for his direction, What is written, how readest thou? And so A­braham Luke 10. 26. referreth the rich gluttons brethren, to Moses, and Luke 16. 29. the Prophets: and Christ telleth the Saduces, that this was the cause of their errour, because they knew not the Scriptures. OutMath 22. 29. of all which Texts, thus I argue, If there were any other rule of faith, besides the sacred Scripture, our Sauiour, and Saint Peter would neuer haue sent vs ouer to the Scripture alone, but would haue poynted out vnto vs some other meanes: but they send vs to the Scripture alone: and therefore that alone is the rule and ballance of our faith.

5. And this the very title and inscription of the Scripture doth intimate: for why is it called Canonicall, but because it containes the Canon, that is, the rule of faith and life? The Fathers with one consent agree in this truth. Saint Basil callsBasil lib. 1. contr. Eunom. Chrysost. hom. 13 in 2. Coloss. Aug. de Baptist. contr. Donatist. lib. 2. cap. 6. the Scripture, Canonem recti, & normam veritatis, The Canon of right, and the rule of truth. Chrysostome sayth, that Assertio diuinarum legum, &c. The assertion of the law of God is a most exact Ballance, Squire, and Rule. Saint Augustine calleth it Statera diuina, Gods ballance, or a diuine ballance: these bee his words, Non afferamus stateras dolosas: Let vs not bring deceitfull ballances to weigh what we will and how we will, saying, This is heauie, that is light: but let vs bring that diuine ballance out of the holy Scriptures, as it were out of the Lords treasurie, and by it weigh all things, or rather acknowledge them, being Tertul. contra Hermog. Greg. Nyss. orat. deijs qui adeunt Hierosol. Grat. Decret. weighed by the Lord. Tertullian giueth to the Scripture the same name: so doth Gregory Nyssen: and our Countriman venerable Bede, to passe ouer all the rest, as he is reported by Gratian in his decrees, telleth vs in most plaine termes, that In sacris literis vnica est credendi, pariter & viuendi regula prae­scripta: The onely rule both of Faith, and Life, is prescribed vn­to vs in the holy Scriptures. Now, if this be so, as it is meere madnesse to affirme the contrary, then that religion which [Page 128] doth refuse to be tryed by this rule, and to be weighed in this ballance, doth giue iust cause of suspition, that it is but light stuffe, and crooked ware.

6. If a man should offer to his creditor a piece of gold for payment, and should refuse to haue it either tryed by the touch-stone, or weighed in the ballance, he might iustly sus­pect that it was but either light, or counterfeit: so may any of good sense rightly suspect that religion to bee both light, and counterfet, which refuseth to be examined by the rule of Gods word, especially (which is the second branch of the first proposition) if it not onely refuse to be tryed by the Scripture, but also will admit no tryall, nor Iudge but it selfe: for as by reason wee conclude, that such a man hath an euill cause in hand, who in Westminster Hall refuseth to haue his matter try­ed by the law, and will admit no Iudge, but his own opinion: & that man to be guilty, which standing at the bar of iustice, accused of some great crime, denyeth to be tryed by the ver­dict of his Country, according to the law: so likewise, the cause of Religion being called in question, that must needs in any equall iudgement bee deemed vnsound and guilty, which will not stand to the verdict and sentence of the Pro­phets and Apostles, who are the Iury to trye all cases of con­science: and of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture, who is the onely Iudge to heare and determine all questi­ons of doubt which may arise in matters of faith, and will be censured and iudged by none but it selfe.

7. Against this truth, all the Romanists, and especially the Iesuites; and of the Iesuites, chiefly Bellarmine, conflict and fight with foote and horse, sailes and oares, tooth and naile, and all they can doe: for herein lyeth the very bloud and life of their Religion. And if this bee wrung from them, that the Scripture is the onely iudge and rule of faith, Actum est de reg­no Pontificio, The Romish kingdome goeth to wracke vtterly: and therefore they mainely contend to proue, first, that the Scrip­ture is not the Iudge of controuersies; secondly, that it is not properly the rule of faith; and if it bee a Iudge, it is a dumbe one that cannot speake, and if it be a Rule, it is a partiall and [Page 129] imperfect one, not totall and absolute.

8. These two positions Bellarmine laboureth to prooue byBell. de verbo Dei interp. li. 3. many sorts of Arguments: first, from testimonies of the Olde Testament; secondly, from testimonies of the New; thirdly, by the authority of Bishops and Emperours; fourthly, by the witnesse of the Fathers; & lastly by reason. I passe ouer the foure first sorts of Arguments, as being sufficiently answered by others, and come to the last, which are deriued from rea­son, the slightnesse whereof doth plainely discouer the vanity of this their opinion. Now, to proue that the Scripture cannotBell. ibid. ca. 9. be the iudge of Controuersies, nor the Interpreter of it selfe, they vse three chiefe reasons: first, because it hath diuers senses: secondly, because it is not able to speake, but is mute and dumbe; and thirdly, because in euery well ordered Com­mon-wealth, the Law and the Iudge are distinguished; and therefore, seeing the Scripture is the law, therefore it cannot be the Iudge.

9. I answere to the first, that it is not onely false, but im­pious to affirme, that the Scripture is as it were, A nose of wax flexible into many senses, as Melchior Canus affirmeth, or thatCan. loc. li. 3. c. 2. it may be dinersly expounded according to the occasion of the time, as Cardinall Cusanus auerreth: or that it is like a Delphian Cus. ep. 2. 3. 7. Tur. contra Sad. pag. 99. Sword, to be conuerted into many senses, as Turrian the Ie­suite maketh it: for as of one body there is but one soule, so of one place of Scripture, there is but one true & sound sense, which is the soule and life of it, the words being but the flesh, and the skinne that couereth the same: and that true sense is that which the Spirit of God intendeth, and not that which euery priuate spirit collecteth and deduceth out of the same: as for the Tropologicall, Anagogicall, and Allegoricall sen­ses, they are not distinct senses of the Scripture, but diuers collections and applications issuing out of one and the same sense: all which may bee intended by the Holy Ghost, vnder that one literall sense. For example, when an Allegory is de­duced out of a place of Scripture, as Saint Paul, Gal. 4. 24.Gal. 4. 24. doth allegorize that History of Abrahams two Wiues, it is not a double interpretation of that History: but it is onely [Page 130] an Allegoricall application of it, to the illustrating of the mat­ter which he had in hand: and so when by a tropologie a morall doctrine is deriued out of a text of Scripture, as our Sauiour doth, Math. 12. 41. 42. applying to the Iewes theMat. 12. 41. 42. repentance of the Niniuites, and the long iourney of the Queene of Saba to see, and heare Salomon; or when as by a type any thing in Scripture is mystically expounded other­wise then the literall sense doth beare: this is not a new sense, but an accommodation of the right sense to another purpose, which notwithstanding is intended by the spirit of God: and this is confessed by diuers of their owne side. Cornelius A­grippa Agrip. de vanit. cap. 100. Aquin. Sum. pri. par. 9. pri. par. 10 thus writeth, The Scripture hath but one simple and con­stant sense, in which alone, the truth is found. And Aquinas thus, It is the literall sense which the author of the Scripture in­tendeth, which is God: yet it is not inconuenient, if in one letter of the Scripture, according to the literall sense, there bee ma­ny senses.

10. But grant that there are diuers distinct senses of some few places of Scripture: to wit, one literall, and another spi­rituall, (for in the most there is not) yet there can be but one literall sense, as many of the Iesuites themselues confesse, andAcost. lib. 3. de Cor. Reuel. ca. 11. Medina. Rib. com. in hos. ca. 11. nu. 6. 7. Bell. de verbo Dei, li. 3. ca. 3. Veg. de Just. li. 9 cap. 44. Sal. com. in Heb. dis. 1. 7. Azor. Instit. mor. lib. 8. cap. 2. Sixt. Sen. Bibl. li. 3. pa. 140. Pol. Virg. de In­uent. li. 4. c. 9. from that onely, a forcible argument may be drawne, as Bel­larmine acknowledgeth, and Ʋega another Iesuite: except the mysticall sense be explaned, and authorized by some other expresse place of Scripture, as Salmeron, Azorius, Sixtus Se­nensis, and Polidore Ʋirgil auouch, and proue the same by the testimonie of Augustine and Ierome. Now then, why should the multiplicity of senses barre the Scripture, from being the Iudge of controuersies, seeing no controuersie can effectually be decided by any other sense, but by the literall, which is euer one and the same: or by the mysticall, so farre forth as it is approued and declared by another Scripture, which then becomes the literall sense of that place, wherein it is expoun­ded, though it was spiritually included in the barke of the former from whence it was deriued? This therefore is a most vaine and friuolous obiection.

11. To the second, that the Scripture is dumb, and there­fore [Page 131] cannot bee the Iudge, because the Iudge of controuer­sies, must haue a deciding and determining voyce. I answere, that this is blasphemy against the sacred word of God: for if the Scripture bee an Epistle of the omnipotent God to his crea­ture, as Gregory calleth it, what doth it but speake to them toGregor. mag. Epist. 40. whom it is sent? He that writes a letter to his friend, doth hee not speake vnto him? and hee that reades his friends letter, doth hee not vnderstand his meaning and intendment, be­cause the letter doth not vtter a voyce, and he heareth not his friend himselfe? Doth not euery man know that there is a double word, verbum dictum, a word spoken, and verbum scriptum, a word written, the one being Imago cordis, the Image of the minde, the other Imago oris, the Image of the speech? True it is, the Scripture doth not speake, as man speaketh, but yet it speaketh as the Law vseth to speake: and God himselfe speaketh in the Scripture, to them that haue eares to heare him, and therefore in the Epistles to the Chur­ches, which were all written, not spoken, it is said, Let him Reue. 2. & 3. that hath an eare, heare what the Spirit saith vnto the Churches; and is there any thing more common then these phrases, what saith the Scripture? doth not the Scripture say? Yea, and is not the Scripture called vi [...]us Dei sermo, the liuely word of God? Heb. 4. 12. Heb. 4. 12. how can it speake, if it bee dumbe; how can it giue life, if it be dead?

12. This manifest truth Stapleton striueth to elude by aStapl. lib. 1. cont. Whitak. c. 7. §. 9. witty, as he thinkes, but indeed a witlesse distinction, God (saith he) speaketh indeed by the Scripture, but hee speaketh not vnto vs by them: the Scripture is indeed the word of God: but the Church is the voyce of God. Which fond obiection our fa­mousWhitak. contra Staplet. Country-man the scourge of Poperie, Doctor Whitaker thus wipeth away. If God speake in the Scripture, then hee doth it either with himselfe, or vnto some other, but not with himselfe, therefore to some other, and if to some other, to whom but vnto man? for hee neither speaketh to Angels nor Deuils, nor dumb creatures, therefore onely to man, as when he saith, Thou shalt not kill, or, Loue your enemies: there is no man so simple, but hee perceiueth that God speaketh vnto [Page 132] man. And therefore the Apostle saith, that whatsoeuer things Rom. 15. 4. are written aforetime, are written for our learning, that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, might haue hope: And so it is cleare, that God by the Scripture, not onely spea­keth, but speaketh vnto vs, and so the Scripture is not onely the word of God, but the voyce of God: in it selfe, as it pro­ceeded from God, the voyce of God; to vs, as we haue it by writing, the word of God, and the Epistle of the great King, to his poore subiects, whereby they are enformed of his will and pleasure, and directed in the wayes of saluation.

13. I, but when the question is about the sense of a Text, as of that, Math. 16. 19. To thee will I giue the keyes, &c. WhichMath. 16. 19. words they interpret, as spoken to Peter onely, and conse­quently to the Pope his successour: we to the rest of the Apo­stles, as well as to him. Where now doth the Scripture decide this doubt, and speake plainely which is the truest sense? Mary first, in the very place it selfe, by the due examination of the circumstances thereof, they euidently shew that our sense is the truest: for whereas the question is propounded to all the Apostles, verse 15. and all the Apostles held the same faith, that Iesus is the Sonne of God, verse 20. it must needes be, that Peter was but as the fore-man of the Quest, and an­swered not for himselfe only, but for them all: thereby shew­ing forth not any preeminence of authority aboue the rest, but a greater zeale and forwardnesse then the rest. And here­vpon it followeth, that seeing this promise of the keyes is made, because of that faith and confession, therefore they all beleeuing and confessing the same, haue an interest to the pro­mise as well as Peter. And this Anselmus in plaine tearmes af­firmeth. It is to be noted (saith he) that this power was not giuen Anselm. in Mat. 16. alone to Peter: but as Peter answered one for all, so in Peter hee gaue this power to all.

14. Secondly, by the conference of another place, which is more plaine, to wit, Ioh. 20. 23. where is a gift and an en­dowmentIoh. 20. 23. of that power of the keyes, which before was pro­mised: for to binde, and to loose, and to remit, and retayne sinnes, is all one in effect, as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth, [Page 133] and contain [...] the whole vertue of the keyes: now here theyBell. de Rom. Pont. li. 1. ca. 12. are all inuested with equall iurisdiction, the Holy Ghost is e­qually breathed vpon them all, and equall authority be quea­thed vnto them all by these words of the Commission, As my Father sent me, so I send you: which exposition is confirmedAug. de verbo Dei ser. 13. Cypr. de vnit. Eccles. Hierom. aduer. Iouin. l▪ 1. Theoph. in Mat. 16. Ansel. in Mat. 16 by the authority of most of the Fathers, as Augustine, Cyprian, Hierome, Theophilact, Anselme, &c. and thus the Scripture by a most liuely voyce determineth this doubt: and as of this, so of all other questions and interpretations, the Scripture onely must bee the Iudge, which by searching the origi­nals, examination of circumstances, conference of other pla­ces, and consulting with the learned Fathers and Expo [...]itors, together with feruent prayer to God for inward illuminati­on, will giue a most exact, and precise satisfaction to all con­trouersies, touching matters of [...]aith, necessarie to bee be­leeued.

15. To the third reason, that the Scripture is the law, and therefore cannot be the Iudge: I answere, that though the Law and the Iudge be diuers distinct things, yet they are sub­ordinate one vnto the other, and so may both ioyne in the concurrence of one cause: as when our Sauiour saith, Call no Mat. 23. 9. man Father vpon earth, for there is but one, your Father which is in heauen: his meaning is not to exclude earthly Fathers from their title, but to shew that God is the primer and principall Father, both in respect of time, order, and cause, and that the other are but subordinate vnto him: so in a Common-wealth the Iudge is subordinate vnto the law, and the law is the Iudges Iudge: and for that cause, as the Law is said to be a dumbe Magistrate, so the Magistrate is said to be a speaking Law: and so in truth the Law is the Iudge pri­marily, and principally, and the Magistrate is but the Mini­ster of the law, and the Iudge subordinate. Now if this be so in a Common-wealth gouerned by humane Lawes, which are failing and imperfect in many things, being the ordinances of erring men, how much more may we deeme it to be so in the Church of God, whose Law-giuer is God himselfe, and the law the word of God? and therefore, though the Pastors [Page 134] and Ministers of the Church may interpret the Scriptures, yet they must be tyed to this rule, to doe it by the Scriptures, and to expound the law by the law: for shall not a temporall Iudge giue sentence out of his owne braine, but secundum leges & statuta, according to the lawes and statutes of the Realme? And shall any Pastour of the Church, be it the Pope himselfe, giue iudgement in any question out of his owne brest, without the direction of Gods word? This is to preferre humane lawes before Gods law: and to make the state of the Church farre inferiour to the state politike: and to haue a more certaine rule for the deciding of ciuill controuersies, then for the determining of questions of [...]aith: so that in a word, the Scripture is both the law and the interpreter of the Law, the Iudge, and the Iudgement.

16. Secondly, Bellarmine affirmeth and laboureth to proue [...]ll. de verbo Dei li. 4. ca. 12. that the proper and chiefe end of the Scripture was not to be the rule of faith, but that it might be commonitorium quoddam vtile, A certaine profitable commonitory, whereby the doctrine de­liuered by word of mouth, might be conserued and nourished. And to this end and purpose, he vseth diuers reasons, as first, be­cause it containes in it many things which are not necessary to faith, as all the Histories of the Olde Testament, and many of the New, and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles; all which were not therefore committed to writing, because they were necessary to be beleeued, but are therefore necessa­rily beleeued, because they are written. Secondly, because all things necessary to be beleeued are not contained in the Scripture, as by what meanes women vnder the law were clensed from originall sinne, wanting circumcision, and chil­dren that dyed before the eight day, and many Gentiles that were saued: againe, which are the books of Canonicall Scrip­ture, and that these are Canonicall, and those are not: that the Virgin Marie was a perpetuall virgin, that the Passeouer is to be kept vpon the Sunday being the Lords day, and that chil­dren of beleeuing Parents are to bee baptized, and such like. Thirdly, because the Scripture is not one continued body, as a rule should bee, but containeth diuers workes, Histories, [Page 135] Sermons, Prophecies, Verses, and Epistles. These be his three reasons, by which the Iesuite would euince, that the Scripture is not giuen to this end, to be the rule of faith.

17. To all which I will answere briefly, and distinctly, and first in generall, secondly in particular: In generall, if the Scripture be not giuen to be the rule of faith, why is it called Canonicall? It is therefore called Canonicall, because it con­taines the Canon, that is, the rule of faith and life: this very inscription approued by all, doth refute Bellarmines fond ca­uillation. Againe, if the Scripture was not giuen to bee the rule, but onely a monitorie, why were there so many Bookes written, seeing fewer would haue serued for monition? The multiplicity of Bookes proueth, that they serue not onely to put vs in mind of our duty, but also as an exact rule to square our faith, and frame our life by. And lastly, if the Scripture was not giuen to be a rule, why doth he himselfe confesse af­terward that it is indeed a rule, but not a total and entire rule, but a partiall and imperfect one? If it bee any waies a rule, then it was giuen by God, and written by the men of God, to that end to be the rule. And so Bellarmines goodly reasons hang together like a sicke mans dreame, the one part wherof ouerthroweth the other.

18. But to answere in particular to them seuerally: To the first, I say, that it is not farre from blasphemy to affirme, that there is any thing in holy Scripture that is vnnecessary; for though all things are not of equall necessity and profit, yet there is nothing in the whole Booke of God, from the begin­ning of Gen. to the end of the Reuel. but may haue most pro­fitable and necessary vse in the Church of God, if not for the essentiall forme of faith, yet for the adorning and beautifying of it: and this may truely bee verified, euen of those things which he excepteth against, to wit, the Histories of the Olde and New Testament, and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles: out of all which, how many excellent doctrines may be deriued both for the confirmation of faith, and edi­fication of manners! And therefore as in mans body, God by nature hath not disposed all parts to be alike necessary, but [Page 136] some haue no other vse but ornament and comelinesse: so hath Almighty God mingled the parts of holy Scripture in that manner, that some are as it were bones and sinews to our faith, some flesh and bloud, and some againe but exteriour beautie and fashion: yet as in nature nothing is made in vaine, so much lesse in Scripture is there any thing to be accounted superfluous and redundant: nay, in this diuine body, there are no excrements that may be cast out and separated, as it fa­reth in our earthly carkases, but all is entire, sound and per­fect, as the Prophet Dauid teacheth, Psal. 19. 7. when heePsal. 19. 7. saith, that the Law of God is perfect, conuerting the soule: and our Sauiour, Math. 5. 18. when he auoucheth, that till heauen Math. 5. 18. and earth perish one iote or title of the Law shall not, &c.

19. To his second reason I answere three things: first, that it is entirely false, that the Scripture doth not contayne all things necessarily required to the Essence of faith; for if the Scripture be perfect, and giueth wisedome to the simple; if no­thingPsal. 19. 7. Deut. 4. 2. Gal. 1. 8. may bee added to it, nor taken from it; if to teach any thing, besides the Scripture, deserueth the fearefull Anathema; if it be able to make the man of God perfect to euery good worke; 2. Tim. 3. 16. 17. Ioh. 5. 39. Ephes. 2. 19. 20. Rom. 15. 4. if in them onely wee may finde eternall life; if the Church of God be built vpon the foundation of the Prophets, and Apostles: and lastly, if our faith and hope doe arise from the Scriptures, then there is nothing necessary to saluation, but is fully and plenarily contained in them: but the first is true, as appeareth by all those testimonies before alledged, and therefore the lat­ter must by necessary consequence be true also.

20. Secondly, I answere, that Bellarmine by that assertion crosseth the whole streame of the Fathers, for most of them affirme the flat contrary. Tertullian saith, that when we once be­leeue Tertul. de prae­script. the Gospell: Hoc prius credimus non esse quod vltra credere debemus: This we beleeue first, that there is nothing besides which we ought to beleeue. Iraeneus saith, that the Apostles committed Iraen [...]. haeres. lib. 3. c. 1. to writing the Gospell which they preached, Fundamentum & co­lumnam fidei nostrae futurum, To be the foundation, and pillar of our faith. Basil saith, Quicquid extra diuinam scripturam Basil. Ethic. Reg. 80. est, cum ex fide non sit, peccatum est, Whatsoeuer is beside the holy [Page 137] Scripture, because it is not of faith, is sinne: Cyrill saith, that all Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 12. cap. 68. those things were written in holy Scripture, which the Writers thought sufficient, Tam ad mores quàm ad dogmata, As well touching conuersation, as doctrine. Augustine saith, that those August. in Io­han. tract. 49. things were chosen out to be written, Quae saluti credentium suf­ficere videbantur, Which seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue. And againe, he saith in another place, Whe­ther Aug. contr. lit. Petil. l. 4. c. 6. concerning Christ, or concerning the Church of Christ, or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith or life: we will not say if we, but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you, but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law, and the Gospell, let him be accursed. Chrysostome saith, Si quis eorum: Chrysost. de sanct. et adoran. spir. Hier. in Mat. 23. If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost, doe speake any thing of him selfe, and not out of the Gospell, beleeue it not. Ierome speaking of an opinion touching the death of Zacharias, the father of Iohn Baptist, saith, Hoc quia ex Scripturis non habet au­thoritatem, This, because it hath not authority, out of the Scrip­tures is as easily contemned as approued. I supersede for breuity sake, the residue of the Fathers, who with full consent con­spire in the same opinion: yea, not onely the Fathers, but ma­ny also of their owne most learned Authors: as Thomas Aqui­nas, Aquin. lec. 1. in 1. Tim. 6. Anton. sum part. 3. tit. 18. c. 3. §. 3 Durand. praefat. in Sent. Peres. de rat. con. lib. 2. c. 19. Cling. loc. lib. 3. cap. 19. p. 198. Antoninus, Durandus, Peresius, Clingius, and diuers others: by all which we may see how little reckoning Bellarmine ma­keth of the ancient Fathers: where they make for him, hee magnifieth and exalteth them to the skies, but when they are opposite to him, he reiecteth them as drosse, and the like ac­count he maketh of his owne Doctors.

21. Lastly, I answere, that of those things which he affir­meth, not to be contayned in holy Scripture, and yet to be of necessity of beliefe, some of them are farre from either ne­cessity or profit, as that of the meanes whereby women vn­der the Law were purged from originall sinne: and how the Gentiles were partakers of the couenant, hauing not the Sa­crament; and that Easter is to be celebrated vpon the Lords day: If these things be of that necessity of beliefe, which hee maketh them, how many thousand then haue sinned greatly, in being ignorant thereof? for at this day not the hundreth [Page 138] part of Christians euer heard these things once named, and yet by this ignorance they neither offended God, nor hinde­red their owne saluation. And what shall we thinke of Irae­neus, Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 25. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 19. and other godly Bishops in the East, that held that Ea­ster was not to bee celebrated euer vpon the Lords day? Againe, the other things nominated by him, as that the books of the sacred Bible, are the Canonicall Scripture, and the word of the liuing God: that the children of beleeuing pa­rents are to be baptized: that Christ descended into hell, may easily be proued out of Scripture, either by expresse testimo­nie, or by necessarie consequence and deduction, which is all one; for, Perinde sunt [...]a quae ex Scripturis colliguntur, at (que) [...]a Nazian. de The­ol. lib. 5. quae scribuntur, &c. saith Nazianzene.

22. Thirdly, being driuen by the power of truth, to ac­knowledge the Scripture to be a rule, he commeth in with a leaden distinction: to wit, that is not a totall, but a partiall rule, and that the word of God written, and not written (by [...] this last meaning traditions) is the totall and perfect rule. To this I answere in a word, that by this distinction, he plainely ouerturneth that which before hee had confessed: for if it bee the rule of faith, then it must needes be totall and perfect, if it be not totall and perfect, then is it not the rule: for a rule must be proportioned to the thing, whereunto it is applied. If then our faith be either longer and larger then the Scripture, then cannot the Scripture bee any wayes called the rule thereof. Besides, as Theophilact saith, Regula et amussis ne (que) appositionem Theophil in 3. cap. ad Philip. habet, ne (que) ablationem: A rule doth neither admit addition nor diminution: and that is the definition of a rule according to Varinus. Regula est mensura quae non fallit, quae (que) nullam vel Varinus. additionem vel detractionem admittit. A rule is (saith hee) a measure which deceiueth not, and which admitteth no addition nor detraction. Therefore if it be the rule of faith, either it is perfect, and absolute, or none at all: if it standeth in neede of traditions to supply it want, then why doth hee call it the rule, and why doe all the Fathers giue it the same name? and why hath it that inscription in the forehead, the Canonicall Scripture? Lastly, if God would giue vs a rule for our faith [Page 139] and life in the Scripture, then by the same reason hee would make that a perfect rule: for, shall any imperfect thing pro­ceede from the authour of all perfection? When an imperfect creature is borne, wanting either limmes or forme, we ascribe it to a defect and errour in the particular nature, from whence the creature is deriued, or to the indisposition of the instru­mentall causes, not to the generall nature which tendeth al­waies vnto perfection. How much more then ought this Ie­suite be afraid to ascribe an imperfect creature, to the all-per­fect Creatour? especially seeing it is the worke of his owne hands, without the intermingling of all second causes, and proceedeth immediately from his owne spirit, the Prophets and Apostles, being but as Baruch to Ieremie, writers and en­grossers of that which the spirit did dictate vnto them? And therefore I may boldly and firmely conclude, that as the vn­created word of God, begotten of the Father before all time, is perfect God, and can neither receiue augmentation nor di­minution: so the word of God, pronounced first by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles, and after by them com­mitted to writing▪ which is called the Scripture, is absolute and perfect, and can neither be encreased nor diminished, to make it more or lesse perfect, and so is the onely true sound and sacred Rule, whereby both our Faith and life is to be di­rected towards the Kingdome of Heauen.

23. And thus I hope, the first proposition remaineth soundMINOR. and firme, notwithstanding all that can be sayd to the contra­ry. Now I come to the confirmation of the assumption or se­cond proposition, which is, that the Religion of the Church of Rome refuseth to be tryed and iudged by the Scriptures a­lone, and will be tried and iudged by none but it selfe: which if it be euicted, then the conclusion must necessarily follow, that therefore it is not onely to be suspected, but vtterly reie­cted and abhorred.

24. That this is so, though it hath already in the precedent discourse beene sufficiently demonstrated, yet that the matter may appeare more plaine, and their impudency may be more notorious, let vs search deeper into this wound, and discouer [Page 140] the filthinesse thereof from the very bottome: and first that they renounce the Scripture from being their Iudge, and then in the second place, that they admit of no other Iudge but themselues.

25. Concerning the first, let vs heare Bellarmine the A­chilles of Rome, speake foremost, hee affirmeth in expresse words, that the Scripture is not the rule of faith, or if it be, that it is a partiall and imperfect rule, and vtterly insufficient of it selfe, without the helpe of Ecclesiasticall traditions. This assertion is well-neere the whole matter subiect of his third and fourthBell. de verbo Dei, li. 3. ca. 3. Bookes De verbo Dei, which he laboureth to strengthen by all meanes possible: Yea, in the third Chapter of his third Booke, he saith peremptorily, that the Pope with a Councill is the Iudge of the true sense of the Scripture, & all controuersies. Now, in setting vp the Pope or a Councill into the supreme throne of Iudgement, he must needes pull downe the Scrip­ture, & the Spirit of God speaking therein from that throne, and despoyle it of that authority. But what need I draw this consequence from his words, seeing throughout that whole Chapter he doth almost nothing else but striue to proue that the Scripture is not the Iudge, & doth reproue the Protestāts for saying that all the iudgements of the Fathers, and all the decrees of Councils ought to be examined ad amussim Scrip­turarum, according to the rule of the Scriptures? Next vnto Bellarmine, commeth in Gregory de Ʋalentia, and hee mostGreg. de Val. li. 5 in Anal. c. 2. & 3 boldly auoucheth, that the Scripture is not a sufficient Iudge or rule of all controuersies of faith: and that the Scripture alone defineth nothing at all, no not obscurely of the chiefe questions of faith: and where it doth speake, it speaketh so obscurely, that it Hos. 10. 2. aduer. Brent. Proleg. doth not resolue, but rather increase the doubt. Cardinall Hosius is no whit lesse audacious, when he affirmeth, that the Scrip­ture in it selfe is not the true and expresse word of God, which we ought to obey, vnlesse it bee expounded according to the sense and Sal. com. in. esist. Paul. in Gen. Tur. contr. Sade. Cost. Ench. de sum. Pontif. consent of the Catholike (that is in his opinion the Romane) Church. The Iesuites Salmeron, Turrian, and Coster, doe not onely barely affirme as much, but also confirme it by reason. The Scripture is dumbe (saith Salmeron) but the deciding voyce [Page 141] of a Iudge must be quicke. The Scripture is a dead letter (saith Turrian) and a thing without life (saith Coster) but a Iudge must be liuing, who may correct such as erre: therfore that Scrip­ture cannot be the Iudge. It is as it were a Nose of wax (saith Melchior Canus) flexible into euery sense, and as it were, aCan. loc. li. 3. c. 2. Turri. vt supra. Delphian Sword, fit for all purposes (saith Turrian) therefore cannot be the Iudge. And therefore two other Iesuites, to wit, Tanner and Gretzer impudently conclude, that no here­sie Coll. Ratisb. can be sufficiently refuted by Scripture alone, and that by no meanes it may be graunted, that either the holy Scripture, or the Holy Ghost speaking by the Scripture, should be the su­preme and generall Iudge of Controuersies: and hee addes his reason, because the Scripture cannot dicere sententiam, giue sentence on one side, as a Iudge should doe. Nay, one Vitus Mi­letus (as Pelargus reporteth) is not ashamed to say, that weePelarg. Jesuit. read, that an Asse spoke in the Scripture, but that the Scripture it selfe euer spoke, we neuer read. And thus this fellow makes the Scripture it selfe to be more mute then Balaams Asse, and the holy Spirit lesse able to make that speake, then an Angell was to make an Asse to speake. Then which, what could be brayed out more like the beast he speaketh of?

26. But some may say, All these are but priuate mens opi­nions: we heare not all this while the determination of the Church. Let vs harken therefore to the voyce of the Church touching this poynt, that is, as they hold of the Councill, or rather Conuenticle of Romish Bishops, assembled together at Trent, which they call the Church representatiue. The se­cond Canon of the second decree in thy fourth Session of thatConc. Trid. ses. 4. decret. 2. can. 2. Councill doth thus determine, Let no man trusting to his owne wisedome, dare to interpret the Scripture after his owne priuate sense, or contrary to that sense which our holy Mother the Church holdeth, or contrary to the vnanimous consent of the Fa­thers. The former part of this Canon is good and sound; for Saint Peter saith, that no Scripture is of priuate interpretation: 2. Pet. 1. 20. and therefore they which wrest the Scriptures to their owne senses, contrary to the intent and scope of them, are guilty of a grieuous sinne before God, and doe it to their owne destru­ction: [Page 142] for Optimus scripturae lector est, qui dictorum intellectum non attulerit, sed retulerit exscriptura, (saith Hil.) that is, He Hilar. de tri. l. 1. is the best reader of the Scripture, which doth not bring a sense to the Scripture, but draweth it out of the Scripture. Besides, the middle and end of the Canon is not to bee misliked, if they haue a fauourable interpretation; for the iudgement of the Fathers is greatly to be regarded, and the authority of the Church is to be held in especiall reuerence: but for all this, la­tet anguis in herba, vnder these faire pretences of words is cou­ched a snake of foule errour: for first, they tye the gift of in­terpretation of Scripture, and of decision of controuersies, to the Chaire of Peter seated at Rome, and possessed by the Pope, Peters successour, as they call him, or to the Chaire of Bishops assembled together in a Councill, as in Noahs Arke: whereas Saint Paul saith plainely, speaking of the gift of interpretati­on, These things workethone and the same Spirit, distributing to 1. Cor. 12. 11. euery man seuerally, as he will. And in another place, that the spirituall man discerneth all things, and therefore the Scrip­tures.1. Cor. 2. 15. Now, by the spirituall man, the Apostle meaneth the man regenerate and sanctified by the Spirit, as it appeareth by that he opposeth him to the naturall man, in the verse going before: and so the gift of discerning and interpreting is not proper to the Chaire of Bishops.

27. Secondly, this Canon doth not onely giue vnto the Church, thus conceiued of them, the onely gift of interpreta­tion, but also a Praetorian and vnexaminable authority in in­terpreting; so that all which they deliuer out of their Chaires, must bee receiued peremptorily without examining the grounds and reasons, for which they are mooued to be of that iudgement: which Tyrannicall vsurpation, is both contrary to the expresse precepts and principles of holy Scripture, and also to the doctrine and practice of all the ancient Fathers: for the scripture bids to try all things, & to hold that which is good. 1. Thes. 5. 21. And Paul refused not to haue his doctrine examined of theActs 17. 11. men of Ber [...]a, by the Scripture: & the same Apost. directeth vs how to behaue our selues at the time of prophecying, namely,1. Cor. 14. 29. that two or three Prophets speake, & the other iudge. All which [Page 143] places are flatopposite to that peremptory obtruding of inter­pretations vpon the Church, which the Canon speaketh of: &Aug. de doctrin. Christian. Orig. hom. 17. in Exod. Hil. de trin. li. 4. Basil de spir. Sa. cap. 1. Cyr. in Job. lib. 8. so are all the Fathers in generall; for in prescribing certaine rules to all men, both of vnderstanding and interpreting the Scriptures, they plainely shew that there is not this absolute authority, nor infallibility in any, to obtrude what interpre­tation soeuer, without contradiction or examination.

28. Lastly, the Canon in giuing this indefinite power of interpretation, and determination of doubts to the Church, without any relation had to the Scripture, doth vtterly iustle out the Scripture from being the Iudge. And so Andradius the interpretour of this Councill doth expound the intend­mentAndrad. thereof, when he saith, that the iudgement of the Church is, Principium vltra quod non sit fas in inquisitione progredi, Aprinciple, beyond the which it is not lawfull to proceede in inqui­sition. By which he giueth to vnderstand, that our faith must relye wholly and solely vpon the iudgement of the Church, that is, the Pope and his Prelates, without enquirie at all into the word of God, whether that which they propound be con­sonant to the truth or no. As Erasmus in a certaine disputati­onEras. ex Chem. exam. pa. 66 against the Papists, confesseth, that their opinion hath not sure & certain testimonies of Scripture, but that the contrary opi­nion may be better & more clerely & strongly proued out of Gods word; notwithstanding (saith he) if the Church bid, I will beleeue it, for I will captiuate my vnderstanding to the obedience of the Church. And this indeed is the Babylonian seruitude of the church of Rome, wherby they fetter the souls of their follow­ers to perpetual slauery, and lead thē blindfold vnder the veile of an implicite faith vnto perdition: for this is the first ground they lay in the hearts of all their generation, that they must not examine the doctrine of the Church, but take it at their hands as good coyne, though it be neuer so counterfeit, do­ctrina in Concilijs definit a custodiēda est, non examinanda, (saithBell de verbo Dei, li. 3. c. 10. Bellarmine) that doctrine which is defined in a Council, is to be kept, not examined: and ordinarius pastor Ecclesiae audien­dus est, non iudicandus (saith Stapleton) an ordinary Pastor ofStap de doctrina prin. li. 1. ca. 5. the Church is to be heard, not iudged: thus we see, that the [Page 144] Scripture is thrust cleane out of dores, from hauing any right or title in the decision of questions of faith: not onely by pri­uate men, but euen by their Church it selfe.

29. Now here two things are to be obserued of vs, for the plainer enucleation and clearing of this poynt: first, that in making the Scripture Iudge, we doe not exclude the Church, nor any member of the Church from the office of iudging and discerning, onely we place them in their due order and ranke: for this is it we intend, that the Scripture is the high­est and most absolute Iudge, from the sentence whereof there is no appeale to be made to any higher Court: and that the iudgement & determination of the Church, or of any member therof, is subordinate vnto that, and to be ruled and guided by that, and where it is agreeable vnto that, there to be receiued, where it swarueth from that, to be reiected. For as in the ci­uill estate, the Iudges deputed to that office, haue no absolute authority in themselues, but are subiect vnto the lawe, and the Ministers thereof, and therefore must not speake what they list, but what the law directeth: so in the state Ecclesiasti­call, they that are inferiour Iudges, are but the Ministers of the law of God, and must not vary from the rule thereof in any respect. And for this cause, as the Iewes were comman­dedDeut. 17. 10, 11 to obey the sentence and determination of the Priest in all controuersies, so the Priest was commanded to giue iudge­ment according to the law, and no otherwise: and albeit the Hebrew glosse vpon that Text teacheth, that if the Priest say that the right hand is the left, or the left is the right, his sentence is to be holden, (which is the plaine doctrine of the Church of Rome, Iudaizing in this as in many other things) yet Lyra Lyra on Deu. 17 writing vpon that Text saith, that the glosse is manifestly false, because the sentence of no man, of what authority soeuer, is to be holden, if it be contrary to the law of God: so we admit the Church to be Iudge, and euery priuate Christian also in his place, but we ascribe the chiefe power and authority of Iudging to the Scripture alone. The next place we allow vn­to the Church, and the lowest vnto the particular members thereof: These last to be directed by the Church, but yet so [Page 145] farre as it bringeth it authority out of the Scriptures, and it to be limited by the bounds of the Scripture also: and if it iudge against the euidence thereof, not to bee heard nor beleeued. This is our opinion, that wee may not be mistaken: but our aduersaries aduance their Church vnto the highest place, and make the Scripture an inferiour vassall, and seruant vnto it, as I haue declared.

30. Secondly, note thereason that moueth them, thus to disclaime from the iudgement of the Scripture: it is because they know full well, that the maynest and chiefest poynts of their Religion, wherein they dissent from vs, haue no ground nor foundation in the Scripture, but would vanish like a mor­ning aust, if the light of Gods word should but shine vpon them: as for instance, their doctrines of worshipping Ima­ges, of tasting dayes, of prayer for the dead, of Purgatorie, of shrift, of pardons, of the communion in one kinde, of single life, and of the priuate Masse, and such like: all which poynts and many other, their owne Writers contesse, cannot be suffi­ciently proued out of the Scripture. And therefore Andra­dius Andrad. Orthod. explic. lib. 2. doth fully and ingenuously acknowledge, that many poynts of their Religion would reele and stagger, if they were not supported by tradition: and Bellarmine himselfe saith, that itBel. de Euchar. lib. 3 cap. 23. How contrary is this to that of S. Augustine, out faith shuld reele and tot­ter, if the au­thority of the Scripturestand not fast, Aug. de doct. Chris. lib. 1. cap. 23. may be doubted whether the great poynt of transubstantiation may be sufficiently enforced out of the words of the Text, Hoc est corpus meum: So that wee see now the reason why they will not be tried by the Scriptures, euen this, because if the Scrip­ture bee Iudge, Popery must needes goe to wracke. This is ther fore a cunning and witty policie, or rather a grosse and palpable subtilty of theirs, whereby though they dazle the sight of the simple and ignorant, yet they cannot bleare the eyes of the vnderstanding and wise, from discerning into their fraud.

31. Hauing thus proued, that they reiect the Scripture, now I come to shew, that they allow of no other Iudges but themselues: for the proofe whereof, there needes no long discourse, seeing it is sufficiently apparent, by that which hath already beene deliuered, that they appeale from the sen­tence [Page 148] of the Scripture vnto the iudgement of the Church, and tye vnto the girdle thereof, the onely key of interpretation. Now by the Church, they intend first the Romish Syna­gogue, that is, all that whole bony which dependeth vpon the Pope for their head, and receiue as it were life, and nou­rishment by his influence: for (as Bristo saith) the Romane Bristo mot. 12. in marg. Rhem. Annot. in Rom. Church is the Catholike Church, and as the Rhemists, the Ca­tholike and the Roman faith is all one. Secondly, by the Church, they meane more particularly a congregation of Romish Bi­shops and Prelates assembled together in a Councill, which they call the Church representatiue. And thirdly and princi­pally,Aquin. 22. q. 11. art. Greg. de Valent. Anal. fid. p. 136. they intend by the Church, the Pope, who is the head of the Church, and contayneth in him virtually all the power and authority of the Church. The Church in the first sense, is not to be this Iudge (say they) nor yet in the second: which notwithstanding, is but an vpstart opinion, and but of the firstConcil. Constant. Ses. 4. 5. Basilsess. 2. head: for in the Councils of Constance and Basil, it was de­creed, that the Pope should obey the Councill, and be orde­red by it in all things pertayning to faith, and the reforma­tion of the [...]: and many learned Romanists haue been of the same opinion, as Bellarmine confesseth: but now nei­therBell. de concil. li. 2. cap. 14. may the Councill be Iudge: therefore take the Church in the third sense for the Pope, and then you haue the man that is the Church virtuall, and must be all in all, euen the on­ly Iudge and Vmpier in all controuersies. The center in which all the lines, that is, opinions of Fathers, Councils, and Di­uines must concurre and meete. The Epitome and abridge­ment of the whole Church, in whom alone remayneth the Silu. sum. verb. sides nu. 2. whole power of the Catholike Church. And thus from the Scrip­ture, they call vs to the Church, from the Church to the Coun­cils, and from them to the Pope, and there they pitch their line, as in the highest poynt of resolution.

32. That they thus vnderstand by the Church, the Pope, and that all iudgement is deuolued vnto him alone, heare them speake in their owne persons. Bellarmine saith, that the Pope without a Councill may define matters of faith, because be­ing Bell. de Christo li. 2. cap. 28. the vniuersall▪ Pastor, and Teacher of the Church, he cannot [Page 149] erre, teaching out of the chaire: and that he is absolutely aboueIdem de concil. lib. 2. cap. 17. Idem cap. 18. the Councill, and that he may, as he is the chiefe Prince of the Church, retract the iudgement of the Councill, and not fol­low the greater part. And therefore, when hee affirmeth in another place, that the Pope with a Councill, is the Iudge ofIdem de Verbo Dei, li. 3. ca. 3. the true sense of the Scripture; he foysteth in the word Coun­cill for a flourish, but indeede, hee meaneth the Pope alone: for if the Pope be aboue all Councils, and may establish or disanull their decrees at his pleasure, then is not hee with a Councill, but without a Councill the chiefe Iudge.

33. Gregory of Valence is more plaine By the Church (saithGreg. de Valent. disp. Theol. tom. 1 dis. 1. q. 1. p. 1. & Anal. fid. p. 136. he) we meane her head: that is to say, the Romane Bishop, in whom resideth the full authority of the Church: the Iesuite Coster, af­ter he hath discarded the Scripture from being Iudge, because it is, Res sine anima & sensu, in varias pugnantes (que) sent entias Cost. Enchir. de sum. Pontif. distracta: A thing without life and sense, distracted into di­uers and contrary opinions, saith, that Penes Ecclesiā Cathelicā est indicium veritatis, The iudgement of the truth is belong­ing to the Catholike Church, but because the whole Church cannot meete together in one place, without great inconue­niences. Therefore God hath appoynted and nominated one man, to wit, the Pope, to whom he hath so tyed his presence and spi­rituall grace, that in question [...] of faith he doth neuer erre. Gret­zer Colloq. Rat. Ses. 1 saith, that the generall; lawfull, and ordinarie Iudge of con­trouersies, is the Bishop of Rome, whether hee define any thing alone, or with a Generall Councill, this Iudge is always infallible. Staplet on saith, that the foundation of our Religion is placed of Staplet. praefat. princip. fid. doct. Iob. de Turr. li. 3. cap. 64. necessitie vpon the authority of this man [...] teaching, in whom wee heare God himselfe speaking. And another of them saith, Si to­ [...]us mundus sententiaret contra Papam, If the whole world should determine against the Pope, yet we must stand to his sentence. ToIn Sext. extrau. Ioh. 22. tit. 14. & dist. 19. in Ca­non. & gloss. conclude, the Canon Law saith, that it were heresie to thinke, that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as hee doth, yea, that his rescripts and decretall Epistles are not Canonicall Scrip­ture.

34. Thus we see, the Pope is that which they meane by the Church: and he is the onely compendious Iudge: and there­fore [Page 148] when they talke of the Church, it is but a vayne vaunt; for when all comes to all, they entend nothing by the Church, but their Lord God the Pope, as the Canonists call him: who is ens secundae intentionis compofitum ex Deo & homine, Extrau. in Ioh. 22. Ioh. Capist. de Pap. et Eccles. authorit. Abeing of the second intention, compounded of God and man, and quasi Deus in terris, &c. as it were a God vpon earth, greater then man; and lesse then God, hauing the fulnesse of power. Now by this that hath beene said, the truth of my second proposi­tion doth euidently appeare; to wit, that the Romanists will allow no other Iudges in matter of controuersie, but them­selues alone, and so giue iust cause to all that are not blinded with errour, at least to suspect their Religion, if not vtterly to abandon it, which is the conclusion necessarily following vpon these premises.

35. Which, that it is of most necessarie consequence, ap­peareth by this, because it is against all reason, that the same should be both the party and the Iudge: yea, in equity is it fit, that we should stand to his iudgement, whom we accuse to be a falsifier of the Scripture, and euen Antichrist himselfe? or that that Church should bee our Church, which wee af­firme and proue to be an Apostate, and an harlot? seeing that a Iudge should be indifferent and vnpartiall, and not a party: as the Church and Pope of Rome is in all cases of controuersie depending betwixt them and vs; as for example in the con­trouersie of the Church, the question being which is the true Church. The Iudge to determine thereof, we say, is the Scrip­ture: they cry, The Church, meaning their owne Church, as I haue shewed. Doe they not by their doctrine aduance them­selues into the tribunall seate, and make their Church the Iudge, whether it bee the Church or no? so in the question touching the Popes Supremacy, who shall be Iudge whether this supreme power be in the Pope or no? Mary the Pope himselfe, for they admit no other Iudge. Sure he must needes gaine the cause, when hee is thus his owne Iudge. If this bee not a plaine terg [...]ue [...]s [...]tion, I know not what is: if this doth not bewray the weakenesse of their cause, let any indifferent man consider and giue sentence.

[Page 149]36. For as on ourside in the question of the Kings Supre­macie, whether euery King in his owne dominion bee the su­preme Gouernour of the Church vnder Christ or no: if wee should in this case admit no Iudge, but the King himselfe: Or in the question of our Church, whether wee be the true Church of Christ or no: if wee should refuse all other triall, saue that which ariseth from the iudgement of our owne Church, and the Bishops and Prelates thereof; would not all men laugh at our folly, and thinke our cause weake and des­perate? So may all men thinke of the Romish Religion, that it be wrayeth manifest folly in the maintayners, and apparent weakenesse in the grounds thereof, in that it will not bee iud­ged but by itselfe, especially seeing it is the property of selfe­loue, whereof no man liuing is freed, to make men blinde in their owne causes, and partiall on their owne sides. To con­clude therefore, as the Lion in Esope, that challenged to him­selfe the whole prey that was caught, and would not stand to the equall partition of his fellow-hunters, proued him­selfe thereby to be a tyrant, and his title naught: so the Pope of Rome, and his Proctours, in refusing to be iudged by any saue themselues, and by that right clayming a title to the truth, discouereth both his tyrannie ouer the Church of God, and the holy Scriptures, and the badnesse of his weake cause; seeing truth like a chaste matrone, though it be slandered, yet is so bold and powerfull, that it feareth not to bee tried by those that are the greatest enemies thereof.

MOTIVE. VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to bee suspected, which doth purposely disgrace the sacred Scriptures: But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome: Ergo, &c.

OVr Aduersaries may fitly be likened to churlish and an­grie Mastifes, whose property it is to rend with their teeth those that are vnarmed, and not able to resist: but if they meet with an armed man, that can keepe them off and [Page 150] entertaine them with sharpe blowes, then they wreak all their teene vpon the cudgell or weapon wherewith they are an­noyed: so they seeing themselues well banged and beaten by our men at Armes, I meane, our Champions that defend the quarrell of our Church, with the staffe of the Scripture, and their hairy scalpes wounded with the stones fetcht out of Da­uids scrip, fall a snarling and biting the staffe, and the stones which haue beene the instruments of their sorrow; whereas if they finde any without a staffe in his hand, or a stone in his sling, that is vnfurnished with Scripture to fight with them, ouer him they domineere, & take him captiue, and leade him to their denne for a prey. This their malice against the sa­cred Scripture, which is the only engine of their destruction, I hope by Gods fauourable assistance so to discouer in this Chapter, that they themselues shall euer bee reputed as blas­phemers of the truth, and their religion as odious and abo­minable to all posterity.

2. The Maior or first proposition in this demonstration,MAIOR. though it bee of an vndoubted truth, yet for the greater illu­stratio: thereof, two poynts are to be considered: first, what this Scripture is, which is opposed against: and secondly, what they are to be esteemed which oppose themselues vnto the Scripture. The Scripture contained in the Olde and new Testament, is, in a word, the holy and sacred word of the eter­nall God: which to haue said of it, is an ascription of the greatest dignitie vnto it, as can bee deuised: for if it bee the holy and sacred word of the eternall God, then must it needs be perfect. excellent, pure, vpright, cleane, permanent, wife, sweet, and what else may be spoken for the setting forth of the excellency of a thing: all which attributes are giuen vn­to it by the Prophet Dauid, in the 19. Psalme, and doe neces­sarilyPsal. 19. appertaine vnto it, being immediately deriued from that cleare and sole fountaine of all goodnesse and perfecti­on: For howsoeuer the holy Prophets were the penne-men thereof; yet those were all and in euery parcell and particle inspired by the Holy Ghost, as Saint Peter informeth vs, when hee said, That no Prophecie in the Scripture is of any pri­uate 2. Pet. 1. 20. 21. motion, but that holy men of God spake as they were mooued [Page 151] by the holy Ghost. For as the heathen Oracles were conceiued, and vttered by the immediate instigation of the Deuill, who guided both the hearts and tongues of his Priests, to bee the instruments of his malice: So the Oracles of Christians, to wit, the holy Scriptures, proceeded from the sacred inspirati­on of Gods Spirit, mouing the hearts, and directing the pens of the Prophets & Apostles his Secretaries, to commit to wri­ting that only which they receiued from God, both in respect of matter and manner. To this purpose is that notable saying of Hugo, In the holy Scripture, whatsoeuer is taught, is truth: Hugo de anima. whatsoeuer is commanded, is goodnesse: whatsoeuer is promised, is happinesse: And he addes the reason; Because God is truth, without deceit; goodnesse, without malice; and happinesse, with­out misery.

3. I need not stand to prooue this position, That the Scrip­ture is the infallible word of the eternall God: it is a groun­ded truth, and a receiued principle of all that professe them­selues to be Christians. And as Saint Basil saith, Like as of e­ueryBasil in Psa. 115 Science there are [...], vnquestionable Prin­ciples which are beleeued without further demonstration: so in the Science of Sciences, Theologie. This is one of those vn­questionable principles, that the Scripture is the word of God, and therefore of diuine both purity and authority. Adde hereunto, that if any should doubt thereof, the purity and perfection of the matter, the maiestie and the statelinesse of the stile, the power and efficacy ouer the conscience, the cer­taintie of Prophesies fulfilled in the duenesse of time, the strangenesse of the miracles, the antiquity of the writings be­fore all other, the admirable prouidence of God in preseruing them from the teeth of time, and rage of Tyrants, the sweet harmony & consent of euery part with each other, the iudge­ments of God against the contemners therof, and lastly, the bloud of so many thousand Martyrs which hath beene shed in the defence thereof, doe sufficiently conuince and proue, that this Booke is the Booke of GOD, and euery line and title therein, the Word of God.

4. This being so, then secondly it must needs follow, that [Page 152] either to denie the Scripture to bee the Word of God, or to abuse it with vnreuerent termes and reproches, or any wayes to diminish the credit and authority thereof, is not onely plaine blasphemy, but also open and notorious Atheifme; and so in both high treason against the Maiestie of God: for, if it be treason to vse contumelious speeches against the Kings person, or either by word to reuile, or by deede to resist his decrees and proclamations: how much more doth that de­serue the name of the highest treason, when the sacred word of God, which is a diuine Law, issuing from his owne mouth, is blasphemed, and the maiestie of God most clearely shining, therein abused? It is an olde and a true saying in ciuility, Qui contemnit legem, contemnit Regem: He that despiseth the Law, despiseth the law-giuer. So much more then in Diuinitie, hee that reprocheth the word of God, reprocheth God him­selfe. How can they then bee lesse than Atheists, Blasphe­mours, and Traytours to God, that are guilty of all this iniu­rie to the holy Scripture?

5. Celsus, against whom Origen wrote, and Lucian, and Por­phery, and Apelles, were Whelpes of this Litter; and there­fore remaine to this day branded with the note of infamy: to these succeeded many others in after-ages (for the world hath neuer beene without such monsters, God permitting them for the further demonstration of his truth, and declaration of his iust iudgement in their deserued and strange destruction:) yea, that which is most strange, many of those that haue vaun­ted themselues for Christs Vicars here on earth, haue beene taynted with this infection, as Pope Leo the tenth, who (as Writers report) mocked at the promises and threats of theBalaeus. Scripture, and told Cardinall Bembus, that that fable of Christ had brought vnto him and his, great profit. Such another was Iohn the twelfth, who vsed to blaspheme God, and call vponCuit. prand. li. 6. [...]as [...]cul. tempor. Stella. Platina. the deuill at his dice: and Iulius the third, who asked why he should not bee as angry for the eating of a colde Peacock, as God was for the eating of an Apple? And Benedict the eight, alias the ninth, whose custome was in Woods and Moun­taines, to sacrifice to the deuill: and diuers others, which for [Page 153] breuity sake I forbeare to name. Is it possible that such A­thiests, and blasphemous wretches, and worshippers of de­uils, should be chosen of Christ to be his Vicars here on earth, to whom hee might commit the gouernment of his Church? Will a mortall man commit the gouernment of his family, especially if he loueth his wife and children, to a knowne Ruf­fin and a notorious villaiue? Now Christ so loueth his family, his Church, that to purchase and redeeme it, hee gaue his owne pretious bloud, for a ransome for it: and will hee now ordaine in his roome such notorious Wolues, to bee the mi­nisteriall heads and guides thereof? As for the rest of the Po­pish crue, both learned and vnlearned, though they bee, as I must needes confesse, for the most part, more infected with superstition, then with Atheisme, (albeit neuer did any Coun­try more swarme with that generation, then doth Italy at this day) yet in blaspheming and debasing the holy Scripture, they cannot be farre from, not onely giuing-way, and ope­ning a wide dore to that horrible sinne, but also from making an open profession thereof.

6. Thus we see both what the Scripture is, and also what they are that oppose against the Scripture: which two consi­derations serue much for the clearing of the first proposition. Now I come to the confirmation of the assumption or secondMINOR. proposition, which euery Romanist will denie in this argu­ment, and therefore stands in neede of stronger fortification: the proposition is this, that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth purposely disgrace the holy Scriptures, and is at enmity with it: that is, that both by doctrine, practice, and bitter and blasphemous speeches, the holy Scripture is dis­graced, defaced, and vilely slandered by the chiefe professours and maintayners of that Religion, yea, and by the grounds of the Religion it selfe. I will begin with their doctrine, and secondly come to their practice, and in the last place their slanderous and bitter speeches shall be discouered.

7. Amongst many of their doctrines, whereby they offer open iniurie and wrong to the sacred Scriptures, these foure are the most principall: First, that which hath beene at large [Page 154] discoursed in the former Chapter, touching the chiefe Iudge of controuersies: for, when as they disable the Scripture from that office, and exalt the Church, that is, the Pope, as I haue shewed, into the highest throne of iudgement, what doe they else but debase the Scripture, in subiecting it to the Popes wil, and making it a vassall to wayt vpon his pleasure, and giuing a greater certainty and infallibility to the determinations of his mouth, speaking out of his chayre, then vnto the infalli­ble and certaine light of truth, shining in the Scriptures? This is open wrong to the Scriptures, and not onely to it, but also to the Spirit of God, the Author and Enditer thereof; for, they which set vp the Pope as an all-sufficient and most com­petent Iudge, and pull downe the Scripture as non-suffici­ent and incompetent, as the Romanists doe, doe they not ad­uance the one, and disgrace the other? as on the contrary, we which ascribe all con [...]petencie of right, and sufficiencie of power to the Scripture, and denie the same to the Pope, doe we not disgrace him, and aduance it? This is the difference in this poynt betwixt them and vs, and their Religion and ours: and that men may see how little estimation they haue of the Scripture compared with their Pope, though the Pope be a man vtterly vnlettered, & ignorant euen of the grounds of Grammar, much more of the grounds of Diuinitie, as someBaron. Glaber. Ro­dulph. Spondan. Annal. Eccl. s. an. 1033. Balaeus. of them were: though he be a childe of tenne yeeres of age, as Bennet the ninth, or a mad Lad not past eighteene yeeres old, as Iohn the twelfth; though he be an Atheist, as was Leo the tenth, or a Coniurer, as Iulius the third: Lastly, though hee were a man destayned with all manner of filthy and lewd conuersation, as a number of them were: yet his iudgementIf quatenus ho­me, he goe to hell, what will his quatenus Papa doe him good? Baldus. must bee heard and preferred, because (forsooth) quatenus Papa, as he is Pope, he cannot erre, though quatenus homo, as he is a man, hee be an Heretike, or an Atheist, or a wicked wretch: or because Papa est doctor vtrius (que) legis authoritate, non scientia. The Pope is Doctour of both lawes in authority, and not in knowledge: And thus by their Religion, the holy and sa­cred Scripture must giue place, and bow the knee to an vn­holy, sacrilegious, and ignorant Pope oftentimes, and ac­knowledge [Page 155] him as Iudge, and submit it selfe to his sentence and censure.

8. The second doctrine of theirs, whereby they disgrace and wrong the Scripture, is that touching the insufficiency and imperfection thereof: for they are not ashamed to say that the Scripture is imperfect and vnsufficient of it selfe, and that in it are not contained all things needfull to saluation, but that a great part. yea, the greatest part of true Religion, is grounded vpon tradition, without the which the Church of GOD could not bee sufficiently instructed, either in faith or manners: this is their goodly doctrine: whereas we on the o­ther side hold and maintaine, that the Canonicall Scripture containeth in it sufficiently, plainely, and abundantly all do­ctrines necessary to be knowne, for the attainment of saluati­on,Iraen. li. 3. ca. 1. Orig. hom. 1. in Ier. com. in Rom. ca. 3. hom. 25. in Mat. Athan. con. Gen. & ido. & in syn. Basil de confes. fid. & Ep. 80. ad Eustath. Chryso. hom. 1. in Mat. hom. 3. in 2. Ep. ad Thes. &c. Cyr. li. 12. in Ioh. cap. 68. Tert. con. Hermo. Cypr. Epi. 74. ad Pomp. Aug. de doctrin. Christ. ca. 9. & li. 1. cont. lit. Petil. cap. 6. Hier. com. in Ep. ad tit. ca. 1. & com. in ca. 1. Hag. Bell. de verbo Del, l. 4. ca. 4. Terent. Eunuch-Whitaker. Chemnit. Morton. whether they be positions of faith, or directions for god­linesse: and that thereis no neede of any vnwritten traditi­ons, for the suppliance of any want or defect which is found therein. And herein we haue not onely all the ancient Fathers of the primitiue and purer times of the Church our Abbet­ters, as Iraeneus, Origen, Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostome, Cyril, Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine, Hierome, as you may see in the places quoted in the Margent: but also the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures, plainely and directly affir­ming the same.

9. That this imputation of imperfection and insufficiency is layd by them vpon the Scripture, let vs heare themselues acting their owne parts: and first Bellarmine the Ringleader. He in his fourth Booke De verbo Dei, and fourth Chapter, sets downe this position, that the Scriptures without traditions are not simply necessary nor sufficient: and throughout that whole Chapter doth nothing else but labour to prooue the same by many arguments and reasons, as if hee were not content barely to affirme so high a blasphemy, but euen (as the Poet sayth) Cum ratione insanire, To be madde with reason: and so are all his reasons there vsed, in very deed mad reasons, which my purpose is not to spend time in confuting, (that being suf­ficiently performed by our great and learned Champions of [Page 156] the truth, which as yet remaine vnanswered: onely it is i­nough for my intent to discouer to all men his notable blas­phemy against the holy Scriptures, which not onely in that place, but in many other, euidently and impudently sheweth it selfe.

10. Next vnto him comes in another great Iesuite, Grego­rie Greg. de Valent. Anal. fid. l. 8. c. 6 de Ʋalentia, and he playeth his part, and sayth, That the most fittest way of deliuering the doctrine of faith to the Church, was this, not that all should bee committed to writing, but that some things should be deliuered viua voce, that is, by tradition. But Cardinall Hosius more plainly and boldly affirmeth, That Hosius confess. Petric. ca. 92. the greatest part of the Gospell is come to vs by tradition, and that very title of it is committed to writing: Yea, it is reported of him, that he should say, Melius actum fuisse cum Ecclesia, si nullum extaret scriptum Euangelium, That it had beene better for the Church, if there were no written Gospell extant. O blas­phemy! and yet wisely spoken, if so be by the Church, hee meaneth the Church of Rome, as without doubt hee doth. But let vs heare another of the same stampe Eckius, I meaneEckius Enchir. cap. 4. that peremptory Bragadochio, he steps forth, and shoots his bolt in a moment, The Lutherans are dolts (sayth hee) which will haue nothing beleeued but that which is expresse Scripture, or can be prooued out of Scripture: for all things are not deliuered manifestly in the Scriptures, but very many are left to the deter­mination of the Church. Coster another Stage-player of theirsCost. Ench. ca. 1. comes in, and diuides the word into three parts, to wit, That which God himselfe writ, as the tables of the Law; that which he commanded others to write, as the Olde and the New Testament; and that which he neither writ himselfe, nor rehearsed to others, but left it to themselues as traditions, the decrees of Popes, and Councils. And then he concludeth blasphemously, that many things of faith are wanting in the two former, neither would Christ haue his Church depend vpon them, but this latter is the best scripture, the Iudge of controuersies, the Expositor of the Bi­ble, and that whereupon we must wholly depend. His words are these, Omnia fidei mysteria, ccaeera (que) credita & scitu necessaria, [...]n corde Ecclesiae sunt clarissimè exarata, in membranis tamen tam [Page 157] noui quam veteris Testaments multa defiderantur: that is, All the mysteries of faith, and other things necessary to bee beleeued and known, are most clearely engrauen in the heart of the Church, but in the leaues of the Olde and New Testament, many things are wanting. What can be more plaine? Yet Lindanus is more plaine, for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam, &c. The vn­written Lindan panopl. lib. 2. cap. 5. tradition, that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes, and the true touch-stone of true & false doctrine, and the A [...]acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes, and in conclusion, the very foundati­on of faith. To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a cōpa­nion in blasphemy, who saith, That many things belong to Chri­stian Canus loc. lib. 3. cap. 3. faith, which are contained in the Scripture, neither openly nor obscurely. To conclude all in one summe, without any fur­ther repetition of priuate mens opinions, wherein much time might be spent, the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent, is this, That traditions are to bee re­ceaued, Concil. Triden. Sess. 4. pari pietate, with the same reuerence and affection, wher­with wee receiue the Scripture it selfe. Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome, touching the insuffici­ency of the holy Scripture, both in part and whole. Out of all which, these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise: First, that traditions vnwritten are equall, if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God: and se­condly, that without the helpe of them, it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life, or to the end of our faith in the life to come: then both which, what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self, or to the Maiestie of that Spirit, from whom it proceeded? And that their blasphe­my might be known [...]o all men, Bellarmine, more like a Iuli­anBel. deverbo Dei, l. 4. c. 4. then a Christian, doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect, but also not simply necessary, and to that end he maketh a good round discourse, and bringeth in long Leaden arguments, which indeed are not worth the answering, for they are meere sophisticall collusions, as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne. Neuerthelesse, by this we may see, what an honourable opinion and affection [Page 158] these fellowes beare towards the Scripture, when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary, but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God.

12. The third iniurious doctrine, whereby open disgrace3. is offered to the holy Scripture, is concerning the authority thereof, compared with the Church: for this they teach and hold, That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church, and not the Church vpon the Scripture. And so by consequent, that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church, and not the Church to the Scripture: whereas we on the contra­ry affirme and defend, that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture, and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture, and not the Scripture vp­on the Church.

13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be dis­cerned, if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church, to wit, not the Primitiue Church, which was in the time and im­mediatelyCanus loc. lib. 2. cap. 8. Stapl. doct. princ. li. 9. c. 12. & 13. after the Apostles, but the succeeding and present Church: and that not the whole Catholicke Church, which is dispersed ouer the world, but the Church of Rome, which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ: and in this Church, not the whole body, but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill: yea, and lastly, not the Councill neither, but the Pope, who is totus in toto, all in all, and in whome all the members meete, and resolue themselues as lines in the center, as is before declared. This is their Church: and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures, euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome, that is, God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man. For as Nil [...] the Archbishop ofNilus de caus. d [...]ss. lib. 1. Thessalonica saith, To accuse the Scripture, is to accuse God, so to debase the Scripture, is to debase God.

14. That wee may see this to be true, and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge, heare them speake in their owne words, and let Bellarmine leade the Ring, If we take a­way Bell. de effect. sa­cram. li. 2. ca. 25. (saith he) the authoritie of the present Church, and of the Councill of Trent, then the whole Christian faith may bee called [Page 159] in question: for the truth of all ancient Councils, and of all poynts of Omnium Conci­liorum, & dog­matū firmitas. faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome. Marke, he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture, but of the present church of Rome; where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church, before the Scripture, & not onely of the Church, but of the Church of Rome, as if there were no Church but that: and not the Church of Rome; as it was, in the purer and primer times, but the present Church cor­rupted, and depraued with infinite errours. Againe, in ano­ther place he concludeth, That the Scriptures doe depend vpon Bell. li. 4. de not. Eccles. ca. 2. the Church, and not the Church on the Scriptures: which po­sition he confesseth in the same place, to haue beene in other places maintained by him. And yet elsewhere he disclaimethIdem de concil. author. li. 2. c. 12. this opinion as none of theirs, and calleth it a blasphemy: that it is his, I haue shewed already, though he be ashamed of it as he may well be, and therefore exore suo, by his owne iudgement, he, and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie. But that you may see that it is the generall re­ceiued doctrine of them all, for the most part; heare others as well as him, vttering their spleene against the Scriptures. Siluester Prierias saith, that Indulgences are warranted vnto Silu. Prier. cont. Luther. conclus. de potest. Papae. vs not by the authority of the Scripture, but by the authority of the Church, and Pope of Rome, which is greater. And againe, That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome. Eckius saith, that the Scripture Eckius Ench. de author. Eccles. resp. 3. ad obiect. Haret. Pighius de Hier. Eccles. li. 1. ca. 2. was not authentical, but by the authority of the Church: and put­teth this proposition among hereticall assertions, The autho­rity of the Scripture is greater then the Church. Pighius also af­firmeth the same, that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth neces­sarily depend vpon the authority of the Church: and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne, Scriptuarij, that is, Scripture­men, or such as maintaine the Scripture. Cardinall Hosius go­ethHos. lib. 3. de au­ther. Scriptur. further, and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus, as a godly saying, That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables, without the testimonie of the Church: and addeth presently of his owne, that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scrip­ture, [Page 160] it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliue­redCoclaeus replicat. cont. Bul. c. 2. Canus. loc. l. 2. c. 8. Staplet. Doctrin. Princip. l. 9. c. 1. Andrad. defens. Trid. Concil. l. 3. Canis. catech. cap. 3. sect. 16. Bel. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 12. Andrad. Staplet. by Coclaeus, by Canus, Stapleton, Andradius, Canisius, and generally all other of that side that handle that question.

15. Onely to palliate the matter, they bring in a distincti­on, to wit, that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is, quoad nos, in respect of vs, not qu [...]adse, in respect of it selfe, and declaratiuè, for declaration sake, not ef­fectiuè, as the cause thereof: which distinction first implieth a contradiction, for the authority of a thing is quoad extra, in respect of others, not quoad intra, in respect of it selfe, that is, ra­ther to be termed dignitie and excellencie, then authority: se­condly, that being granted, yet it importeth a falshoode in them, and concludeth directly our purpose, for by it the last resolut on of our faith should not bee into the Scripture, but into the authority of the Church, which is contrary both to truth, and to their owne principles. For why doe they attri­buteMulbusin. Resp. ad Par [...]um, de cript. author. thes. 33. that infallible authority to the Church, but because the Scripture saith so, as they themselues acknowledge? And then to affirm that the Church is of greater authority in re­spect of vs, is sufficient to [...]uince, that in respect of vs, they pre­ferre the Church before the Scripture. What is this, but to offer open iniury and disgrace to the holy Scripture, especial­ly, seeing a Iesuite of their own is bold to say, that a man may mordicus tenere, and propugnare acerrimè▪ strongly hold, & stout­ly Sacrob [...]sc def. Bell. par. 1. c. 6. maintaine a doctrine contrary to the word of God, and yet bee no Heretike, vnlesse the opposite to that opinion, be defined by the Church in his time?

16. The fourth and last doctrine whereby they offer iniu­rie4. to the Scripture, is this, That the Pope may dispense with the Law of God. This the Popes vassals do not onely affirme,Michael Medin. Christian. par [...]n. lib. 7. cap. 17. Abbas Panorm. extra. de diuort. cap. [...]in. Fel [...]. de consti­tut cap. statut. canon. but euen confirme and auouch. For thus they teach, Potestas in diuinas leges ordinariè in Romano Pontifice residet, Power ouer the lawes of God remaineth ordinarily in the Pope of Rome: and that the Pope may dispense against the Apostles, yea, against the new Testament vpon great cause, and also against all the precepts of the olde Testament. The reason whereby they confirme this braue doctrine, is this, that where the reason of the law faileth, [Page 161] there the Pope may dispense, but the reason of the law always faileth, where he iudgeth it to faile, (for speaking definitiuely, he cannot erre) therefore the Pope may dispense with the pre­cepts of the Olde & New Testament, where, and when he list. Now, what can be more iniurious to the Scripture then this? for first, they set the Pope aboue the scriptures, because he that taketh vpon him to dispense with the law of another, chal­lengeth to himselfe a greater authority then the other, accor­ding as their owne rule is, In praecepto superioris non debet dis­pensare Anton. par. 3. tit. 22. [...]. 6. inferior, The inferiour may not dispense with the comman­dement of the superiour. Secondly, they equall him to God himselfe, for whereas there is no exception nor exemption from the law of God: but this Nisi deus aliter voluerit, Ex­cept God otherwise appoynt, they instead thereof put in this ex­ception, Nisi Papa aliter voluerit. And lastly, they make the law of God a maimed & an imperfect law, in that (as their di­uinity is) it cannot giue sufficient direction to mans life, for practice of duties and auoyding of sinnes, in all cases, without the Poprs dispensation, and the interposition of his superwise authority.

17. From their iniurious doctrines, l [...]t vs come to their malicious practice against the Scripture, that both by their precepts and practice, their enmity to the Scriptures may ful­ly appeare. First therefore, whereas the language wherein the Scriptures were originally written, is indeed the true Scrip­tures, because that is the immediate dialect of the holy Ghost, and the translations of it into other tongues, are no farther to bee regarded then as they agree with the originall; yet the Church of Rome, in the Councill of Trent, hath canonizedConc. Trident. Sess. 4. the vulgar Latine aboue the Hebrew and Greeke, and hath [...]n [...]oyned it onely to be vsed in all readings, disputations, ser­mons, and expositions, and not to be reiected vnder any pre­tence whatsoeuer, vpon paine of Anathema. Yea, Bellarmine, Bell. de verb [...] Dei, lib. 2. with the rest of that crue, accuse the Greeke and Hebrew, of many corruptions, and iustifie the vulgar Latine aboue them, as most free from corruptions: whereas notwithstanding, for one corruption which they would saine fasten vpon them, [Page 162] there are to be found twenty in this, and that by the confessi­onLind. de opt. gen. interp. lib. 3. of many learned of their owne side.

18. Besides, those corruptions which are supposed to be inM [...]lin. in 1. Tho. page 399. Poss. Bibl. select. lib. 3. ca. 6. the originals, are either none at all, as may easily be prooued, and is already sufficiently by our learned Diuines: or else such as are not of that weight to derogate from the perfecti­on of the Scripture in things pertaining to faith and goodPoss. ibid. Sixt. Senen. Bibl. sanct li. 8. p. 318 manners; as Posseuine and Sixtus Senensis confesse, or at least are but errours of the Writers, which no Booke is free from, growing either from humane infirmity, or from the mistaking of the letters in the Greeke, and prickes in the Hebrew; which last is but a late inuention of the Massorites, and no essentiall part of the Text: whereas on the contrary, the errours which are extant i [...] the vulgar Latine, are many of them contrary to the grounds of faith: as that one for all, in the third of Gene­sis, where the Latine readeth, ipsa conteret caput tuum, she shall bruise thy head: which they apply vnto the Virgin Marie, being in the originall ipse his, and in the Septuag [...]nt [...], that is, Hee, vnderstanding Christ our Sauiour. Here wee see a fundamentall poynt of saith ouerthrowne, not onely in ac­commodating a Prophecy of Christ vnto the Virgin his mo­ther, but also in ascribing vnto her the worke of our Redēpti­on, signified by the bruising of the Serpents head. And as in this, so in many other places, which I willingly for breuitie sake [...]uerpasse. And yet for all this, by their doctrine and practice, their Latine Translation is onely authenticall. Yea, so impudent is a Bishop of theirs, that setting forth the Bible in diuers Languages, he placeth the vulgar Latine betwixt the Hebrew and the Greeke, as Christ betwixt two theeues, as blas­phemousl [...] [...]. Bibl. [...]olo. he speaketh. This is therefore a notable iniuricus practice of theirs against the Scripture.

19. To which adde second, no wh [...]t inferiour to the for­mer, [...]. which [...] their forbidding the Scripture to bee translated into the mother tongue of euery Nation, to the end that it may be to the common people as a Booke sealed vp, and that they might not reade, nor be exercised therein. This prohibition is both contrary to the practice of all the Saints of God, both [Page 163] vnder the Law and the Gospell, for it was their daily exercise to meditate vpon the Law of God continually, and to search the Scriptures, whether those things which they heard were so or no, and to the plaine precept of Christ, and the ApostlePsal. 1. [...]. Deut. 6. 7. 8. 9. & 17. 18. 19. Acts 17. 11. Iohn 5. 39. Col. 2. 16. Origen in Mat. [...] Nazian. hom. 4. dom. Epi [...]n. C [...]il contra Iul. lib. 7. Hier. in Psal. 86 Chryso. hom. 5. in Laz. & 9. in Epi. ad C [...]l. & 2. in Mat. & 10. in Iohn. Lactan. Inst. l. [...]. cap. 21. Isidor. li. 1. de sum. b [...]n. Fulgent. ser. de confess. Anselm. com. in Ephes. 6. August. de doct. Christ. li. 2. c [...]. 5. Origen vt supr [...]. Peres. de tradit. page 44. Thyrrae. de d [...]m. ca. 21. Thes. 257 Hosius de expres. verb [...] Dei. bidding vs to search the Scriptures, and to haue the word of God to dwell plentiously in vs: and to the doctrine of all the ancient Fathers, who with one consent exhort and perswade to the diligent reading of them, as may appeare by the places quoted in the margent: And beside, is most iniurious to the Scriptures themselues: for to restraine a common good to a particular vse, is an open wrong to the good it selfe, which the more common it is, the better it is, and the lesse common, the lesse good; for bonum est sui diffusiuum, good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe, and therfore the restriction there­of is violence and force offered to the nature of it, and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned, but loueth liberty. This is true in all naturall, good, and true things, but much more in this supernaturall good, and truth, which as Origen [...] well no­teth, was not written for a few▪ as Platoes Bookes were, but for the people and multitude, yea, for the veriest Ideots, and women, and children, as the Fathers affirme.

20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the rea­ding of the Scripture among the people; one of them affir­ming, That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible: Another, That he knew certaine men to be pos­sessed of the deuill, because being but Husband-men, they were a­ble to discourse of the Scriptures: All teaching, that it is the ground of Heresie, and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs: and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them, and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans, or a knife in a Childes hand. Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells, or Monkes cloysters, which were giuen by God, to be the light of the world: and yet (which is to be noted) in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies, such as could dis­pend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare, might reade the Bible, without any speciall dispensation; as if heresie builded [Page 164] her nest rather in the brest of the poore man, then of the rich, or, as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore: and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their plea­sure, being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes, whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae, because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures, but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light.

21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture, as the two former were against the letter, that nei­ther the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated: and this is in respect of the learned, to bar them vp from con­trouling their errours, as the other were in respect of the sim­ple, to keepe them from once looking into them. Their poli­cy in this, is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scrip­ture, saue such as agree with the Church of Rome, and are al­lowed by the Pope of Rome: this is the interdiction of the Councill of [...]rent, and is grounded vpon a false interpretati­onConc. Trid. Sos. 4 of that article of our faith, I beleeue the Catholike Church: for, as Stapleton saith, The literall sense of that article is, that Stapl. des. Eccle. potast. aduers. Whit. li. 1. c. 9. Hosius de ex­presso verbo dei. thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and tea­cheth. And Cardinall Hosius, If any man haue the interpretati­on of the Church of Rome, though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture, notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei. Now, by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church, or rather the Romane Bishop, as I haue shewed: for as Siluester sayth, The power of the Ca­tholike Sum. Syluest. verb. [...]ides, nu. 2. Staplet. prae [...]. Doctr. princ. fid. Church remaineth onely in him. And as Stapleton, The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching: and therfore one [...]aith, that the Pope may change [...]he Gospell, and giue to it according to place and time, Henri. mag. sa [...]r. [...]alat. adiegat. [...]. Cardia. S. Angeli ad legat. B [...]em. another sense: Yea, a blasphemous Cardi [...]all is b [...]ld to say, That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man, and the P [...]pe thought the same, he should not be condemned. This is a tricke p [...]ssing all other, whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture, that it neuer doe them hurt, but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof, vnto their fond and foolish fancies, and make it speake, not what the [Page 165] Holy Ghost intendeth, but what they imagine. Nay, they areCusan. ep. 2. 3. 7. so impudent as to say, That the Scripture is fitted to the time, and variably vnderstood, the sense thereof being one while this, and another while that, according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement. Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is?

22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then4. all the rest, & that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wre­sting out of the holy Scripture, a sense contrary to the true in­tendment of the place, & fitting it strangely to their own pur­pose. This is a practice of theirs so cōmon, as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish inter­pretations, and so ridiculous withall, that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh, if he were aliue. I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions, that the Rea­der may haue a taste of them, and so iudge of the whole caske.

23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible, Genes. 1. 16. It is written, God created two great Lights, the greater to rule the day, and the lesser to rule the night: that is (saith In­nocentius Innocent. 3. ad Const. Imper. cap. solit. de maior. Molin. tom. 1. de Iust. & iure. the third, one of their owne Popes: And also Mo­lina the Iesuite, God ordained in the Firmament of the Catho­like Church two dignities, to wit, the Pontificiall dignitie, and the Regall: But that to gouerne the day, that is, the Spiritual­ty, and is the greater: and this to rule the night, that is the Carnalty, and is the lesser; so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne, and the Moone, so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome, and a King, that is, according to the Glosse vpon the same place, seuen and fiftie times. So in the 3.Gloss. in ca. solit. de maior. of Genesis, whereas the words of the Text are plaine, Hee shall breake thy head, or tread vpon thy head, which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah, they contrary both to the Hebrew, and Septuagint, translate and expound it, Ipsa, She shall: applying vnto the Virgin Mary, that which properly belongeth vnto Christ, euen the worke of our Redemption. And this interpretation and translation of that place is appro­ued by the Councill of Trent, in approuing the vulgar LatineConc. Trident. Bellarm. Bible for authenticall: and by Bellarmine also, who calleth it [Page 166] a great mysterie, that in the Hebrew, a verbe of the Masculine gender, is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine; to signifie, that a woman should breake the serpents head, but not by her selfe, but by her sonne: and is also so translated by our Doway Transla­tours in English.

24. So againe, that place in the Psalme, Psal. 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice, and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon: Pope Alexander the third in­terpreted it of himselfe, and the Emperour, applying the pro­miseNaucler. Gen. 40. made to Christ principally, and in him to all the Elect, vnto himselfe as Pope, and vnderstanding by the Aspe and Cockatrice, Lyon and Dragon, the Emperour Frederick, vp­on whose necke hee set his foote, vsing those words, and all other Kings and Emperours: and to proue that he so vnder­stood the place, when as the Emperor disdayning this pride, made answere, Not to thee, but to Peter: the holy Father treading on his necke, replied; Et mihi & Petro, Both to mee and to Peter. Which storie, though it bee branded by Baro­nius with the marke of a fable, yet it is auouched by a full Iurie of witnesses, and especially two, Gennadius the Patri­arkeGennad. in cens. [...]rient. annot. in cap. 13. sect. 6. Girolam. Bardi. Ʋittor. Naual. impres. anno 1584. of Constantinople, and a Venetian Historian that liued about that time: which last onely differeth in the Popes al­ledging of the Text, for he makes the Pope, to say, not in the second person, thou: but ambulabo, I will walke vpon the Lion and the Adder. Againe, they interpret that place of Esay 49. 23. They shall worship towards the face of the earth, and licke the dust of thy feete, as a Prophecie of the Popes sublimi­tie. For, saith Turrian the Iesuite, Where is this verified, butTurrian. cont. Sadoel. pag. 14. in the kissing of the feete of the Bishop of Rome? and yet who knoweth not, that this is nothing else, but a manifest predi­ction of the glory of the Church, and the conuersion and subiection of Kings and Princes to the Religion of Christ? What a wresting of Scripture call you this? Are not these strange interpretations?

25. But yet heare them which are more strange and ridi­culous: In the 28. of Esay, 16. verse wee read, Behold, I will I [...]y 28. 16. lay in Sion a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure [Page 167] foundation. This all know, being taught by the interpretation of S. Peter, 1. Pet. 2. 6. is to be vnderstood of Christ only and1. Pet 2. 6. Bel. praefat. de Rom. Pontif. none other; yet Bellarmine vnderstands by this tried precious corner stone, not Christ, but Peter, that is, as he saith, Sedes Romana, The Roman Sea. Againe, we read, Iere. 26. 14. Behold, Ier. 26. 14. I am in your hands, doe with mee as you thinke good and right. This Text Bonauenture alledgeth, to proue, that Christ is inBonauent. in ex­posit. missae cap. 4 the Priests hands at the Masse, as a Prisoner, not to bee let goe, till he haue payd his ransome, that is, till he haue giuen remission of sinnes, contrary to the manifest sense of the place, Hosea 1. 11. We read, that the children of Iudah and Is­rael Hosea 1. 11. shall be gathered together, and appoint themselues one head, answerable to that, Ioh. 10. 16. There shall be one fold and one Ioh. 10. 16. Iob. de Par. de potest. Reg. & Pop. cap. 3. Bel. de Rom. Pon. lib. 1. cap. 9. shepheard, which places properly appertayning to Christ and his Church, are ordinarily and blasphemously alledged, to proue, that the Pope is the head of the Church. Againe, Cant. 5. 11. His head is as fine gold. And Cant. 7. 5. Thy head is like the mount Carmel. One of which is the speech of the Church to Christ, and the other of Christ to the Church: but Bellar­mine Bel. ibid. interprets the first to be spoken Christ, and the second of the Pope. These be his words: The Bridegrome compareth the head of his Spouse to mount Carmel, because though the Pope be a great mountaine, yet he is nothing but earth, that is, a man: and the Bride compareth the Bridegromes head to the best gold, because the head of Christ is God.

26. But let vs come a little to the new Testament: are they any thing more shie and cautelous in this then in the olde? Heare and then iudge. Matth. 28. 18. our Sauiour saith to his Disciples, All power is giuen vnto me in heauen and earth. This in the booke of Ceremonies, is expounded ofLib. Ceremon. tit. 7. Concil. Later. sub Leon. Decim. Luk. 22. 38. the Pope; and also by Stephen the Archbishop of Patauy, in the Councill of Laterane, Luc. 22. 38. the Apostles say vnto Christ, Behold two swords: and he answered, It is sufficient. By this place of Scripture, Boniface the eighth challenged to himselfe both temporall and ecclesiasticall authority, because Christ said two swords were sufficient, and bade Peter not castBel de Rom. Pontif. l. 5. c. 7. away one of them, but put it vp into the sheath. This expo­sition [Page 168] flat contrary to the meaning of the Text, was not only deuised by a Pope, but also approued by Bellarmine, and Mo­lina Molin. lib. 1. de [...]ure. tract. 2. dis. 29. Balb. lib. de co­ronat. the Iesuite, and Balbus with diuers others, though (I con­fesse) reiected by Stella, Maldonate, and Arias Montanus. But what are these to a Pope that cannot erre, and to such an Emminent Cardinall as Bellarmine is? So likewise, they ex­pound that Text, Matth. 17. 24. Solue pro te & me, Pay for Math. 17. 24. thee and me: To signifie, that Christs family hath two heads, to wit, Christ and Peter, because they two onely payd, and that Peter was chiefe ouer the rest of the Apostles, because none of the rest payd: as if paying of tribute was a signe of preeminence, and not rather of subiection, as Iansenius ex­pounds it. So Baronius alledgeth that of Act. 10. 13. Arise, Roffen. in Art. art. 25. Act. 10. 13. Bel. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 19. Baron. Epist. ad Papam. Roffen. assert. Luther. confut. cap. 17. 1. Pet. 4. 8. Pro. 10. 12. Peter, kill and eate, to proue the Popes power to excommu­nicate the Venetians. Kill, that is, excommunicate, and eate, that is, bring them to the obedience of the Church of Rome. This is goodly stuffe indeede: sure they stand in neede of ar­guments to proue their cause, that are driuen to these silly shifts. So our Country-man Fisher, to proue iustification by workes, alledgeth that Text of S. Peter, 1. Pet. 4. 8. Loue coue­reth the multitude of sinnes, which he expounds thus, that loue expiateth and purgeth away the guilt of our sinnes in the sight of God, contrary to the direct sense of the holy Ghost, Pro. 10. 12.

27. It is a wonder to see, how both Bellarmine and all the Patrones of Purgatory wring and wrest the Scripture, to vnderprop the Popes Kitchin: The Scripture cannot name fire and purging, but presently there is Purgatory, as Esay Esay 4. 4 & 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. Zachar. 9. 11. Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. 4. 4. and 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. nor a lake where there is no water, but there is Purgatory, as Zachar. 9. 11. nor things vnder the earth, Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. but there is Purgatory: and yet they themselues confesse, that they know not whether it be vnder the earth or no, because the Church hath not yet de­fined where it is. And Bellarmine bringeth in eight diuersBel. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 6. opinions, touching the place of Purgatory: but two of their expositions touching Purgatory, I cannot ouerpasse, left I should depriue the Reader of matter of laughter in the midst [Page 169] of this serious discourse, and them of commendation of wit; for they are witty aboue measure: the one is, Mar. 13. 34.Mark 13. 34. where it is said in a Parable, that a certaine man going intoChemnit. exam. de Purga. p. 130 a strange Country, leaueth his house, and giueth authority to his seruants, and commandeth the Porter to watch. This man going into a strange Country, signifieth the soule (say they) which by death departeth out of this world: his leauing authority with his seruants, signifieth, that he commandeth his executors, to procure with his goods the prayers & suffrages of the Church, whereby he may be freed from Purgatory: hee commandeth the Porter to watch, that is, he giueth part of his goods to his Pastor, that he may diligently sacrifice for him by saying Masse. Who can doubt of Purgatory, that is thus authentically proued? The second place is in the 8. Psalme 7. Thou hast put all things Psal. 8. [...]. vnder his feete, fowles of the ayre, that is (say they) the Angels in heauen, beasts of the field, that is, the godly in this life, and fish of the Sea, that is, the soules in Purgatory. Here is a proofe of Purgatory worthy the noting.

28. And thus much for a taste of their false and foolish ex­positions; these being not the hundreth part of them, which are found in their writings. Let all men iudge now, whether these men deale well with the Scriptures or no, and whether they be friends or enemies to the sacred word of God, & the Spirit of God that animateth it, that dare thus wretchedly abuse it at their pleasures, and wring it like a nose of waxe, into any shape to make it serue their purpose. Erasmus pla­cethEras. encom. Moriae. that Frier in the Ship of fooles, that being asked what Text he had in the Scripture, for the putting of Heretikes to death, produced that of S. Paul, Tit. 3. 10. Haereticum hominem Tit. 3. 10. post vnam aut alteram admonitionem deuita, that is in true con­struing, Shunne an Heretike after the first or second admonition: but he construed it thus, De vita supple tolle, that is, Kill an Heretike after, &c. This fellow by Erasmus opinion, was worthy of a Garland, or rather of a Cockscomb for his witty exposition: and so was he also, that being asked where hee found the Virgin Mary in the olde Testament, answered, In the first of Genesis, in this Text: Deus vocauit congregatio­nem [Page 170] aquarum Maria. But I must not be so sawcy with Popes and Cardinalls. I iudge them not therefore, but leaue them to the iudgement of God.

29. Their last practice against the Scriptures, is their adding to and detracting from it at their pleasure, whatsoeuer either distasteth their Pallate, or may seeme to make for their profit: which notwithstanding hath a wo denounced against it. AndDeut. 4. 2. Reuel. 22. 18. Fel. de maior. & [...]ed. c. fin. this practice is grounded vpon a rule, Papa potest tollere ius diuinum ex parte, non in totum, The Pope may take away (say they) the lawe of God in part, but not in whole; and if hee may take away, then may he adde also: for the same reason is of both, and one is as lawfull as the other; for adding, marke their practice, the Councill of Trent, together with most of theCon [...]. Trid. Ses. 4. Popish Doctours, adde vnto the Canon of the Scripture, the Apocrypha Bookes of Iudith, Wisedome, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, Bell. de verbo Dei, li. 1. ca. 10. Machabees, remainders of Ester, and Daniel: and curse all them that are not of the same minde: and yet the Iewes before Christ, who were the onely Church of God at that time, and Scriniarij Christianorum, as Tertullian callsTertullian. them, or depositarij & custodes eloquiorum Dei, as Tollet theTollet com. in Rom. 3. 2. Iesuite names them, that is, The keepers and treasurers of the holy Scriptures, and to whome were committed the Oracles of God, Rom. 3. 2. These Iewes, I say, neuer admitted of these Books as Canonical, and the Fathers for the most part, though they held them Bookes profitable for instruction of manners, yet dispunged them out of the Canon, as not of sufficient au­thority to proue any poynts of faith, as is confessed by Bellar­mine Bell. de verbo Dei. li. 1. cap. 10. & 20. Canus lo. l. 2. c. 10 himselfe, in some sort, naming Epiphanius, Hilarius, Ruf­finus, and Hierom, and by Melchior Canus, nominating be­sides the former, Melito, Origen, Damascene, Athanasius, accompanied with many other Diuines, as he saith: and be­sides, the Bookes themselues, by many pregnant proofes de­riued out of their owne sides, doe be wray that they are not of the same spirit the Canonicall Scripture is of.Ioh. Bale in vita eius. Dist. 19. cap. in Canonicis Rubrie.

30. Againe, they adde to the Scriptures thei [...] Decretals and Traditions. Innocentius the third, commanded the Canon of the Masse to be held equall to the words of the Gospell, and [Page 171] it is in one of their Bookes, Inter Canonicas Scripturas decre­tales Epistolae connumerantur, (that is) The Decretall Epistles are numbred among these Canonicall Scriptures. As for Traditions, I haue shewed before, that it is a decree of the Councill of Trent, that they are to be receiued with as great affection of piety and reuerence, as the written Word of God. Againe, they adde vnto the Scripture, when they take vpon them to make new articles of faith, which haue no ground nor foo­ting in the Scriptures: for vnto the twelue articles of the Apo­stles Creed, the Councill of Trent addeth twelue more, as may appeare in the Bull of Pius the fourth, in that publikeBull Pij 4. super form. Iuram. profes. fid. profession of the Orthodoxall faith, vniformely to be obser­ued and professed of all: And when they adde vnto the two Sacraments ordained by Christ, fiue other deuised in the forge of their owne braines: and those two also, they so sophisti­cate with their idle and braine-sicke Ceremonies, as the Eu­charist with eleuation, adoration, circumgostation, and such like trumperie, and Baptisme with oyle, and spittle, and salt, and coniuring, and crossing, &c. that they make them rather Pageants to mooue gazing, then Sacraments for edifying: and thus most wrongfully they adde vnto the Scripture, euen what they themselues list.

31. As for their detracting and taking away, they shew themselues no lesse impudent, for they haue taken away the second Commandement, as appeareth in diuers of their Ca­techismes and Masse-bookes, because it cutteth the throat of their Idolatry wholly out of the Decalogue: and to make vp the number of tenne, they diuide the last Commandement in­to two, contrary to all reason and authority: Yea, so impu­dentVasq. li 2. disp. 4 ca. 4. nu. 83. & cap. 7. nu. 115. Azor. Inst. mora. part. 1. li. 9. ca. 6. Cathar. opusc. de Imagin. Con. Trid. Ses. 1; Catha. adu. No­ua. Dogma. Ca­iet. pa. 1. & inde. are they, that two famous Iesuites, Ʋasques and Azori­us doe boldy affirme, that this second precept which forbid­deth worshipping of Images, was not of the law of nature, but onely a positiue Ceremoniall and Temporall Iniunction, which was to cease in the time of the Gospell: and in the Eu­charist, whereas Christ ordained the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud in two kindes, they notwithstanding depriue the people of the cup, and will haue it administred to them but in [Page 172] one kind: Yea, Cardinall Caietane, as Catharinus testifieth ofCatha. adu. No­ua. Dogma. Ca­iet. pa. 1. & inde. him, cut off from the Scripture, the last Chapter of S. Marks Gospell, some parcels of Saint Luke, the Epistle to the He­brews, the Epistle of Iames, the second Epistle of Peter, the second and third of Iohn, and the Epistle of Iude: and yet this mans writings were not disallowed in the church, as con­taining any thing contrary to wholesome doctrine, and hee himselfe acknowledged to bee an incomparable Diuine, and the learnedst of all his age: and thus wee see both the doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome, against the Scripture.

32. To the which if we adde their open blasphemies and horrible reproches wherewith in plaine downe-right blowes they rent and teare in pieces, or at least-wise besmeare and defile these holy writings, then their malice against them will bee knowne to all men, and there will bee no vizard left to maske it withall. To conclude therefore, some of them call the Scripture a dumbe Iudge, some a dead Letter, and without Pigh. hiearch. l. 1 cap. 2. cont. 3. Sal. com. in epist. Turr. con. Sadeol. Cost. Enchir. de Sum. Pontif. Peres. de tradit. praefat. Cens col. pa. 112. & Pigh. cont. 3. Hosius de autho. Eccles. lib. 3. Bell. de ver [...]o Dei, lib. 4. ca. 4. Eckius Enchir. a Soule, others, dead Inke, others, a Nose of Waxe, to be wrea­thed this way, or that way: others say, that it is no better then Aesops Fables, without the authority of the Church: all of them ioyne in this, that it is not simply necessary, that it was written not to rule our faith, but to be ruled by it, and that Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any Scripture, and that it is subiect and inferiour to the Church: all these, and many other bitter and blasphemous speeches they belch out against the Scripture: whereby they plainely bewray their cankred hatred against the Scripture; and all because they finde it contrary to their humour, and an enemie to their Religion.

33. Thus the Minor proposition in this demonstration is, I hope, sufficiently prooued, to wit, that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth professedly disgrace the holy Scrip­ture, as both by their doctrine, their practice, and their blas­phemous speeches against it, doth manifestly appeare: and so the conclusion is of necessary and vndeniable consequence, that therefore it deserueth to be suspected and reiected of all [Page 173] those that professe themselues to be friends to the Scripture, and hope from it either consolation in this life, or saluation in the life to come.

MOTIVE. VII. That Religion is to be abhorred, which maintaineth, comman­deth, and practiseth grosse and palpable Idolatry; but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome: Ergo, &c.

WHen I consider the fearefull Idolatry of the Church of Rome, which for that cause is called The Whore of Babylon, and The Mother of fornications, Reuel. 17. 1. 2. IReuel. 17. 1. 2. cannot choose but wonder, that any should be so bewitched with the sorceries of this Iezabel, or made drunke with the wine of her fornication, that they should take her marke vp­on their forheads, and right hands, and ioyne with her in her abominations: and not rather come out of her with all speed, as they are admonished by the Angell, lest they bee partakers in her sinnes, and haue a share also with her in herReuel. 18. 4. plagues: but then againe, remembring that which S. Paul faith, that the comming of Antichrist should be in all deceiuea­blenesse of vnrighteousnesse, and that God should send vpon2. Thes. 2. 10. 1 [...] them strong delusion to beleeue lies: I turne my wondering at their sottishnesse into the admiration at Gods Iustice and Truth: the one in punishing their contempt of his Gospell, with such a giddinesse of spirit: and the other in making good his owne word after such an euident and manifest man­ner, that there by it most clearely appeareth, that the Pope of Rome is that Man of sinne, and Sonne of perdition there spo­ken of, euen that Antichrist which exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God, and sitteth in the Temple of God, as if he were God. As this appeareth in many grosse errors which they hold, so in none more, then in the horrible idolatry pra­ctised and preached, & defended in this Antichristian Church; of which I may truely say, as Plutarch said of the heathen,Plutarch in vit▪ Romul. that they mingle heauen with earth, because they made Gods of [Page 174] men, & men of Gods: So these, whilst they giue diuine worship to earthly creatures, as the crosse & pictures of Christ, and to the Saints in heauen; or attribute earthly affections, to hea­uenly creatures, make a plaine mixture of heauen and earth, spoyling the Creatour of his honour, due vnto his Dietie, and adorning the creature therewith; and ascribing that vnto men, which is onely proper vnto God. That the Church of Rome is guilty of this impiety, I hope by Gods grace so to proue in this Motiue, that no Iesuite (though neuer so sub­till) shall bee able with any shew of sound reason to hisse against.

2. The first proposition in this Argument, though it be ofMAIOR. so euident a truth, that it needeth no further demonstration, yet because S. Paul saith, that an Idoll is nothing in the world, and thereupon, some may peraduenture conclude, that Ido­latrie is a matter of nothing, and a small and triuiall sinne: I will therefore very briefly shew the greatnesse and haynous­nesse of this sinne, and how odious and abominable it is in the sight of God. As touching therefore that phrase of Saint Paul, An Idoll is nothing, it is not to bee vnderstood, either in respect of matter, for euery Idoll hath a materiall being,Exod. 32. 4. and subsisting, as the matter of the Calfe, which the Israelites made in the Wildernesse, was gold, and of the brazen serpent,2. Reg. 18. 4. which was abused also as an Idoll, was brasse, and of those Idols, which the Prophet Esay declameth so against, wereEsay 44. 10. Bel. de Imag. lib. 2. c. 5. Caiet▪ in loc. wood: nor yet in respect of forme, as Bellarmine and Caie­tane would haue it. As though the Apostle should meane thus, that an Idoll, though it hath matter, yet it hath no forme, that is to say, is the representation of such a thing as hath no being in nature: for many of the Idols of the Gen­tiles were of such things as truly were: but the Apostles mea­ning is, as Tertullian obserues, and many other, both of an­cientTertul. de core. milit. cap. 7. and late Writers, that an Idoll is nothing in respect of that which it is intended to bee, that is, that it is no God, nor hath any part of the Diuinitie in it, which deserueth to bee worshipped: or that it is nothing in regard of efficacie and power, that is, as the Psalmist speaketh, is not able to doe ei­ther [Page 175] good or bad, to hurt, or to helpe; to saue, or to kill: and this interpretation is authorized by S. Augustine and S. Chry­sostome, Chrysost. hom. 20. in Epist. 1. ad Corin. Aug. cont. Faust. Manich. l. 20. c. 5 the one saying thus, There are Idols indeede, but they can doe nothing, neither are they Gods: the other thus, Sunt Idola, sed ad salutem nihil sunt, There are Idols, but they auaile nothing to the attaynement of saluation: and it is also appro­ued by many other Expositors, both ancient and moderne Protestants and Papists, and is most agreeable to the whole current of the Text. This then that S. Paul saith, That an Idoll is nothing, is both so farre from extenuating the sinne of Idolatrie, that it aggrauateth the same, and also so farre from clearing the Church of Rome from the guilt of that crime, that it rather layeth a greater stayne thereof vp­on it.

3. As for the greatnesse of the sinne, it may appeare by three considerations; first, of the precept: for there is no one commandement of the Law so frequent in the whole Scripture, and so strictly vrged, and mounded and fenced a­bout with so many reasons, as that is against Idolatrie: as we may see in the Decalogue. Secondly, in respect of the pu­nishmentExod. 20. 2. 3. 4. denounced against, and inflicted vpon the commit­ters thereof, to wit, not onely eternall death from the iustice of God, which is the wages of all sinne vnrepented of: butPsal. 97. 7. 1. Cor. 6. 9. Apoc. 21. 8. Exod. 22. 20. Deut. 17. 5 6. also temporall death from the iustice of man, as being vn­worthy to breathe this common ayre, or to tread vpon the earth, that thus sinne against the Maiestie of God: and that not onely the worshippers of Idols themselues, but they that should entice or perswade any to Idolatry: The executionDeut. 13. 5. of which Lawes, wee see put in practice vpon the Israelites, Gods owne people, in the 32. of Exod. and 23. of Numbers. Thirdly and lastly, in respect of the nature of the sinne: which is first a senslesse sinne, full of folly, contrary to the very lightPsa. 115. 15. 16. Esay 44. 9. 19. of reason and nature, as both the Prophet Dauid and Esay at large proue. And secondly, a sinne, full of impiety, because they that worship an Idoll, worship the Deuill, as S. Paul af­firmeth, 1. Cor. 10. 20. And lastly, a sinne most opposite to the1. Cor. 10. 20. glory of God, and consequently sooner procuring the ven­geance [Page 176] of God, then any other; for it is called in the Scrip­ture spirituall forn [...]cation and adulterie, because the IdolaterEsay 57. 7. 8. Ier. 3. 6. 7. Ezech. 16. 15. forsaketh God, and prostituteth himselfe to an Idoll, and that in Gods presence. And therefore as corporall fornica­tion is the onely cause of diuorce betwixt man and wife: so this sinne onely causeth God to diuorce himselfe from his Church, and to take from her all her ornaments and Iewels, that is, his Word and Sacraments, and to giue her ouer into the hands of her enemies. Thus the greatnesse of this sinne of Idolatry, is manifest, and from thence I may conclude my first proposition, that that Religion which maintayneth and commandeth this sinne, so full of folly, impiety, and contra­riety to God, is worthy not onely to be suspected, but euen abhorred, and detested of all men.

4. But let vs come to the examination of the second pro­position,MINOR. to wit, whether the Church of Rome bee guilty of this great sinne or no. The Romanists mainly denie it, as they haue great reason: for if their Religion bee proued to main­taine Idolatrie, they know that it must needes fall to the ground: and therefore they deuise all manner of shifts, to de­liuer themselues from this imputation. But we on the other side confidently affirme it, and that the world may see, wee doe it not without great reason, wee confirme our affirmati­on with this strong argument: Whosoeuer ascribeth diuine honour to any creature, is an Idolater: but the Romanists ascribe diuine honour to many creatures, therefore they are Idolaters: and lest any should thinke this to bee the errour of priuate persons, and not the heresie of their Religion, I adde vnto the Minor, that all the Romanists doe this from the very grounds of their faith, and that in so doing, they are warranted from their Religion it selfe.

5. They deny both the Maior and Minor proposition in this argument, and in denying them, especially the Maior, they giue iust cause of vehement suspition, if not of plaine de­monstration, that they are guilty of the crime whereof wee accuse them: for if a thiefe standing at the barre, being ac­cused of a robbery by the high way side should answere that [Page 177] to take money from a man by the high way side at Noone­day, was not theft, all men would thinke that hee was guilty of the robbery, and so the Iurie would finde him: then cer­tainely the Romanists, by denying this to be the true definiti­on of Idolatry, which is propounded in the first proposition, bewray their owne guiltinesse, and giue vs more cause to sus­pect them, then we had before.

6. But let vs heare their shifts: they principally are two, one of Bellarmine, the other of Ʋalentia, two maine posts in the house of Popery. Bellarmine would faine vndermine this proposition (to giue to creatures diuine honour, is Idolatry) by aBell. de Eccles­triumph. l. 2. c. 5. distinction betwixt an Idol and an Image, affirming that an I­mage is the similitude of a thing that hath a true being, but an Idol of a sained thing, that indeed is not: and therevpon he seemes to conclude, that to ascribe diuine honour to some I­mages, is not Idolatry, because euery Image is not an Idoll. In the proofe of this distinction he labours much, and profits little: for like the heedlesse fish, hee leapes out of the Fry­ing-pan into the fire, and tyes the knot faster which he would seeme to vntie: for first, all the Idolatry of the Church of Rome consisteth not in worshipping of Images, but in many other things, as shall appeare in the Discourse following. Second­ly, if to worship the Image of a true thing, be not Idolatry, then the Gentiles were not Idolaters in worshipping the I­mage of Iupiter, and Mars, and Diana, and Romulus, and Aesculapius, and the Sunne, because (as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth) all the Idols of the Gentiles were the statues of Ibid. cap. 8. Aug. cont. Faust. lib. 20. cap. 3. men. And Saint Augustine also affirmeth, That the Gentiles did worship those things which were in being, but were not to bee worshipped: and then the Israelites did not commit Idolatry in the Wildernesse, when they adored the golden Calfe, nor was that Calfe an Idoll, contrary to the expresse Text of Scrip­ture, Acts 7. 41. because it was a representation of a trueActs 7. 41. Exod. 32. 5. thing, namely, of the true Iehouah, as it is euident, Exodus 32. 5. Thirdly, let it be graunted, that an Idoll is onely the similitude of an imaginary and fained thing; yet will not this acquite them of Idolatry, seeing they worship in the Ro­mish [Page 178] Church, the Images of things which either neuer were, or were not such as they are taken to bee, as the Image of S. Katharine, and Saint Christopher, and Saint George, and such others: the truth whereof they are not able to proue by any approoued Historie: Nay it is confessed, that many are wor­shipped in the Church as Saints, which are tormented in hell fire for their sinnes. This shift therefore of Bellarmine, to wipe off the blot of Idolatry, is but a silly one, and blurres them more then they were before.

7. Gregory de Ʋalentia labours to creepe out at anotherGreg. de Valent. de Idol. li. 2. ca. 7. hole, to wit, not by a distinction, but by addition: for hee would adde vnto the definition of Idolatry these words, sicut Deo, as to God: and so Idolatry should bee not a giuing of diuine honour to a creature, but when it is so giuen to the creature, as vnto God. Wherein, as he vnmannerly crossethBell. de Eccl [...]s. triumph. li. 2 c. 5. his fellow Iesuite, in calling the Images of Christ, Idols, and saying, that they are to bee worshipped, latria, with diuine honour, the one whereof Bellarmine simply and absolutelyGreg. de Valent. quo supra, & li. 1. cap. 5. denyeth, and the other he alloweth, but [...], respectiuely; so likewise [...]e crosseth reason, Scripture, Fathers, and conse­quently all sound diuinity.

8. For Reason: If an adulteresse woman being taken in b [...]d with another man, should excuse her selfe thus, I am not guilty of adultery, because, though I lent the vse of my body to a stranger, yet I did it not to him as vnto my husband: would this excuse her? no, it would rather adde vnto her crime. So the Romish harlot, committing spirituall fornica­tion with her Idols, when shee goeth about to colour her crime with t [...]is vermillion, I giue diuine honour indeed to I­mages, but yet not as vnto God. What doth shee else but adde car [...]all impudency vnto spirituall vnchastitie? A filthy stopple for a more filthy bottle. Besides, which is more vn­reasonable, he maketh things to be of a contradictory oppo­sition, which are one and the same in nature: for to giue di­uine honour to the creature, is not Idolatry (saith hee) but to worship a creature as God, is Idolatry: whereas in verie [Page 179] truth, to giue diuine honour to a creature, is to worship that creature as God; and to worship a creature as God, is no more nor lesse, then to giue diuine honour vnto it, as any man of vulgar sense may easily discerne.

9. Scripture: for if none were Idolaters, but they which accounted the Idols which they worshipped, to be very Gods: then were not the Israelites Idolaters, when they adored the golden Calfe in the Wildernesse: nor the tenne Tribes, whenExod. 32. 1 Reg. 14. 1. Reg. 18. 19. they offered sacrifice to Ieroboams Calues at Dan, and Bethel: nor the Iewes, when they bowed the knee, and bu [...]nt Incense to the Image of Baal; for they did not esteeme these Ima­ges as very Gods, but in them the two former worshipped the true God, and the latter the God of the Sidonians, which was the same: and yet all these are condemned as Idolaters1. Cor. 10 7. 1 Reg. 4. 9. le [...]. 7. 9. in the Booke of God: nay, many of the Heathen them­selues were to be freed from Idolatry; as the Athenians, who on that Altar which was dedicated to an vnknowne God, worshipped ignorantly the true God, which made the world,Acts 17. 23. Acts 19. 27. [...]. proae [...]. com. in Epist. ad Epocs. M [...]nut. Foelix in Octa [...]. F [...] us [...]n Act. cap. 17. Ca [...]et. n [...]. part. Tho. q. 25. art. 3. Ambras in [...]pist. ad Ephes. ca. 5. Aug. de Trinit. lib. 1. cap. 6. Aqui. in Epist. ad Ephes. c. 5. l [...]ct. 3. Tertul. in Luc. cap. 4. Cypr. ad Fortun. Greg. Niss orat. in laud. Basil. mag. Nazian. ora [...]. in Christ. Natiuit. and all things that are therein, as Saint Paul declareth, Acts 17. 23. and the Ephesians, who worshipping the great God­desse Diana, did not ascribe diuine power to the Image, which was like vnto a great pillar full of dugs, but vnto na­ture represented by that Image, or rather God the nourisher and conseruer of nature, & of all things in nature▪ and the rest of the wiser rancke of the Gentiles, who as some of the Ro­mish Writers themselues confesse, worshipped vnwittingly that same God, which was preached by the Apostles: and though they set before them diuers Images, yet their mea­ning was to worship in them the true God.

10. Fathers: for all of them with one consent define I­dolatry to be nothing else, but the attributing of diuine ho­nour to the Creatures, as Thomas Aquinas out of them all concludes, that this is Idolatry, quando honor soli Deo debitus, exhibetur creaturae, that is, when that honour which is onely due vnto God, is bestowed vpon a creature. Hee that would see the Fathers particular definitions hereof, let him reade the places quoted in the Margent, which for breuity sake I ouer­passe. [Page 180] And to conclude, to see how grosly this Iesuite doth erre from the scope of truth, and how vnaduisedly he brings in that fond addition (as vnto God) the Catechisme of theCatech. Trid. in explic. pr [...]cep. 2. Councill of Trent doth plainly affirme, that the Heathen set vp vnto God the Images of diuers creatures, & that the Israe­lites worshipped the true God in the golden Image of the Calfe. These are the two vaine eu [...]sions of these two great pillars, whose workes are approued by the censure of the Church, to bee wholly Orthodex, and to containe nothing contrary to the Catholike verity.

11. But enough of them: let vs leaue the two Cubs in their holes, and come to the hunting of the olde Foxe, the Idolatrous Church it selfe. That the Church of Rome attri­butes diuine honour to creatures, appeareth by this, because trust, and confidence, inuocation, vowes, sacrifice, adora­tion, all which are giuen by them vnto creatures, are all parts of diuine honour, and worship: For trust and confi­dence, the Prophet Ieremie so appropriateth it to the Lord,Ier. 17. 5, 7. that he denieth it to all other, Ier. 17. 5, 7. Cursed be hee that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arme, and withdraweth his heart from the Lord. And then he addeth: but, blessed bee the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is: And S. Peter more plainely, 1. Pet. 5. 7. doth bid vs, to cast all our 1. Pet. 5. 7. care vpon God. Now if all confidence, and our trust, or care, is to be reposed in the Lord, then there is no part nor piece thereof to beeb stowed vpon any creature, and that as all, so onely it belongeth to the Lord. Christ himselfe teacheth, Math. 4. 10. interpreting that place of Deut. 6. 13. and 10. 20.Math. 4. 10. Deut 6. 13. & 10. 20. for whereas Moses saith, Thou shalt feare the Lord thy God and serue him. Christ the best Expositor of the Law that euer was, himselfe being the end, and perfection of the Law, doth thus alledge it, adding this word (onely) vnto the Text, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serue: Whereby he euidently declareth, that all the parts of Gods worship are to bee restrained by this word onely, that is, that they so belong vnto the Lord, that it is sacriledge, if not Idolatry, to communicate them to any other, and so of [Page 181] inuocation, vowes, sacrifice, and adoration: the ScripturePsal. 50. 15. loel 2. 32. Rom. 10. 14. Esay 19. 21. Exod. 22. 20. Exod. 20. 5. Act. 10. 26. Apoc. 19. 10. Esay 42 5. Hier. Ezech. l. 4. c. 14. Basil. in Psal. 7. Aug. de vera Re [...] c. 53. Epiphan. haeres. 79. Ambros Rom. 1. doth ascribe them to God, as parts of his worship: and therefore by the same rule, onely to God, and none else: the reason hereof, is giuen by the Lord himselfe, Esai. 42. 5. I am the Lord (saith he) this is my name, and my glory will I not giue to any other; but his worship is his glory: therefore no part of this may be giuen to any other.

12. To this also, consent all the Fathers: Ierome saith, If we must put our confidence in any, let vs haue our affiance in God alone. And Basil, As it is meete to worship nothing beside God, so wee must fixe our hope in one God. Augustine thus. Saints are to be honoured for imitation, and not to be adored for Religi­on. Epiphanius thus. Let Mary bee honoured, but not adored: let the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost bee adored. Lastly, Am­brose determines the poynt most effectually, thus. Is any so mad (saith hee) that will giue to the Earle the honour of the King? Yet these men (marke this, you idolatrous brood of Babylon) doe not thinke themselues guilty, who giue the honour of Gods name to a creature; and leauing the Lord, adore their fellow seruants, as though there were any thing more reserued for God. This is iust your case, and therefore by the iudgement of this good Father, you stand as guilty before Gods iudge­ment seat of Idolatry.

13. But all these are but generall considerations: let vs therefore see in particular, how these parts of Gods worship, are by the Religion of the Church of Rome, assigned vnto creatures, and to what creatures they are assigned, that the Strumpet of Babylon may haue no mantle to couer her vn­cleannesse. I might here begin with the Pope himselfe, and shew how hee is made an Idoll in the Church of Rome, and worshipped as God: yea, takes to himselfe the titles of God, and suffers himselfe to be called God, and receiueth adora­tions, prostrations, and kissing of the seete from all his follo­wers:Aug. Stench. tom. 3. l. 2. de do­nat. Constant. Moscon de ma­iest. milit. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 4. as is testified by their owne corrected Canon Law, and diuers of their learned Doctours: whereby hee doth plainely shew himselfe to be Antichrist, according to S. Pauls description. I might shew also how good workes, to wit, [Page 182] almse-deedes, pilgrimages, workes of supererogation, vowed chastity; voluntary pouerty, Monkish obedience, which they esteeme the chiefest good workes, are made Idols, in that they repose the confidence of their heart, and the hope of sal­uation in them through the power of meriting, which they ascribe vnto them: as also how they turne their Sacraments into Idols, by teaching, that they conferre grace, Ex opere B [...]l. de Sacram. l. b. 2. c. 1. operato, by the very worke done: and that effectiuely, actiue­ly, and immediatly, they produce in the heart, the grace of regeneration, and iustification, which is the proper and im­mediate worke of the Godhead: but I passe ouer these, & ma­ny other things, because they admit in shew some probable exception, though no sound confutation; and I insist in those things onely, in which euery Ideot, and almost Infant, may discerne most grosse and palpable Idolatry. And those are these fiue in number, the bread in the Sacrament, Images, Reliques, Angels and Saints departed. And lastly, the Crosse and Crucifix: of which in order.

14. The blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ, ordayned for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion; and for the strengthning, and nou­rishing of the soules of the faithfull, to eternall life, is transha­ped by them into a most horrible Idoll. For this they teach and practise, that that very thing, which to all the senses, is but bread, being but lately moulded and knead by the Ba­ker, is to be worshipped, and adored with diuine worship, [...]l. de Sacram. Euchar. l. 4. cap. 29. Coster En [...]. de Euchar. Rub [...]c. in Mis­sal. Rom. because (forsooth) after consecration, it is the true and natu­rall body of Christ. And therefore at the Priests eleuation of the hoast, they all fall downe vpon their knees, and worship it with great deuotion, and expect from it forgiuenesse of their sinnes, and all manner of earthly and temporall blessings, and whosoeuer refuseth to doe this, is an Heretike.

15. Their Apologie is, that there is a reall and naturall presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament, and therefore not the bread, but the body of Christ, into which the bread is transubstantiate, is worshipped of them, and so they thinke, to free themselues. To which I answere, that if [Page 183] that were certaine, then their defence was iust, and their practice godly, and we in calling them Idolaters, for this cause should bee slanderers of the truth: but seeing the contrary is rather certaine, to wit, that Christ is not corporally in the Sacrament, but in heauen: and that the bread remayneth still true bread, both for matter and forme after consecration: they cannot be excused from notorious Idolatry, in worship­ping a piece of Bakers bread, in stead of Christ, the eternall Sonne of God: for to the outward senses, it beareth the shape, taste, figure, and colour of bread. This is certaine, and to the vnderstanding, in reason it is bread, because accidents cannot be without a substance: this is as certaine, and to faith it is bread, because the Word, which is the foundation of1. Cor. 10. & 11 saith, so calleth it, after the words of consecration, neither is there any Scripture to auouch the contrary, saue that which may well receiue our interpretation as well, yea, better then theirs, as the best learned amongst them confesse: for, Bel­larmine B [...]l de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 23. confesseth, that it may iustly bee doubted, whether the Text (this is my body) be cleare inough to enforce transub­stantiation. And Scotus and Cameracensis thinke our opinionSect. 4. d. 11. q. 3. tit. f. Cam [...]r. quaest. in 4. qu. 6. art. 2. tit. [...]. more agreeable to the words of institution: and thus they haue against them sense, and reason, and faith, and for them onely a doubtfull Exposition of two or three places of Scripture; and therefore three to one but they are guilty of Idolatry.

16. Besides, graunt that there is a reall transubstantiation of the bread and wine, into the body and blood of Christ: yet the accidents of bread and wine remaine vnchanged, and the forme and shape. Now, howsoeuer the learned may here distinguish their worship, from the outward accidents, to the inward substance; yet the common people are not able so to doe, but worship confusedly the outward accidents toge­ther with Christ contayned vnder them; and so in that re­spect, are Idolaters also: for accidents be creatures as well as substances: Yea, and Bellarmine also doth allow them so to d [...]e: for thus he writeth; Diuine worship doth appertaine to Bel. de Euchar. lib. 4. c. 29. the Symboles and signes of bread and wine, so farre forth as they are apprehended, as being vnited to Christ whom they containe. [Page 184] Euen as they that worshipped Christ vpon earth being clo­thed, did not worship him alone, but after a sort his garments also. Here is a braue straine of Diuinity, they worshipped Christ in his clothes, therfore they worshipped Christs clothes: So Christ is worshipped vnder the formes of bread and wine: therefore the formes of bread and wine must be worshipped. This is like the Asse, which bore vpon his backe the Image of Isis: and when men fell downe before the Image, he thought they worshipped him: but hee was corrected with a cudgell for his sawcinesse; and so are they worthy for their folly, that cannot distinguish betwixt a man and his garments, Christ and the signes of Christ, but promiscuously confound the worship of the one with the other. Rather therefore may we thus conclude: they which worshipped Christ on earth, did not worship his garments that he wore: therefore they which will worship Christ in the Sacrament, must not worship the outward Elements; and so it will follow, that as it had beene Idolatry in any to worship the garments of Christ: so it is in the Romanists, to worship the accidents of bread and wine.

17. Lastly, let it be supposed, that there is such a reall pre­sence of Christ in the Sacrament; yet according to the do­ctrine of the Church of Rome, no man can be certaine when it is, because it depends vpon the intention of the Priest: forSum. Rosel. verb. Lu [...]har. 3. nu. 47 Fr. Quand. 4. [...]. 13. Pro. 6. thus they teach, if the Priest should say the words of conse­cration, without intention to consecrate the bread and wine, he should effect nothing: or if hee intend to consecrate but one hoast, and there chance to be two, or more, then nothing is consecrated at all: and so the intention of the Priest, being vncertaine to the people, there must needes be an vncertaine adoration: and the Priest oftentimes intending nothing lesse, then the matter it selfe which hee hath in hand, there must needes be certaine and vndoubted Idolatry: for if the bread and wine be not effectually consecrated, as they are not with­out the Priests intention, then Christ is not really present; and so nothing is worshipped, but the bare bread: for remedy hereof, they haue deuised two poore shifts: one, that the people must adore vpon a condition, to wit, if the due forme [Page 185] in consecrating bee obserued: the other, that an actuall in­tention is not necessarily required, but onely a vertuall, that is, when an actuall intention to consecrate, is not present at the very time of consecration, by reason of some vagation of the minde, yet it was present a little before, the operation is in vertue thereof.

18. This is Bellarmines. But to the first, I answere, That though the people ought to doe so, that is, adore vpon con­dition; which notwithstanding, is a thing neuer heard of be­fore in any diuine worship, and implieth necessity of danger; yet because not one amongst a thousand doe so, hauing ne­uer heard that distinction once named in their liues, nor vn­derstanding what it meaneth, therefore they are for this ne­uer a whit freed from Idolatry. To the second, I answere, that oftentimes the Priest hath neither actuall nor vertuall inten­tion: for what intent had the Monke Bernhardine, that poy­sonedEgnat. the hoast, to the intent that he might poyson the Em­perour Henry of Lucenburgh, as he also did at the instigation of Robert King of Sicily? What intent had that Priest, thatSpondan Annal. Eccles. an. 1055. Volateran. Houed [...]n. Math. Paris. either did, or would haue poysoned Pope Ʋictor the second, as witnesseth Baronius? or those Priests that poysoned William Archbishop of Yorke? for hee was poysoned at the Masse, by the treason of his owne Chaplins: both with that, which was in the Chalice. If the Priest bee an Athiest, as many of the Popes themselues were, what intention haue they of conse­crating Christs body, when they beleeue not that Christ hath a body, or that there is a Christ now liuing in the heauens, and sitting at the right hand of his Father, to be present in the Sacrament? or what intention can they haue to doe that which the Church doth, when as they beleeue not, that there is a Church: but that all Religion is a fable, and a matter of policy? Here must needes be grosse and notable Idolatry, by their owne confession: for I argue, Ex concessis, that is, out of their owne grounds. So that we must iustly conclude, not­withstanding all their distinctions and shifts, that the Church of Rome, in worshipping the consecrated hoast, and that with such worship, as is due vnto God, is guilty of Artolatry, that [Page 186] is, of worshipping a piece of bread, in stead of God, then which, what can be more Heathenish and palpable Idolatry?

19. Secondly, wee indite them of Idolatry, for that they2. teach, that Images are to bee worshipped with diuine wor­ship: and in their practice, they giue vnto stockes and stones the honour which belongeth vnto God. For this is their do­ctrine, that the Images of the blessed Trinity, and of Christ, and of the Virgin Mary the mother of Christ, and of other Saints, are to be had and retained, especially in Churches:Concil. Trid. decret. de Imag. ijsque debitum honorem & venerationem impertiandam, and that due honour and worship is to be giuen vnto them: they be the words of the Councill of Trent. Now, what that due honour and worship is, that is a great question among them: some thinke it is the same which appertaineth to the persons whom they represent; as if it be the Image of God or Christ: then it is to be worshipped, latria, that is, with the highest degree of worship: if of the Virgin Mary, then with a little lower degree called [...], if of the Saints, then with the lowest, which they call [...], and this is the tenet of many of their Rabbies (as reporteth Vasques the Iesuite) to wit, Aquinas, Ʋide Vasq. Ie­suit. de adorat. Caietane, Bonauenture, Alexander, Coster, and diuers o­thers. Others thinke, that the Image is not to be worshipped at all: but onely the Samplar before the Image. Of this opini­on were Durandus, Alphonsus de Castro, and some others,Bel. d Imag. cap. 20. Durand. lib. 3. sent. d. 9. q. 2. Alphons. de Ca­stro. verb. Imag. but it is confuted by Catharine, and vtterly reiected by Bellar­mine. A third sort were of opinion, that Images ought to bee worshipped in themselues, and properly with a lesse honour then the Samplar: and therefore that no Image was to be wor­shipped with Latria. Of this opinion were Peresius, Cathari­nus, Sanders, Gabriel, &c. But the Councill of Trent, which is their Church, in the wordes of the decree, and Bellarmine Bel. de Imag. cap. 20. which is their chiefe champion, doe manifestly incline to the first opinion: for this is the summe of his propositions: First,Ibid. cap. 22. 23. 24. that the Images of Christ, & the Saints are to be worshipped, not onely by accident, and improperly, but euen by them­selues, and properly: so that they doe limit the worship, as they are Images; and not onely as they stand in stead of their [Page 187] patternes. Secondly, that in truth and deed, Images may be worshipped with the same kind of worship which belongeth vnto their patternes, improperly, and by accident, and so with Latria in that condition. Thirdly, and lastly, that though this be true, yet especially in the pulpits, and before the people, it isP [...]aesertim in concione ad populum. not to be said that Images are to bee worshipped with this kind of worship, but rather the contrary. Heere is excellent diuinity: the people must not bee taught the truth, nay the contrary rather, which is a lie, and that in the pulpit: beholde here a doctor of lies, and that by his owne confession, whilst he goeth about to maintaine Images, which Habacuk cal­leth,Habac. 2. 18. doctors of lies. Hab. 2▪ 18.

20. This is the summe of their doctrine. Out of all which these three conclusions doe arise. First, that the blessed Tri­nity, that sacred and incomprehensible deitie, by their do­ctrine may be pictured on a wall, and worshipped in or at an Image; yea, that such an Image ought at least improperly bee worshipped with the same worship that is due vnto God him­self: as whē they picture God the Father in the similitude of an old man, & God the Son in the likenes of a yong child, & God the holy Ghost in the likenesse of a Doue, which the Scripture in the second Commandement condemneth as Idolatrie: and that the intendment of that Commandement is not against the Images of false gods onely, as the Romanists would haue it, but also of the true Iehouah: Moses the best expounder of himselfe, teacheth most plainely, Deut. 4. 16. when hee saith,Deut. 4. 16. Take heed that you make not to your selues any grauen Image, or representation of any figure: for you saw no Image in the day that the Lord spake vnto you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire: and the Prophet Esay confirming the same exposition, saith, To whom will you liken God? or what similitude will yee set vp vnto him? Esay 40. 18. as if he should say, it is impossible to repre­sentEsay 40. 18. God by any likenesse or similitude. If they reply that they worship not the Image, but God in the Image, I answer, First, that the very Image of God is an Idoll by this Comman­dement: and therefore, the erecting of it to a religious vse, is Idolatry. Secondly, that it is false which they say, that they [Page 188] worship not the Image, but God in the Image: for their do­ctrine is contrary, as hath beene shewed, and their practice is contrary, as shall be declared hereafter. Thirdly, though it be true which they alledge, yet the worshipping of God before an Image, is Idolatry: for when the children of Israel worship­ped the two golden calues at Dan and Bethel, they were not such calues, to worship the outward calues, but God in them: and therefore the worship of them is called, the feare of Ieho­uah: 1. Reg. 17. 28. and yet they are branded for Idolaters in that respect. The like I might say of the golden Calfe in the wildernesse, and of that Image which Micha erected. Fourthly, and lastly, that theIudg. 17. true God worshipped in or before an Image, is made an Idol, because (as Saint Augustine saith) they that worship God in any other sort then he hath appointed, worship not him, but that which Aug. de consens. Euangel. lib. 1. cap. 18. they had fayned, that is, an Idoll of their owne fancy: and there­fore the Scripture saith, when the Iewes worshipped God in the golden Calfe, they turned God into the likenesse of a beastPsal. 106. 20. which eateth grasse.

21. The second conclusion to bee obserued, is, that by their doctrine the Images of Christ are to be adored with such worship, as is belonging vnto Christ himselfe, though impro­perly: and that this worship is to be bounded within the com­passe of the Image, without relation to the Samplar. By which is euident: First, that by their owne confession they are Idola­ters improperly: and secondly, that trust and confidence is to be put in such an Image, & vowes, and prayers, and sacrifices to be made vnto it: for all these are parts of diuine worship, which must be confined to the Image, and so they are not im­properly, but properly Idolaters: and then by this we may see that the caueat inserted in the decree of the Councill of Trent, is but a meere sophistication: for whereas the decree saith, that Images must be so worshipped, that trust and confidence be not placed in them: in affirming that some ought to bee worshipped with Latria, they enioyne plainely, that men should repose their trust and confidence in them: and thus they bewray the fraud of the decree, and their owne secret impiety.

[Page 189]22. The third conclusion is that same Hyperdulia, or extra­ordinary reuerence, which they say is due to the Image of the blessed Virgin; and that Dulia, or common seruice, which they assigne to the Images of other Saints, is no lesse then I­dolatry, let them extenuate the matter neuer so much by titles and distinctions; for it is religious worship: all which is dueReuel. 19. 10. and 22. 9. vnto God onely, Reuel. 19. 10. and 22. 9. The Angel would not suffer Iohn to performe any outward worship vnto him, nor so much as prostrate himselfe before him; but comman­ded him to worship God; and yet Iohn knew him to be but an Angel, and therefore meant not to giue him any thing but outward reuerence, yet he refused it vpon this ground, that all religious worship, both outward and inward, belongeth one­ly vnto God. So Mardochee the Iew refused to bow the knee to Haman the Agagite, because the honour which was giuen vnto him, was more then ciuill; for he was made a petty God: and therefore in the fragments of Hester, this reason is giuen by himselfe, I did it, because I would not preferre the honour of Hester 13. 14. a man, before the glory of God, and would not worship any but thee, my Lord: therefore, the bowing of the knee, or prostra­ting of the body after a religious manner, is due onely vnto God, and is part of diuine worship: to bow the knee, and prostrate the body after a ciuill manner, is lawfull to Kings and Princes, and others that are either exalted in gouernment, or endued with excellent gifts and graces of God; but to doe the same in a religious respect, is proper onely to God, be­cause it presupposeth the knowing of the heart, an omni-pre­sence, and an infinite power to helpe. And thus this same Hy­perdulia and Dulia, wherewith they worship the Image of the Virgin, and other Saints, is open and plaine Idolatry: and the rather, because it is seldome or neuer seuered from Latria, that is, the inward worship of the soule, which, as they say, is onely due vnto God: as by their practice more plainely shall appeare.

23. Thus we see the morrow and mystery of their doctrine discouered: now let vs take a view of their practice. And first, what worship can bee more performed vnto God, then they [Page 190] giue vnto their Images? they kneele to them, they pray to them, they vow vowes to them, they offer offerings to them, they sweare by them, they prostrate their bodies before them: let Polydore Virgill, one of their owne sworne fauorites, who would not, we may presume, speake any thing too lauishly of his owne, but rather bee sparing in their disgrace, describe their manners. Men (saith hee) are growne to that madnesse, Polyd. Virgil. de Inuent. l. 6. c. 13. that this part of piety is little differing from flat impiety: for there are very many of the rude and ignorant, which worship the very Images of wood or stone, of marble, or brasse, or pictures painted vpon the walls, not as figures, but euen as if they had verily sense, and doe put more trust in them, then they doe in Christ, or other Saints, to whom they are dedicated. Thus doth this man de­scribe the practice of their Idolatry; and much more might be found in him to that purpose, but that the Spanish Cen­sours haue taken order by their Index Expurgatorius, that he shall not doe them much hurt. But if this mans testimony will not serue the turne, let vs heare another of the same ranke, a man of great learning and iudgement, Cornelius Cornel Agrippa de vanit. cap. 57. Agrippa, who thus complaineth: The corrupt manner, and false Religion of the Gentiles, hath infected our Religion, and hath brought into the Church Images and pictures, with many vaine ceremonies of externall pompe, none whereof was found amongst the first and true Christians. Hence wee began to bring into our Churches dumbe Images, and to place them vpon Gods Altars with great reuerence, and whither we account it vnlawfull for a man, the true Image of God, to ascend, thither we translate sense­lesse Images: to them we bow our heads, giue kisses, offer lights, hang vp gifts, apply myracles, & buy pardons of them. To conclude, to them we goe a pilgrimage, to them we make vowes, them we in­wardly worship, and not only outwardly adore, neither can it be vt­tered how great superstition; that I may not say Idolatry, is nouri­shed amongst the rude and ignorant people, in Images, the Priests winking thereat, and reaping thereby no small gaine to their pur­ses. Adde vnto these Cassanders testimony, another learned man of an indifferent spirit. It is more manifest (saith he) then Cassand. consul [...]. de Imag. that it needeth any long explication, that the worship of Images [Page 191] hath too much preuailed, and that the affection, or rather super­stition of the people, hath beene too much fauoured in this regard: so that Christians seeme to be nothing inferiour to Pagans, in the adoration, which they vsed to exhibite to their Idols, and in the vanity, which they shewed in making and adorning their Images. And a little after, he bringeth in a saying of Gabriel Biell, toGab. Bielin ean. lect. 49. this effect. The blockish errour of certaine men is so great, and they are so affected to Images, that they thinke that some diuine grace, or sanctity resideth in them, by which they are able to worke myracles, and giue health: and for that cause they worship them, to the end, they might obtaine some such benefit at their hands: and their simplicity is so great, that they worship with greater de­uotion faire Images then foule, new then old, those that are ador­ned with gold and purple, then those that are naked and bare: yea, they make vowes, and binde themselues to goe a pilgrimage, now to this, now to that Church, in regard of certaine Ima­ges, supposing that greater vertues doe shine forth in one then another.

24. Thus doth this learned man, together with the two former, describe the miserable Idolatry of the Church of Rome, which is committed by the worshipping of Images. They were all three Romanists, and no doubt, but would speake of their owne fauourites as fauourably as they could; and therefore we may well imagine, that their impiety was farre more grosse, when it wrested out of their owne mouthes this plaine confession. But if a Protestant should speake, hee would tell another tale, and make them march in equipage with the Pagans in Idolatry, as Cassander after a sort con­fesseth; and that not without great reason: For first, theLactan. de fal. Relig. lib. 2. c. 20. Aug. in Psal. 113. con. 2. & in Psal. 96. Chrysost. hom. 18. in Epist. ad E­phes. Senec. q. nat, lib. [...]. cap. 45. Psal 115. Paynims, when they bowed to stockes & stones, pretended, that they worshipped not the Images, but them, after whose likenesse they were figured, as testifie Lactantius, Augustine, Chrysostome, and Seneca. Now the Romanists doe vse the ve­ry same excuse to cloke their Idolatry, that they worship not the Images properly, but God, Christ, Angels, Saints in them, and at them. Secondly, the Paynims Idols are descri­bed in the 115. Psalme, To haue eyes and not to see, eares and [Page 192] not to heare; [...]oses, and not to smell, &c. And finally, to haue no breath in their nostrils: but the Romish Images are in e­uery respect like vnto them: let them shew that their Images can heare, see, speake, smell, and goe, better then theirs, and then we will not say their Idols to be like to theirs.

25. Peraduenture they will instance in the Roode of Win­chester, Polyd. Virgil. histor. lib. 7. which in the yeare of our Lord 1475. at a solemne Councill there holden about the marriage of Priests, spake in the behalfe of Dunstane against the poore Priests, or in theHenr. Hunting. lib. 6. Baron. tom. 40. ad annum. 975. §. 12. Image of our Lady, that bade Saint Bernard good morrow, when he came into the Church, as it is reported: or in that Image of Saint Nicholas at Chester, which vsed to mooue the hand to blesse the people: or in that Image of our Lady, neere to the Abby of Ramsey, which vsed to sweat when it was offe­red vnto; and happy was he that could get any of that sweet sweat into his handkercheife, for it was of soueraigne vse for many purposes and cures: But that they begunne to be halfe ashamed of such fables, especially, seeing Polidore Virgil, a man not meanely affected towards their Religion, censured the first to be a Legerdemaine of Dunstane to worke his pur­pose, and reported that diuers others vsed to doe the same at that day. And S. Bernard in a iesting answere discouered the second, when he answered, that it was against the Canons, for her Ladyship to speake in the Church being a woman. And the Bishop of Chester discredited the third, when he manife­stedDownam de An­tich. li. 1 c. 7. pa. 102. in the open Market place, that the Image was made with such a deuice, that at the pulling of a certaine string the hand would mooue vp and downe. And the last, euery olde man and woman in the Countrie could tell to bee but a iuggling tricke of a crafty Priest, first anoynting the Image without, and then heating it within (for it was hollow) with a chafing­dish of coales, from whence grew out that soueraigne and excellent sweat.

26. Thirdly, the Paynim plants a tree, and after cuts it downe, and with one part thereof hee warmes himselfe, with another part he rosts his meate; and of the third hee makes himselfe a God, as the Prophet Esay saith, and when he hathEsay 44. 15. 16. [Page 193] done, he censeth that Image, and lighteth Tapers before i [...], and falls downe and worships it. They of the Romish Church doe the very same by their Images in euery respect. Four [...]hly, the Paynims say, that Images were Elements or Letters toAthan. orat. con. Gentes. know God by, and they vsed Images and other ceremonies to procure the presence of Angels, and celestiall powers: the Romanists say and doe the same; they say that Images are Lay-mens Bookes, and that their worship of them doth pro­cure the fauour of those heauenly things whose representa­tions they beare. Lastly, Paynims put their trust and affiance in their Idols: so doe the Romanists in their Images, as ap­peareth by the consecration of them, and their Prayers vnto them: thus they consecrate the Image of the blessed Virgin, Sanctifica, Deus, hanc formulam, &c. O God, sanctifie this forme In pontifical. of the blessed Virgin, that it may minister the succour of wholesome helpe to thy faithfull people, that hurtfull thunder and lightnings may be speedily auoyded, inundations of waters, commotion of warre, &c. may be suppressed. Againe, thus they consecrate the Image of Saint Iohn the Euangelist, Grant, that all which behold this Image with deuotion, and make their prayers before it, may be heard: for what necessity soeuer they pray, let this I­mage be a holy expulsion of deuils, an aduocation of Angels, a protection of the faithfull, &c. Why should not affiance bee placed in these Images that are thus qualified? But beare their prayers; To the Image of Ʋeronica they pray thus,

Before the famous Image of the Lady of Lauretto, menTursell. Iesuit. de virg. Laur. and women of all sorts fall downe and pray, when they are [Page 194] in any danger, or extremity: to her they go a pilgrimage, and assoone as they come neere to the Towne of Lauretto, and behold the place where the Image is, they fall downe and worship, and so they doe againe at the Temple dore, and af­ter in the Temple they humble themselues in a most seruile and base manner: by all which it is euident, that they affie and trust in the Image: as that Falkoner did, who being vp­on the gallows ready to be hanged, for suspition of conuaying away his Masters Hawke, by onely conceiuing a prayer in his heart, vnto this Ladie of Lauretto, the Hawke came gingling in the ayre, and light vpon the gallowes, and so the poore man escaped the halter. He that will reade the fiue Bookes of Tur­selline the Iesuite, concerning this Lady, shall easily perceiue that she is made a Goddesse amongst them, and worshipped with the very same worship which is due vnto God. And thus it is as cleare as the Sun, both by their doctrine and practice, that the Church of Rome by worshipping of Images, is guilty of heathenish and abominable Idolatry.

27. Concerning the Reliques of our Sauiour Christ and3. the Saints, whereof their Church hath infinite numbers, there is no lesse Idolatry committed to them, then was before vn­to Images. For first, some of them confesse, that Reliquiae eo­dem Vasq. de adorat. li. 3. dis. 4. cap. 2. modo atque imagines sunt adorandae, Reliques are to bee worshipped after the same manner as Images. And therefore if there be Idolatrie in the one, it must also be needs in the o­ther: for whether the worship be not to be restrained to the Image and Relique, but to be referred to the things whereof they are representations and parts, as the forenamed Iesuite thinkes, with some other: or whether it is to be confined to the matter of the Relique, and forme of the Image, without further relation, as Bonauenture, Aquinas, yea, and Bellar­mine Bona. 3. d. 9. art. 1. q. 4. Aquin. in 3. d. 9. q. 1. art. 1. Bell. de Imag. li. 2 [...]a. 21. himselfe, with many other, seeme to auerre: yet it is I­dolatry both waies, because in both, religious worship is gi­uen to the Creatures, in the one simply, in the other respec­tiuely, which indeed some what qualifieth the heate of the dis­ease, but doth not at all cure the roote of it.

28. Secondly, others are of opinion, that there is greater [Page 195] cause of worshipping Reliques, then Images: for (say they) a man cannot worship an Image, but his thoughts must needs be caried vp to the contemplation of him whose Image it is, but reliquia solùm adorantur ratione contactus, quo sunt quodam­modo Bona. Ibid. Aquin. Ibid. Marsil. in 3. q. 8. art. 2. Vasques de ado­ra. lib. 3. dis. 4. c. 1 sanctificatae & consecratae: Reliques are to be worshipped, onely in respect of their touching of Christ, or the Saints, by which they are after a sort sanctified, and consecrated, and therefore they may be worshipped simply by themselues, by reason of that san­ctification without Christ or the Saint, of whom they are said to be sanctified. Here the former qualification for Images is taken away from Reliques, and therefore the Idolatry is more grosse, yea, in regard of this contaction, some of them are not ashamed to say, that the very wormes of the bodies of the dead, Vasq. Ibid. l. 3. c. 8. nu. 114. are to be worshipped with a right intention, and with a sin­cere faith. Thirdly, not to stand vpon priuate opinions; the determination of their representatiue Church, the CouncillConcil. Trident. Decret. de Reliq. Sanctor. of Trent, doth proue the worshipping of Reliques to be Ido­latry: for it doth not onely condemne those which refuse to giue worship and honour to them in any respect: but euen those also, which opis impetrandae causa, To obtaine helpe by them, doenot honour them. Now hence thus I reason: to put our trust and confidence in any creature, is Idolatry: but to seeke for helpe at the Reliques of Saints, is to repose trust and confidence in creatures; therefore by necessary consequence, the worship of Reliques is Idolatry, because thereby they seeke for helpe; and so the Church of Rome is by the sentence of their owne Councill, guilty of this foule sinne: and this Councill of theirs, is guilty before God and man, of prote­cting, maintaining, and authorizing the same: a farre grea­ter guilt then the former; by how much, according to the rules of Law, the Author of a sinne is euer more guilty then the Actor.

21. Fourthly, their practice doth make this more euident: for as Cassander ingeniously confesseth, In these last times too Cassand. consult. de venerat. Re­liquiar. much is attributed to the Reliques and memories of Saints, in so much as the better sort of men, and those that were most zealous, haue placed the summe, and substance, as it were, of Religion, in [Page 196] searching out such Reliques, adorning them with gold, and Iewels, and building temples and memorials for them; and the worser and wickeder sort haue reposed false confidence in the foolish and superfluous worshipping of them. Here we s [...]e the practice both of the better and the worser sort of people, that is, indeed, of all for the most part, in the worship of Reliques; the one estee­ming it the chiefest part of Religion and piety; and the other relying wholly vpon it, as the onely meanes, for the purging away their sinnes, and so an occasion to harten them in the same, because they thinke, as long as they performe this du­tie, they may sinne freely. If any man say, that the ignorance and misdoings of some, is not to bee imputed as an errour to the Church: I answer, that it is not some, but all generally, for the most part, that are thus affected: and therefore Cassander condemnes both good and bad, as guilty of this crime. But graunt, that many are otherwise minded; yet for all that, it cannot be denied, but the greater part are in this ranke: and that is inough to proue their Church Idolatrous, because, ac­cording to the Logicall axiome, euery denomination is to be taken from the greater part; neither is it a personall errour, but a dogmaticall position deriued from the grounds of their Religion, as from the Councill of Trent, which alloweth to worship them, Opis impetrandae causa, for to obta ne helpe of them, and from the rest of their great Diuines: Some of whom would haue them to bee worshipped with the same worship with Images, some with a greater reuerence then Images ob contactum: and they that mince it finest, with a religious reuerence, which they call adoration and venera­tion: in all which is that, in a sort, either openly or couertly allowed by their doctrine, which is practised by their people.

30. But let vs search a little further into their practice. The custome of the Church of Rome, is to take the bodies, ashes, or bones of Saints out of their graues, and to adorne them with gold, and siluer, silke, veluet, and such like, and to carry them about in publike processions, and supplicati­ons, and to shew them to the people, to be touched, kissed, gazed vpon, and adored as a singular and meritorious seruice [Page 197] to God: is not this Idolatry? They teach, that God doth tye his grace and vertue to those Reliques, whereof they are par­takers, that adore them with due reuerence, and offer preci­ous gifts vnto them: yea, they promise vnto such many in­dulgences, and Pardons for sinnes. Is not this Idolatry? Againe, they teach, that their prayers are better, and more effectuall, and acceptable vnto God, if they bee made be­fore the Reliques of Saints, and therefore their practice is in times of necessity, to goe a pilgrimage to such places, where the most famous Reliques are; because they are perswaded, that their prayers shall bee there soonest heard of God: yea, they make men beleeue, that the Eucharist hath a great deale of holinesse added vnto it, if Reliques of Saints bee included within the Altar. Is not this Idolatry? They light vp candles, and set vp before them Tapers, which S. Ierome calleth Ido­latriae Hieron. Epist. ad Ripar. insignia, the Ensignes of Idolatry, and cause them to burne, euen at noone day; and that as they say, in resem­blance of the golden candlesticke, which alwayes burnt be­fore the Arke, Exod. 2. 5. but indeede rather in imitation ofExod. 2. 5. the heathen, who vsed to burne Tapers before their Images, in the Temples of their Gods: and therefore, me thinkes, it isBaruch. 6. 18. Virgil. Aenead. 1 Bel. de reliquiis, Sanct. l. 2. c. 3. strange, that Bellarmine should make this an argument why Reliques are to be worshipped, because Tapers and Candles are set vp before them: wheras rather he should conclude, that Idolatry is cōmitted before them, because of this. Againe, in their solemne oathes, they touch not onely the Bible, but the Reliques of Saints, & so deuide the religion of an oath, which is a principall part of Gods worship, betwixt God and them, against which a plague is denounced by the Prophet Ze­phany, Zephan. 1. 5. Ier. 5. 7. Opus imperfect. in Math. [...]om. 12 Zephan. 1. 5. And it is also condemned by the Prophet Ieremie, Ier. 5. 7. And a reason is giuen of it in Chrysostomes 12. Homily vpon S. Mathew: at least if it be Chrysostomes; He that sweares by any thing beside God, deifies that thing, and there­by makes himselfe an Idolater. Is not this then Idolatry? Last­ly, whereas in former times, where lesse superstition preuai­led, they placed the Reliques of Saints vnder the Altar, as Am­brose Ambros. in Epist. ad Soror. witnesseth of the Reliques of Geruasins and Protasius. [Page 198] Ille (Christus videlicet) super altare, qui pro omnibus passus est, isti sub altari qui ipsius redempti sunt sanguine. Christ was vp­on the Altar, who suffered for all, the Reliques of them vn­der the Altar, who were redeemed with his bloud: yet nowCassand. consult. de Reliq. p. 162. (as Cassander well notes) contrary to the ancient custome, their practice is to place the bodies of Saints vpon the Altars, which place is only proper for the body of Christ. Is not this horrible Idolatry? And yet Bellarmine would hence proue,Bel. de Reliq lib. 2. c. 3. that they are to be worshipped, because they are placed vn­der the Altar, because (forsooth) the Altar is to be worship­ped: but what if the worshipping of the Altar be Idolatry too, as without question it is, if the Altar be a dead creature, and a heape of stones, or wood? This is to adde drunkennesse to thirst, and to couer a filthy wound, with a more filthy plai­ster: besides, the first bringers in of that custome, though they placed them vnder the Altar in a religious manner: yet neuer meant, that they should bee worshipped by those that approched vnto the Altar, or that they did conferre any san­ctity to the Eucharist. Thus we haue a short view of their su­perstitious and Idolatrous practice in this point.

31. Fiftly and lastly, that they may be voyd of all excuse and pretext, an infinite number of their thus worshipped Re­liques, are meere false and counterfait; not true members, parts, or remainders of any Saints, but fained impostures of couetous Priests, and often the members not of men, but of baser creatures. At this day (saith Cassander) when the world see­meth Cassand. Ibid. to be full of Reliques, it may bee feared, lest vpon diligent examination, most detestable frauds and impostures be found out, as it appeared sometime to S. Martin, who found a place honoured in the name of an holy Martyr, to be the Sepulcher not of a Mar­tyr, but of a wicked Robber. This kinde of cousonage beganAug. de oper. mo­nach. cap 28. Gregor. lib. 3. Epist. &c. to spring in Augustine and Gregories times: for the one com­plaineth of certaine Hypocrites, that caried about, and boa­sted of the members of Martyrs, si tamen Martyram, if so be they were Martyrs. And the other affirmeth, that certaine Greeke Monkes being found digging vp the dead bodies of men, in a certaine field of Rome, confessed that they meant to [Page 199] carrie their bones into Greece, as the Reliques of Saints.

32. But since Popery grew to perfection, this is also growne to such a height of impudencie; that it is a wonder to heare what strange Reliques are to bee seene in the world. S. Peter being buried whole in one place, to wit, at Rome inBaron. Annal. tom. 1. & 3. an­no 69. & 324. Onuphr. de sep­tem vrb. Eccles. Bel. de Eccles. triump. lib. 2. cap. 4. Onuphr. Ibid. the Vaticane, as Baronius writeth: yet is found halfe in ano­ther; to wit, in via Ostiensi, as Onuphrius testifieth: and for all this, a part of him is to be seene at Constantinople, as Bellar­mine himselfe confesseth. Nay further, besides these three places, his head is reserued in a fourth, to wit, in the Laterane Church at Rome, by Onuphrius testimony. And besides this whole head, another piece of his head, in the Church of Saint Praxis; by the same Author: and in a fixt place, one of his iaw-bones, with his beard, is kept for a monument: this is at Poytiers in Fraunce, as witnesseth Caluine: his teeth areCaluin. admonit. de Reliquijs. not confined to his iawes; nor yet at one place, but to bee seene in many places; at Rome in the Church of S. Vincent, and Anastasius and the holy Crosse, and S. Sauiour, and S. Law­rence Onuphr. Ibid. Caluin. Ibid. without the walls: his braine is to be seene at Geneuah, at leastwise if a Pumice stone be his braine: for it is nothing else. Many of his bones are to be seene at Treuers, a piece of his shoulder at Rome in the Church of the holy Crosse, a toe in the Church of S. Praxis, and the ioynt of another in Eng­land, Eras. pereg. resig. ergo. at the Lady of Walsingham, as Erasmus testifieth; as it were of a Giants toe: these with many moe, be the Reliques of S. Peter: all which are held in great honour and worship of them. Now either S. Peter must bee a Monster, or many of these counterfait Reliques.

33. But S. Peter is not alone in this, for Christ himselfe is abused: three praepuces, or foreskinnes of his are showne,Caluin. de neces­sit. reformand. Eccles. and worshipped in three diuers places: so foureteene nailes, when as he felt but three; three coats, whereas hee had but one, and that without seame, for the which the souldiers cast losts: two titles that were set vpon the Crosse, foure poynts of the speare wherewith his side was pierced, fiue Linnen clothes, wherwith he was wrapped, and many such like trum­peries. Nay, there is scarce a Saint that is any thing famous, [Page 200] to whom they do not faine two or three bodies. Saint Bar­baries Luther. postil. in Euangel. fest. ex­alt. crucis. head is to be seene in so many places, that sure, she must needs haue beene a monster, if all those were true members. Saint Apollonia had so many teeth, being all soueraigne me­dicinesAbbas Amelm. Chemnit. exam. Concil. Trident. de Reliquijs. for the tooch-ache, that when King Edward labou­ring of that disease, sent through England, for all her teeth to be brought vnto him, two or three hogsheads could not hold them that were found out. It is reported and recorded of a certaine Relicke-monger that boasted, that hee carried about in a box some feathers of the holie Ghost. Now, another mer­ry companion stealing away these feathers, foisted in, in their roome, certaine coales: The other not perceiuing the cooze­nage, the next day began to vaunt of his holy relickes, and to shew them to the people, which stood ready by to adore them with great reucrence: but when he opened his caske, he found nothing but coales: whereat, being nothing amazed, like a skilfull Artisan, he turned Cat in the pan, and told the people, that those coales were taken from vnder the Grediron of Saint Laurence, when he was broyled to death: thus any thing will serue their turnes for relickes, when need requireth: and so more then Aegyptian is the blindnesse of the Popish crue, that they beleeue all to bee true, and take all this trash for good ware.

33. There is almost nothing that our Sauiour touched, or that touched him, or that hee had any thing to doe withall, but is turned into a Relicke: as the Manger wherein hee was laid at his birth, is to be seene in Rome at Saint Mary Ma­ior: the Linnen cloth wherein he was swadled, at Saint Paul: and another piece at Saint Sauiour in Spaine: his Cradle and the Shirt which his mother made for him, at the same place: the Pillar which he leaned vnto, when hee disputed with the Doctours, and the water-pot in which he turned water into wine, which are to be seene at diuers sundry places, to wit, at Rauenna, at Pisa, at Andegauum, and in Spaine at Saint Saui­ours, the Table which he eate his last Supper on, at Saint Iohn Laterane, a piece of the bread at Saint Sauiours in Spaine, the Knife where with he killed the Passeouer, at Treuers, the Cup [Page 201] wherein he gaue the Sacrament of his bloud to bee drunke, at Saint Maries neere Lyons, which Cup also is to bee seene a­mong the Heluians, in a certaine Monasterie of the Augu­stine Friers: so the dish wherein the Paschall Lambe was put, is visible at Rome, at Genua, and at Arles: so the to well wher­with he wiped his Apostles feet, is to be seene in Rome at S. Iohn Laterane, and yet the same is shewed at Aquae in Germa­nie, and at Saint Cornelius, with the marke of Iudas his foote imprinted in it: a piece of one of those loaues wherewith Christ miraculously fed the multitude in the desart, is yet ex­tant at Rome, at Saint Maria Noua: and another piece at Saint Sauiours in Spaine.

34. What should I speake of the Crosse found out by Hele­na? whereof, as Histories report, she gaue one part to her Son Constantine, which was placed on a porphyrie pillar in Constan­tinople: and the other part enclosed in a siluer case, shee sent to the Bishop of Hierusalem to be kept. It is admirable to see, into how many pieces and patches it is now subdiuided: one man was able to beare it sixteene hundred yeares agoe: and now sixteene men (nay, if I said a hundred, it were not amisse) are scarce able to carry the fragments of it: yea, they would load a whole ship, and that of good burthen. The nailes, as I said before, which were but three, as all know, haue spawned eleuen more, and are become foureteene, where of two are to be seene at Rome, one at Saint Hellens, another at Saint Crosses, a third at Ʋenice, a fourth at Sene, a fift at Colne in Germanie at the three Maries, a sixt at Treuers, a seuenth at S. Dennis in France, an eight at S. Sacell, a ninth with the Car­melites, a tenth among the Biturigions, an eleuenth in an Abby, &c. his crowne of thornes is diuided into so many portions, that either it must needs be of huge bignesse, or else some of those fragments which are taken for parts of it, must needs be meere impostures: his seamelesse Coat hath begot diuers others; for one is to be seene at Argentolium, another at Treuers, a third the Turke hath with him. I should bee too long in this friuolous argument, if I should reckon vp all the reliques of our Sauiour Christ that are notoriously extant, [Page 202] and to all which, worship and adoration is performed.

35. As for the Virgin Maries relicks, they are also very many and notable; her haire and her milke are reserued in so many places, that neuer any woman gaue so much milke in all her time of bearing, as she did in that time that shee gaue sucke: her Smocke is had in great honour both at Carnu­tis, and also at Aquae in Germany, and is carried vpon the end of a pole to be worshipped; it is of that bignesse, that the bles­sed Virgin should seeme by it to haue been a woman of an in­credible stature: which is the more to be wondred at, because Iosephs breeches, which are carried with the smocke in the same pompe, are so little, that they would fit a little boy or adwarfe: her Kerchiefes are to be seene, one at Treuers, an­other at Lisium in Italie: a little Crosse-cloth of hers is at Bo­nonia, her girdle at Pratum, and another at Monferrat, her Slippers at Saint Saniacquery, her Shoo at Sanfloridum, her Combes, one at Rome, another at Ʋesontium, her marriage Ring is at Perusium (as if then mariage was made with Rings, as it is at this day) her Garments, or at least, pieces of them are to be seene at so many places, that the Virgin Maries ward­robe might compare (if all were hers) with the greatest Prin­cesse in the world; foure pictures are to be seen of her, which Saint Luke himselfe drew.

36. What should I reckon vp the Relicks of other Saints, which are all of the same nature, though not number? Saint Michaels Sword and Buckler wherewith he ouercame the diuell, is a monument of great estimation, they are kept at great Saint Michaels in France, a place much frequented by Pilgrims. And what kind of things are they, thinke you? ma­ry, the sword is like a Childes dagger that hee weareth at his back, and his Buckler like a little cupping-glasse: or like the bosse of a Bridle: fit weapons (without doubt) for an Archan­gell, and more fit for him to fight with the Diuell withall? What should I speake of the Relicks of Saint Iohn Baptist? breuity bids me passe them ouer: and yet I cannot chuse but relate one or two which are most famous: as that finger of his wherewith he poynted vnto Christ, when he said, Behold [Page 203] the Lambe of God: this finger is multiplied; for it is to be seene at Vesontium, and at Tholosse, and at Lyons, and among the Bituriges, and at Florence, and neere Matiscone. Behold a wonder, sixe fingers on a hand, or else one finger begetting fiue more, and so turned into sixe, both a like mira­culous: one of his shooes is in Paris among the Carthusians, behold here another miracle, it was stolne away vpon a time, and another of a sodaine came in the roome thereof: sure, a shoo will neuer bee wanting, as long as there be Shoo-ma­kers in Paris.

37. Such like are the relickes of the rest of the Saints, as of Peter, and Paul, and Iohn, and Iames, with the other Apo­stles, the Popish Churches are replenished with thē, and some of them are in diuers places at once, after a miraculous maner, as the Altar whereon Peter said Masse, is both to bee viewed at Rome, and at Pisa, his staffe is at Colne, and at Treuers. An­drew hath one bodie to be seene at Tholosse, and another at Melphis: Iames the lesser, and Philip, haue each of them two bodies, one of them at Tholosse, another at Rome: so al­so haue Simon and Iude: Bartholomew is to be seene at Naples: and yet for all that, his body is at Rome too, in a Church dedi­cated vnto him. Mathew hath three bodies, one at Patauium, another at Rome at Saint Mary Maior, and a third at Treuers: the Cup wherein Iohn the Euangelist drunke the poyson, after he was condemned by Domitian, is both at Bononia, and at Rome to be seene. Saint Anne hath three bodies, one at Apla, another at Prouince, and a third at Lyons: and so her head is in three places, at Treuers, at Turen, and at Thuring. Laza­rus the Brother of Marie is like wise a Gyant of three bodies, one of them is at Massilia, another at Angustodune, and the third at Auelona.

38. I [...] would fill a volume, if I should reckon vp all their strange relicks. Let him that desireth to see more of them, reade Caluins Tractate, called Admonitio de Reliquijs, where he shall finde a whole thraue of them. I for this time end with three or foure braue ones for the nonce, which are worthy neuer to be forgotten. It is written of Dunstane the Abbot [Page 204] of Glastenbury, that as he was hallowing a certaine Church, he beheld the right thumbe of Editha, then Abbesse of Wilton, Guiliel. Malms­bur. lib. 2. de Pontif. Vincent. lib. 25. cap. 33. as shee was crossing and blessing her forhead, and much de­lighting therein, hee tooke it into his hand, and said, Neuer might this thumbe perish. By vertue of which prayer of his, af­ter Edithaes death, when all her body was turned into ashes, that thumbe, and another part of her body, which it seemeth, he had blessed too, were found safe and sound, and so became Reliques. We read also of a certaine Monke, who gaue out,Verger. annot. in Catalog. haeret. an. 1559. fol. 17. that he had brought from the East some of the sound of the Bels, which hung in Salomons Temple, and that he could shew among other Reliques, some of the haires which fell from the Seraphicall Angell, when hee came to imprint the fiue wounds of Christ in S. Frauncis body. Yea, some of them are not ashamed to shew to the Pilgrimes that goe to Ieru­salem, a three cornerd stone, which they beare them in hand, is that very stone, whereof Dauid spake, saying, The stoneBellon. obseruat. lib. 2. c. 85. which the builders refused, is the head of the corner. Lastly, at Cour cheuerin neere vnto Blois, is kept for a monument the breath of S. Ioseph, which he breathed, when he claue wood being a Carpenter: at Burgos in Spaine, is shewne a Cruci­fix, whose nailes and beard are cut euery moneth, they grow so fast, and in these excrements, they say, is great vertue. At Rome is to bee seene the fore-skinne of our Sauiour, which was cut off at his circumcision: and in Galicia (as Pilgrimes re­port) are preserued some of the feathers of certaine chickens, which are of the race of that Cocke, which crowed when Peter denied his Master. And at S. Denis, is to bee seene the Lanthorne which Iudas caried in his hand, when he came to betray his Master, with a number other such like. These bee their goodly Reliques which they would haue men to wor­ship with such great deuotion: of all which, or at least, of most of them, we may truly auouch that which Augustine saith of miracles, that they are vel figmenta mendacium hominum, vel August, de vni­tat. Eccles. portenta fallacium spirituum, That they are nothing but mere impostures, and coozening deuices, either of diuels or of aua­ricious Priests, Friers, and Monkes, to nouzle the people [Page 205] in superstition, and to line their owne purses with crownes.

39. The bare narration of them is sufficient to bewray their falshood, but much more the Logicall contrariety and naturall repugnancie that is among them, which all the wit of man is not able to reconcile. And last of all, their nouelty for most of these Reliques, was neuer heard of in this world for three hundred yeeres aft [...]r Christ; so that it may iustly be wondred where they lay hid all that while, and by what meanes they were found out at last, or how they could conti­nue so long. If they say, they were discouered by diuine reue­lation, as the bodies of Geruasius and Protasius, to S. Ambrose, Ambres. Epist. Aug. confess. lib. 9. cap. 7. Epist. Lucian. Beda de sex aeta­tibus. Zozomen. lib. 7. cap. vlt. of Stephen and Nichodemus, to one Lu [...]anus, and the head of Iohn Baptist to two Monkes, and the bones of Abacuk and Michaeas, to a certaine Bishop: and the body of S. Barnabe, with the Gospell of S. Mathew vpon his brest. I answere: that though all these were true, yet they were not reuealed to that end that they should be worshipped: neither yet did the God of truth euer by his testimony bolster out such noto­rious lyes as are found in the Romish Reliques. We may con­fidently therefore conclude, that most abominable Idolatry is committed in the Church of Rome, by the worshipping (at least) of false Reliques, whereof there is such a swarme: for the greatest part of their Reliques being counterfait, the greatest part of the worship which is done vnto them, must needes be Idolatry.

40. The Iesuites, to this obiection of ours, giue two an­sweres; one is Bellarmines, who flatly denieth the ReliquesBell. de Eccles. triumph. li. 2 c. 4 in Churches to be counterfait, because none are receiued but by the authority of the Bishop of Rome. And as for the multiplici­ty of bodies, hee saith, that the parts of them are often found in diuers places, and by a figure of speech, are called by the name of the whole. But the Iesuites answere, by his leaue, is idle and friuolous: for first, all these fore-named false Reliques are not caried about by priuate men, but found in their Churches; and therefore if authorized by the Popes holinesse, the more shame for him, and the more certainty for vs, that he can erre like a sinfull man, euen sitting in his chaire of doctrine. And [Page 206] secondly, though it were true which he saith, concerning the bodies of Saints, yet it cannot hold in other things, as in Iohn Baptists finger and his shooe, and the nailes of Christs crosse, and the Virgin Maries milke, and such like. Therefore Vas­ques Vasques de ado­r [...]t lib. 3. cap. 8. disp. 3. the Iesuite hath deuised another answere, and that is, Though the Reliques be vncertaine and false, yet if they bee worshipped, it is no sinne, but a good worke, Because, as it is not the sinne of Idolatry (saith hee) to worship a beame of light, vnder which the diuell lurketh, when a man taketh it for Christ: so if a man worship a false Relique, supposing it to bee some true part of a Saint, Merito suae deuotionis non caret, He wanteth not the merit of his deuotion. But this answere is not onely friuolous, but impious: for by the same reason the Iewes should be cleared from sinne, when they crucified Christ, be­cause S. Paul saith, they did it through zeale, though not ac­cording to knowledge, Rom. 19. 2. and the Gentiles, whenRom. 19. 2. they put Christians to death, because our Sauiour saith, that in so d [...]ing, they thought they did God good seruice, Iohn Ioh 16. 2. 16. 2. but they both sinned notwithstanding most grie­uously. And their owne rule is, that ignorantia non excusat à toto, sed à tanto, that is, ignorance doth not excuse the whole fault committed, but onely lessens the guilt of it. I conclude therefore, that notwithstanding all that can be said, yet in the worshipping of Reliques, is committed manifest and dete­stable Idolatry.

41. Neuerthelesse, we protest against the slanders of our aduersaries, that albeit wee abhorre all false and counterfait Reliques, and refuse to worship with adoration those that are true: yet for these last sort, when they are certainely knowne vnto vs, wee giue vnto them a due honour and reuerence: that is, wee confesse them to bee holy as the members of Christ, and Temples of the holy Ghost, if they bee the parts of Saints and Martyrs: wee say with S. Augustine, That their Aug. de ciuit. lib. 8. c. vlt. memories are to be celebrated to the end (not that they may be worshipped but) that thankes may be giuen to God for their vi­ctories, and we may be stirred vp to the imitation of their crownes, by calling vpon God to our helpe. We acknowledge with Cas­sander, [Page 207] that Vowes and Pilgrimages vnto places, famous forCassand. consult. de reliquijs. the Relickes of Martyrs, were in olde time profitable, Whilest that the memory of the Martyrs was yet fresh and certaine, and as long as God by vndoubted myracles did manifest, that their soules did liue, who were thought to bee dead: and whilest all these things were referred to this end, that the Christian faith which they by dying professed, might bee confirmed (as it were) by these signes. Yea, we affirme with Agrippa, that as Agrip. d [...] vanit. cap. 57. the abuse of Relicks is an execrable wickednesse; so the irreue­rent contempt of true Relickes is a detestable herfie: onely the matters we speake against, are these corruptions: first, a su­perstitious confidence in the worship of true Relickes: se­condly, a sacriligious forging of false ones: and thirdly and lastly, an immoderate expending our riches in adorning and guilding the bones and Relickes of dead men; when in the meane while we suffer the poore that liue, to famish for hun­ger, or to go naked for want of clothes. As the heads of Pe­ter and Paul are inclosed in so much siluer as weigheth foureCom. l'ij 2. li. 8. thousand pounds, besides Iewels and precious stones, of in­estimable price: And the golden Tombe of Thomas of Can­terbury was couered with Diamonds, Vnions, and Carbun­cles,Eras. coll. de pe­r [...]g. Rel. ergo. the basest part of it was Gold. How much better might these treasures haue been imployed to the reliefe of the poore, and other charitable vses! This is all we finde fault withal; and this is inough to prooue them sensl [...]sse and blinde Idola­ters, and their Church, which maintaineth all these things, an Idolatrous synagogue.

42. The fourth maine arme of Idolatry issuing out of the4. body of the Romish Church, and the roote of their religion is, their doctrine and practice touching the Inuocation of Saints and Angels. They maliciously slaunder vs, and say, that we are enemies to the Saints, and that we deny them all ho­nour and reuerence, comparing vs therefore to the Caianian and Eun [...]ian Heretickes, for our wicked and sacrilegious contempt of the Saints of God, as they falsly affirme: but we returne this reproch vpon themselues, and confidently af­firme, that they wrong the blessed Saints more in making [Page 208] them Idols, and giuing them more honour then is their due, then we doe in giuing them too little, if that were true that we did so: for what can be more iniurious to the honour of those blessed Creatures, who liue in the presence of God, and sing Haleluiah to him continually, with all ho­nour, Reuel. 7. praise, and glory be ascribed to him that sitteth vpon the Throne, and to the Lambe for euermore: whose chiefe ioy and delight is to aduance the honour of the eternall God, then to haue any part of that honour due vnto him ascribed vnto them? they had rather be deuested of all theirs, then any iot of his glory should be diminished. More iniurious therefore are they to the Saints, if they giue them too much, and that in derogation from God, then we, if we giue them too little.

43. But wee deny that wee giue them too little; wee giue them their due honour and respect. For first, we giue God thankes for them, and for the benefits which God vouchafed by them to his Church; as the Church glorified God for the conuersion of Saint Paul, and Paul gaue God thankes for theGal. 1. 13. graces of the Thessalonians. Secondly, we highly extoll and1. Thes. 1. 2. commend the Saints departed, and magnifie the graces and gifts of God in them; wee account them blessed, as the Vir­gin Marie prophesied of her selfe, that all Nations should call her blessed: And wee keepe a perpetuall and a reuerend re­membranceLuke 1. 48. of them, as our Sauiour promised to that Marie, that powred the boxe of precious oyntment vpon his head,Marke 14. 9. Prou. 10. 6. And Salomon confirmeth also to all the iust, that their memo­riall should be blessed. And thirdly, we propound them as ex­amples for imitation, that their vertues may bee as patternes for vs to imitate, and their falls as markes to make vs warie: and their conuersation as guides and directions for vs in the way to the heauenly Canaan. Thus much honour we willing­ly attribute vnto the Saints: but no further dare we goe, lest we derogate from the honour of God; and in so doing, not please or content, but vexe and grieue the blessed Saints, who cast downe their Crownes; that is, strippe themselues of all ho­nour,Reuel. 4. 10. before the Throne of him that liueth for euer. But the Church of Rome are so lauish and prodigall in their honou­ring [Page 209] of them, that they despoyle God of his honour, and in­uest them therewith, committing Idolatry vnto them. And this they doe three waies principally, first by outward adora­tion; secondly, by inuocation; and thirdly, by reposing their trust and confidence in their merites and mediation.

44. Touching outward adoration, which consisteth in these things principally, to wit, in bowing the knee, prostra­ting the body, dedicating Temples, consecrating Festiuall daies, and making vowes to the Saints departed; all whichBell de cultu Sanct. lib. 3. outward worship the Romish Church alloweth, and the Po­pish crue affoord vnto the Saints departed: it cannot by any meanes bee esteemed any whit lesse then a practice of Idola­try, seeing by their owne confession, it is more then a ciuill adoration, and being more then ciuill, it must needes be reli­gious: for there are but two kinds of worship commanded by the law of God, the one enioyned in the first Table, name­ly, the diuine worship of God: and the other in the first com­mandement of the second Table, which is the honour wee ought to giue to our superiours. Now this worship of Saints must of necessity be one of these: but it is more then ciuill (say they) therefore it must needes bee a religious and diuine worship. For thus I reason, This worshipping of Saints is ei­ther an iniunction of the first Table, or of the second, or of neither: if they say, Of the first, then it is diuine and religious worship, for the first Table of the Law containeth vnder it onely diuine and religious duties, the obiect whereof is God himselfe, and none other, as the seuerall precepts thereof doe declare: if they say, Of the second, then it is meere ciuill and politike, for the second Table is onely a bond of ciuill duties: if they say, It is of neither, thē it must needs be a wil worship, deui [...]ed by their own braines, and not warranted by the word of God: which is also confessed by Eckius in his Enchiridi­on,Eckius Enchir. Concil. Trid. de­cret. de Inuocat. Sanctor. and insinuated by the Councill of Trent, when in setting downe that decree, it alleageth no Scripture; but onely the ancient custome of their Church, consent of Fathers, and de­crees of Councels.

45. But to the poynt: I say, that seeing by the rule of [Page 210] Gods word, we find but two kinds of worship, one religious and diuine, contained in the first Table; the other ciuill and humane, inioyned in the second: If therefore the worship of Saints be not a meere ciuill worship, belonging to the second Table of the Law, then it must needes be religious, and per­taine to the fi [...]st and so consequently Idolatrous. This two­fold worship and no more is approued by Saint Augustine, Aug. de ciuit. lib. 10. who by that distinction of [...], and [...], putteth diffe­rence betwixt the worship that must bee giuen to God, and that ciuill honour which is due vnto men: for by [...] ▪ hee mea [...]eth that kind of worship and honour, which wee may and must performe to those that excell either in place of au­thority, or in gifts and graces of God, which is meerely hu­mane and ciuill, and by [...], that d [...]uine worship which the creature oweth vnto the Creatour onely: and that former is that which he alloweth onely to the Saints: and that in that acception of the word which is before specified, to wit, as it is a ciuill and humane worship, as appeareth more euidently by that which he affirmeth in another place, in these words,Aug. cont. Faust. li. 10. cap. 21. Colimus Martyres eo cultu dilectionis & societatis, quo & in hac vita coluntur Sancti Dei homines, sed illos tanto deuotiùs, quantò securiùs post incerta omnia superata. In which words it is plaine, that the kinde of the worship exhibited to Saints triumphant, and Saints militant, is all one, but the extension of it is greater to the one then the other, according to t [...]e proporti [...]n of gifts and graces, more apparent in one then the other.

46. But the Romish Doctours, and principally the Iesu­ites, adde a third kinde of worship, yea, a fourth to these two; albeit therein they neither agree with themselues, nor with their fellowes, as it commonly falleth out when men build vpon their owne fancies, (a rotten foundation) and not vpon the word of God, which is the ground of truth. For Bellar­mine Bell. de Sanctor. beat. li. 1. ca. 12. saith, that there is a ciuill worship due vnto men, for some ciuill respect: and there is a religious worship due vn­to Saints, in respect of their Sanctity and holinesse, which he calleth dulia; and a diuine worship proper onely vnto [Page 211] God, which he calleth latria: and that middle hee subdiui­deth into two degrees; the first, he saith, is dulia, propriè dicta, so properly called, which agreeth to the Saints; and the se­cond Hyperdulia, which belongeth onely to the humanity of Christ, and the blessed Virgin his Mother: and so hee ma­keth foure distinct kinds of worship, whereof two are with­out the compasse and reach of Gods Commandements, and therefore I know not where to place them, except in the di­uels. The like doctrine is deliuered by Ʋasques another Ie­suite,Vasq de ador. li. 1. ca. 2. dis. 5. Canis. Catechis. Bell. Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 14. Vasq. Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 1. dis. 6. and Canisius, and almost all the rest of that Iesuiticall ra [...]ble: but marke their harmony; Bellarmine saith, that this worship o [...] Saints is Cultus, and therefore an acte of Re­ligion, though in a secondary respect. Ʋasques denyeth it flatly to be an act of Religion at all, but of s [...]me other vertue. Thomas Aquinas, Bonauenture, Gabriel, and Albertus, are of mind, as testifieth Ʋasques, that it is one and the same kind of worship wherewith wee honour men, aduanced in ciuill dignity, and the Saints; and that the difference is in the de­grees of proportion, not in diuersity of kind. And in this they fully consent with vs, as also with Saint Augustine, and with the truth; but this is contradicted by Bellarmine, Vasques, and all the rabble of the Iesuites, as may appeare in the places be­fore quoted.

47. Paluda nus makes three kindes of Hyperdulia, the first due to the humanity of Christ, for it selfe; the second, to thevasq. Ibid. blessed Virgin; & the third, to the rest of the Saints: but as for dulia, that he applyeth onely to that honour which we owe to all reasonable creatures, except the damned: but this is cros­sed by all the rest. Againe, Durandus (as Vasques reporteth) is of opinion, that the worship of Saints departed, and men, in ciuill dignity, proceedeth from one and the same vertue,Vasq. Ibid. and differeth onely in the act applyed vnto the degrees of ex­cellency. But Bellarmine, Vasques, and all of that stampe, re­nounce vtterly that opinion, as I haue shewed. Lastly, Vas­ques that acute Iesuite, as they brag of him, affirmeth, that the worship of Saints is not an act of Religion: and yet in the same Chapter he calleth it cultus sacer & religiosus, A holy [Page 212] and religious worship; then which, what can be more contra­dictory? for if it be a religious worship, then must it needs be a worship of religion, and an act of religion; and if no wor­ship of religion, then no religious worship: for coniugata (by the rule of Logicke) se inuicem ponunt & tollunt. And that which i [...] to bee noted aboue all the rest, hee is constrained to deuise a new speciall habite of vertue, to which this worshipVasq. Ies. Ibid. of Saints may be referred, neuer heard of before, neither in Morall Philosophy, nor yet in diuinity: and that without name, and so without nature and being, except in the Iesuites braine onely. Thus wee may see how errour, like Proteus, tur­neth it selfe into many shapes, and at last is strangled with it owne halter.

48. But that this outward adoration of Saints departed is Idolatrous, appeareth ouer and aboue that which hath beene said, by these reasons: first, because they ascribe vnto them a presence, not onely in one place, but in all places where they are worshipped: secondly, a power of hearing, seeing, and helping: and thirdly, an ability of knowing and seeing the heart: all which imply an infinite power, and such as is pro­perly diuine. And therefore it is nothing but a vaine shift, when they say they giue diuine worship to God, and no more but a certaine kinde of seruice to the Saints, when in truth they giue that which is Gods to the Saints, besides touching, kneeling, and prostrating the body in a religious manner. Pe­ter Acts 10. 26. refused to haue it done vnto him by Cornelius: and the Angell rebuked Iohn twice for offering it vnto him: if it hadReuel. 19. 22. beene lawfull, sure, they would not haue refused it; for nei­ther did Cornelius take Peter to be a God, but for a holy man: nor Iohn, the Angell for the Creator, but for an excellent crea­ture, as euidently appeareth in the Texts; and therefore they intended not to worship them as Gods: yet because the manner of their worship was more then befitting a crea­ture, hauing in it a touch of diuine worship and religion, ther­fore it was reiected; the one saying, Stand vp, for I my selfe am a man; insinuating, that a man must not bee religiously adored: and the other, See thou doe it not, for I am thy fellow [Page 213] seruant, implying thereby, that Angels, and if Angels, then Saints are but our fellow-seruants, and therefore not to bee worshipped with any part of diuine and religious worship.

49. To the example of Peter, Bellarmine and Vasques Bell. de Sanctor. beat li. 1. ca. 14. Vosques de ado­rat. li. 1. dis. 5. c. 3 giue two answers, the one out of Hierom in his Booke against Vigilantius, that Cornelius was worthily corrected by Peter, because he thought some diuine thing to be in him aboue o­thermen: the other out of Chrysostome vpon this place, that it was no fault in Cornelius to exhibite, but modesty in Peter to refuse that honour which was due vnto him. Bellarmine is in different which of these two answers we take; and therefore without propounding his owne iudgement, leaues thē to our choyce. and yet the one of them ouer-turneth the other; for Hierom saith, it was a fault in Cornelius; Chrysostome, that it was no fault: Hierom, that Peter did well in reprouing Cor­nelius; Chrysostome, that he did not reprooue him at all, but of modesty refused the honour giuen to him. What reason had he to leaue these to our choyce, being thus contrary? It plainely sheweth, that he knew not what to answere. There­fore Ʋasques the Iesuite renounceth Hieroms answere vpon this ground, that Cornelius knew the true God, before Peter came vnto him, and therefore could not erre so grossely, as to ascribe any diuinity to a mortall man, and insists vpon Chry­sostomes, that hee did it for modesty sake: but by as good warrant we may reiect Chrysostome, as he doth Hierom: espe­cially, seeing our reason is as effectuall; for Peter giues this reason of his denyall, for I my selfe am a man: which must needs be the medium of a sillogisme, thus to be concluded: No religious worship is to be giuen to man; but I my selfe am a man, therefore thou doest euill to worship me. Here is not a strayning at courtesie for modesty sake, but a plaine renunci­ation of Cornelius his sact as vnlawfull: if it had been a tricke of modesty onely, he should rather haue said thus compara­tiuely, I am not worthy of this honour from such a man as thou art, or such like: but in saying, I my selfe am but a man, he insinuateth, that Cornelius did more then he ought to do.

50. If they say, I but though you thus escape from Chry­sostome, [Page 214] yet Hieroms interpretation will hold you fast: I an­swere, Besides Vasques reason whereby he reiecteth Hierom, that it maketh nothing against vs, but for vs rather, & against them, because Hierom seemeth to condemne as idolatrous, all such adoration of Saints, wherein any part or propertie of the diuine nature is attributed vnto them: but the Romanists in kneeling and prostrating their bodies to the Saints, ascribe the properties of God vnto them, to wit, either to be present in many places at once, o [...] to heare, being as farre remote from them as [...]ea [...]en is from earth, and to know the heart, and to haue power to helpe, &c. all which properly are proper vnto God.

51. To the example of Iohn and the Angell, the former two Iesuites oppose also a double answere: first, that the An­gell did appeare vnto Iohn in that maiesty, that he might bee thought to be Christ himselfe: And therefore that Iohn was rebuked, not for the errour in his adoration, but for his er­rour in the person adored. This answere Vasques names one­ly, and then reiects as friuolous: But Bellarmine propounds it as good and authenticall. Which shall we beleeue in this case? Ma [...]y, sauing his reuerence, though hee be now a Cardinall, the plaine Iesuite is to be preferred before him, both because this answere is crossed and contradicted by the second; and also, because the Iesuite giues a reason of his reiection. And the Cardinall goeth to it by downe-right authority, as if, be­cause he is their chiefe Rabbi, hee may say what hee list: his reason is, because Iohn did truely know him to be an Angell, and not God, and therefore that there was no errour in the person. Secondly, they answere, that the Angell would not now, as in time before, be worshipped of men, because now God was become man, and by his incarnation brought such dignity to the nature of man, that the very Angels should doe reuerence vnto it, not be adored and reuerenced by it; espe­cially of Christs Apostles, and Princes of the Church. To which I answere, first, that by this allegation it must needes follow, that Angels are not now to bee adored in the Church of Christ, howsoeuer they were before; which is contrarie to [Page 215] their owne doctrine, and generall tenent of their religion.Bell. de Sanctor. be [...]t. li. 1 ca. 13. Vasques de ado­ra. lib. 1. dis. 5. c. 3 And secondly, if not Angels, then much lesse the Saints, who at their highest, though they be made like, yet are farre in­feriour to the Angels in excellency of graces, and gifts. And th [...]ly, the reason where with the Angell, after he had repro­ued Iohn, directeth him to the right obiect of religious wor­ship, doth ouerthrow this exposition: for he saith, Worship God: he doth not say, Forbeare to worship me, because your nature is dignified by the incarnation of the Sonne of God: but forbeare, because I am not God; and all diuine and reli­gious worship belongeth vnto him. And thus notwithstan­ding all that is yet said, all religious kneeling and prostrating the body to the Saints, is Idolatrous.

52. As for the dedicating Temples, consecrating Festiuall daies, making vowes to them, they are all within the same compasse, and that partly for the reasons before specified, be­ing acts of a religious worship: but especially, because theBell. decult. Sanct. li. 3. c. 4. & lib. 3. ca 9. & cap. 16. Idem, Ibid. ca. 4. doctrine of their Church is, that these things are so properly directed vnto the Saints, that the end of their consecration is determined in them. And therefore Bellarmine reprooues their opinion, which say, that Temples cannot properly bee erected to any, but to God: and affirmeth, that they may be dedicated directly vnto Saints, and that vowes may bee made to them determinately; and so also Holy daies conse­crated: which cannot be any lesse then plaine Idolatrie: see­ing, as Saint Augustine saith, Cuiconuenit Templum, ei conuenit Aug. de ciuit. lib. 22 ca. 10. sacrificium, to whom a Temple, to him a Sacrifice belongeth. And seeing the Scripture in many places testifieth, that vowsNumb. 30. 3. Deut. 23. 21. Esay 19. 21. must onely be made to God; I am not ignorant of their cua­sion, that they doe not dedicate Churches to Saints, as they are Temples; but as they are Basilicae, that is, stately buil­dings for memorials of the Saints: and that a Vow is made to God in signum gratitudinis [...]rga authorem, & primum prin­cipium omnium b [...]n [...]rum, as a signe of our thankfulnes to God the authour, and first cause of all good things: but to the Saints, as a signe of gratefulnesse towards our mediatours and Intercessours, by whose meanes wee receaue benefits from [Page 216] God. And that the honour of the holy day, though it imme­diately pertaineth to the Saints, yet mediately and seconda­rily it amounteth to God.

53. These be Bellarmines goodly, but scarce godly distin­ctions: for these, and such like as these are, hee vseth as en­gines to vndermine the truth, and as vizards to couer the face of vgly falshood. But they may well bee ouerthrowne with this one blast, that the holy Scripture neuer taught them, nei­ther haue they any warrant from Gods Spirit: and therefore they are rather to be accounted forgeries of a frothy wit, then fruits of truth. But let vs examine them a little: A Church is dedicated to God as it is a Temple; and to a Saint, as it is a Basilica, Why then it seemeth, that either sometimes it is a Temple, and sometimes not a Temple, according to the fan­cie of those that approach vnto it: or else it is alwaies a Tem­ple, and yet alwaies a Basilica too, and then the honour must be diuided betwixt God and the Saints: let them take which they will; the first is impiety, the second Idolatry. Againe, for Vowes, though we vow chiefly vnto God, and seconda­rily to the Saints; yet the same worship in nature is giuen to these as to him, onely it is not in the same degree: but Ido­latry is to afford any part of Gods worship to a creature, as hath beene shewed. And lastly, touching feast daies; if they be immediately applied to the honour of the Saint, and in a mediate and secondarie respect to God, as his distinction im­porteth, then the creature is adored not onely with the like worship in nature, but with a higher degree then God him­selfe. And thus the mist which he seeketh to cast ouer mens eyes, by the subtiltie of his distinctions, is quickly dispelled, as­soone as the light of truth sheweth it selfe: and therefore as Ixion, imbracing a cloud, in stead of Iuno, beg at a monstrous off-spring: so, the entertaining of those cloudie distinctions, without deciphering them to the quicke, hath bred, and doth breed most of those monstrous errors in the Church of Rome. Thus we see, that this outward adoration is tainted with most grosse Idolatrie.

54. The second branch of their Idolatrie to the Saints, is, [Page 217] by Inuncation and Prayer directed vnto them. For, Prayer is a proper and peculiar part of Gods worship, and therefore not to be giuen to any other besides, without a plaine touch of Idolatry: for the commandement of God is in the OldePsal 5 [...]. Testament, Call [...] of [...] not vpon my [...] ­gels or my Saints, but vpon [...]nd t [...] be alone is [...] inuocated, the reason following declareth, [...]d I will deliuer thee: from whence ariseth this conclusion, he alone is to be inuocated by prayer, that is able to deliuer vs in the day of trouble: but God alone can doe that, therefore he alone is to be prayed vnto. Againe, it is the commandement of our Sa­uiour Christ in the New Testament to his whole Church, that it should thus pray, O, our Father, not, O, our mother, nor, O, our brother, nor, O, our sister, nor, O, our fellow-seruants, as the Popish Church prayeth: but, O, our Father. If there had been any necessity of praying to Saints, sure, our Sauiour would here haue prescribed it, where he setteth downe a per­fect forme of prayer to be vsed in his Church for euer. Infi­nite be the places of Scripture [...]ending to this end; neither is there so much as one precept or example in the whole Booke of God, that either inioyneth or approueth Inuocation of Saints, as Cassander confesseth; albeit his inference therevp­onCassand. consult. art. 21. is absurd, that therefore it may be done, because, as there is no mandate nor example extant to warrant it, so there is no prohibition to interdict it: as if it were not necessarily re­quired, that as all our actions, so our prayers should bee grounded vpon faith, without which it is not onely impossible Iames 1. 6. Heb. 11. 6. Rom. 14 23. Rom. 10. 17. to please God, but also, whatsoeuer we doe, is sinne; but saith is grounded vpon the word of God only, It commeth by hearing, saith the Apostle, and hearing by the word of God. How then can the Inuocation of Saints bee but vaine and vnprofitable; yea, impious and dangerous, seeing it is without saith, and so without all hope of Gods acceptance?

55. Suarez and Salmeron, two famous Iesuites, confesseSuar. in 3. Them. q 52. d [...]s. 42. see 1 Salmer. com. [...] 1 Tim. 2 dis. [...]. §. as much as Cassander: for the one saith, that we neuer reade that any directly prayed vnto the Saints departed, that they should pray for them: and the other, that the Inuocation of Saints is [Page 218] not expressed in the New Testament, because it would haue beene a harsh precept to the Iewes, and dangerous to the Gentiles. Thus, here are three, and those not of the meanest, that acknow­ledge the inuocation of Saints, not to bee found in Scrip­ture. And yet Bellarmine and [...]ius, and Coster, and others [...] ashamed to [...]est di [...]laces of Scripture to prooue it: but with what impude [...]y of spirit, and euill successe, I shall not neede to shew, being sufficiently discouered by others, and the very fight of them being a sufficient re­futation.

56. As for his reason which he braggeth to be vnanswer­able, me thinkes, it halts of all foure: for, because we entreat Gods children here in this world to pray for vs, doth it there­foreBell. de Sanctor. beat. li. 1. ca. 19. follow that we must pray vnto them, being departed out of this world? By the same reason it may bee inforced, that we ought to giue almes vnto them, and entertaine them into our houses, and wash their feete, and comfort them, and ad­uise them, and preach vnto them: for all these duties of cha­rity wee performe to Saints militant. If they say, Why, but they are remooued from vs, and also from their bodies; and therefore as they stand not in neede of our charity, so wee cannot extend it vnto them: The same answere cutteth the throte of this argument, they are so farre exalted aboue vs, and seuered from all commerce with our affaires, that though we vsed their prayers here on earth, yet it is in vaine to inuo­cate them in heauen, our prayers, as our deeds of charity, be­ing not able to stretch so farre. This I take to be a sufficient solution to that vnsoluble argument: Albeit, we haue also an­other answere in readinesse, to wit, that there is not the same reason of the inuocation of Saints in heauen, as of the mutuall prayers of Gods children on earth, but a great difference; here we know one anothers necessities, there the Saints knowEsay 63. 16. 2. Reg. 22. 20. not our wants; here we are present with them whom we re­quest to pray for vs; but we are not present with the Saints in heauen, nor they with vs; and therefore the one is a fruite of charity, but the other a practice of piety and religion: here one liuing man may request anothers helpe by word of [Page 219] mouth or letter: but inuocation of Saints is often perfor­med by the secret desires of the heart, without the vtterance of any speech: here we stand as fellow members in our pray­ers, and make request for each other, not in our owne names, but in the name of Christ our Mediatour: but when men in­uocate the Saints in heauen, they make them more then their fellowes, euen mediatours of intercession betweene them and God. Lastly, for mutuall praying for one another here, wee haue both an expresse commandement, and plaine examples in the word of God; but for praying to the Saints, wee haue neither commandement, nor example, nor promise in the whole Scripture.

57. But that I may leaue these things, and come to the poynt in hand, that Saints are made Idols by inuocation, may appeare by these reasons: First, because they ascribe vn­to them an omnipotent power to know the heart, which is a peculiar property belonging vnto God onely, Ier. 17. 10.Ier. 17. 10. Secondly, an infinite presence in all places, and that at once: for when one prayeth to Saint Peter at Rome, another at Paris, another at London, another at Constantinople, and all at one instant, must not he needs be present in all those places, or else how can he heare their prayers? Thirdly, a diuine power to helpe and deliuer all those that call vpon them, and that not onely from outward calamities, but from inward sinnes and corruptions. Fourthly, a property belonging onely vnto God, namely, to bee beleeued in: for how shall they call vpon him in whom they haue not beleeued, saith S. Paul, Rom. 10. 14?Rom. 10. 14. And lastly, a diuine worship, which is sacrifice for prayer, is a spiritual sacrifice of Christians. Heb. 13. 13. which, as all know,Heb. 13. 13. Mal. 1. 11. 1. Tim 2. 8. Aug. de ciuit. li. 8 cap. 27. pertaineth onely vnto God. And as Saint Augustine well con­fesseth, when he saith, We doe not ordaine Priests, nor offer sa­crifices to the Martyrs, because it is vnfit, vndue, and vnlawfull, and due onely to God alone: and againe in the same Chapter, because not they, but their God is our God.

58. Against these arguments our aduersaries make a shew of opposition (and but a shew) after this manner: First, that they doe not ascribe to the Saints an omnipotent power, or [Page 220] an infinite presence by inuocating them; for they say, Beatifi­ca Bell. de Sanctor. beat. li. 1. ca. 20. visione, by that blessed vision of God, they doe behold all things which pertaine vnto them to know in him, tan­quam Coster. Enchir. in speculo, as it were in a glasse. Secondly, that the Saints helpe, not as Authours, but as instruments and impe­trators. Thirdly, that wee may beleeue in them, though not as in God, but as in our Patrons and Protectours. And that Bellarmine proueth by Hierome vpon the Epistle to Philemon, Philem. 1. 5. on these words, When I heare of thy loue and faith which thou hast towards the Lord Iesus, and towards all Saints. Lastly, that Prayer is an improper kind of sacrifice, so called by a figure of speech, and not so, being in it owne nature.

59. But all these are but meere shifts, which may in some sort blanch the foulenesse of this errour to the dim eyes of the ignorant; yet those that are quicke-sighted, can easily dis­cerne their falshood: and therefore that I may a little disco­uer their iuggling, I answere to their obiections in order; to the first three things: First that t [...] is glasse, in which all things are said to be seene, is no where to be found in the Scripture, and therefore is a plaine forgerie of their owne braines: for we reade, Mat. 5. 8. That the pure in heart are therefore Mat 5. 8. blessed, because they shall see God. From whence it may be ga­thered, that Visio beatifica est beatitudo videntium: In the bles­sed sight of God consists the happinesse of the Saints: but that thereby they should behold, as it were in a glasse, all things which they would, is no where to be sound in the Scripture of God. Secondly, it is contrary to Scripture: for Reuel. 6. 9.Reuel. 6. 9. it is said, that the Saints vnder the Altar cry, How long, Lord, holy and true, wilt thou not reuenge our bloud! and Acts 2. 7. ItActs 2. 7. is not ( [...]aith our Sauiour-to his Apostles) in you to know the times and seasons, which the Father hath put in his owne power. And that this is meant not onely of the Saints in this life, but also in heauen, appeareth by that which Christ [...]aith, Mat. 24. 23. that the Angels know not the houre of the last Iudgement: & if not the Angels, much lesse the Saints: but all these things doe in some sort pertaine vnto thē as well as the prayers of the liuing: and yet it is plaine, that they see them [Page 221] not in that glasse. Thirdly, if that be certaine, that they see in this glasse the prayers and necessities of their suppliants; Why doth Coster and others affirme, that they attaine this know­ledgeCoster Enchir. by the relation of Angels? and yet they assigne to eue­ry man but one Angell: surely, that Angel is well employed in ascending and descending euery houre to carry newes to the Saints. And why doe others say, that the Saints are after a sort by a wonderfull celerity of their glorified nature in eue­ry place? This is a wonderfull celerity indeed, if it were pos­sible for them to be so; and yet be it as they would haue it, it cannot euince an audience of those prayers which are made at one and the same instant, in diuers and farre distant places. And lastly, why doe some others affirme, that they haue this knowledge not by the vision of God, but by ordinarie and continuall reuelation from God? If by vision, then not by reuelation: and if by reuelation, then not by vision. And thus, like men in the darke, they fight with one another, and whilest they forsake the light of the truth which shineth in the word of God, they fall into grieuous errours, hammered out of their owne fancies if they say it is no matter how they know our wants▪ but certaine it is that they doe know them: they take that for granted which is the question to be proued, & which by no sufficient argument they can euince.

60. To the second obiection I answere, that most igno­rant persons esteeme the Saints, to whom they pray, as the very authours and giuers of those good things which they pray for, without any respect vnto God, saue that they thinke hee hath put them into their hands to bee distributed at their pleasure; and therefore they pray to one for their Horses, and to another for their Hogs, and to a third for their Kine, &c. Yea, not onely the simple sort doe this, but it is the doctrine of their Church, as may appeare by this rime in their autho­rized Seruice-Bookes, to the blessed Virgin.

Here the Virgin Marie is not made the Impetrator, but the giuer of grace: and so are the rest of the Saints, as shall more fully appeare in the next Section.

61. To the third I answere, that to beleeue in a creature, is to deifie that creature. For as Augustine well obserueth,Aug. Tractat. in Iohn 54. Wee beleeue the Apostle, we doe not beleeue in the Apostle: and we beleeue the Church, and not in the Church: and thereforeIdem ser. de tem­p [...]r. 131. in the Apostles Creed, where we say, I beleeue in God; wee doe not say, I beleeue in the Catholicke Church, but I be­leeue the Catholicke Church: whereby is plainely insinua­ted, that none but God is to be beleeued in, because to be­leeue in a thing, is to put our trust and confidence in that thing. As for that place in the Epistle to Philemon, it maketh nothing for this purpose; for there the word Faith is referred to the Lord Iesus, and Loue to the Saints: neither ought Saint Hieromes authority more preiudicate vs in this inter­pretation, then it doth them in many such like, whom they reiect as they do the rest of the Fathers, at their pleasures: es­pecially, seeing no man else besides himselfe is of that minde: at least wise, if he vnderstand by faith, to beleeue in the Saints, and not to beleeue them onely: the one whereof is proper to the Creator, the other to the creatures.

62. To the last I answere, that Prayer is properly one of the sacrifices of the New Testament; for here the sacrifices are not corporall, but spirituall, as may bee prooued in generall by that which our Sauiour saith, Iohn 4. God will be worship­ped in Spirit, and truth. And in particular, by comparing Mal. 1. 11. with 1. Tim. 2. 8. for whereas Malachie prophecyingMal. 1. 11. 1. Tim. 2. 8. of the Kingdome of Christ, had said that Incense, and a cleane offering should be offered to God in euery place: Paul sheweth what is meant hereby, when he commandeth to lift vp pure hands vnto God in euery place. But suppose that it were im­properly called a sacrifice, yet it looseth not the knot; for all [Page 223] kinde of sacrifices, both proper and improper, corporall and spirituall, are due onely vnto God: for to whome belongeth a Aug. de ciuit. li. 8 cap. vlt. Temple and Altar, to him belongeth a sacrifice, saith Saint Au­gustine: but no Temple or Altar, proper or improper, is to be built, or set vp to any but to God: and therfore no sacrifice is to be offered but to him.

63. Lastly, touching the authority of the Fathers, which are alleaged so frequently by Bellarmine, to prooue the In­uocation of Saints: and from which Cassander would draw this conclusion, That it was not credible that those holy men would admit any doctrine or custome, which they supposed to bee contrary to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine, or detract any thing from the glory of God, or the merit of Christ, when as they vnderwent so heauie conflicts for Christs sake. Here, (not to keepe the Reader in suspense, referring a fuller satisfaction to this argument to a more fit place) foure things are to bee noted; first, that for the space of two hundred yeares after Christ, the Intercession and Inuocation of Saints, were do­ctrines vnknowne vnto the Church: and therefore they al­ledge no Father within that compasse, saue Dionisius Areopa­gita: Dionis. Areopag. Eccles. Hier. c. 7. Cap. 7. Eccles. Hierarch: which booke, as diuers o­ther that goe vnder that name, Illyricus hath proued to bee counterfeit by impregnable reasons. And Iraeneus, Lib. 5.Iraeneus cont. haeres. lib. 5. contra Haeres. who saith, that the Virgine Mary was made the Aduocate of the Virgine Eue: by which hee could not meane that Eue did pray vnto Mary here on earth, seeing Mary wasOrig. in Epist. ad Rom. lib. 2. & hom. 3. in Cant. Nazian, de laud. Gorgon. & Orat. 1. cont. Iulian. & Orat. de Basil. & epitap. patris. Hier. Epist. ad Nepotian. Aug. de cur [...] pro mort. cap. 16. & 13. & in Psal. 108. not then borne when Eue liued: nor that the Virgine Mary did pray for Eue whilst shee liued, because then shee her selfe was not: both which must needes be, if by this testimony the Inuocation of Saints should be proued.

64. Secondly, those Fathers that liued in the next two hundred yeares, speake of this matter very variously and doubtfully, as if it were a doctrine which they knew not what to say to, & were not fully resolued in. Thirdly, of those Fathers which he alleageth, though in some places they seeme to al­low that custome which was then brought into the Church: yet in other places they disallow the same. Yea, and they are [Page 224] disapprooued also of others that liued in the same age. Thus true Athanasius condemneth Inuocation of Saints, Orat. 2. & 3. contra Arianos: and false Athanasius alloweth it, Ser­mon. in Euangel. de Sanctissima Deipara. Basil approueth it, but Nazianzene doubteth of it, and Epiphanius that liued al­so about that time, vtterly condemneth i [...]. Chrysostome in some places seemeth to allow of it; in others, he speaketh against it: and so doth Augustine, and the rest, as you may see at large prooued by Chemnitius in his examine of the Councill ofChemnit. exam. de Inuoc. Sanct. Trent. And that which is not to be forgotten, they alleage many false and counterfeit Bookes, vnder the name of the Fa­thers, as Dionysius Areopagita. Ecclesiast. Hierar. Athanas. Serm. de Sanctissima Deipara. Chrysost. hom. ad pop. 66. and many others of the like impression, as the same Chemnitius hath learnedly and vnanswerably prooued.

65. Lastly, those Fathers which doe defend this Inuoca­tion, yet do not defend it as it is now practised in the Church of Rome: for first, the Fathers, if they did allow of this Inuo­cation, yet it was in their priuate deuotions, not in the pub­like Leiturgie of the Church: for it cannot bee prooued, that in any of the ancient Leiturgies this Inuocation was v­sed, vntill Gregorie the firsts time (for as for that which was called Chrysostomes Masse, all know it is a bastard brat, and not a true Child of that good Father) but in the Church of Rome it is practised in their publicke seruice, and so is come from a matter of priuate deuotion, to a generall practice of Religion. Secondly, the Fathers, though they may seeme to haue prayed sometimes vnto the Saints, out of the heate of their deuotion; yet it was but now and then, and as it were, by the way, whereas their ordinary prayers and deuotions were directed vnto God: but in the Church of Rome the Saints are more prayed vnto, then God; he hath the least, and they the greatest share in their deuotion; witnesse the Leta­nie of the blessed Virgin Marie, and the Marie Psalter, and their Common practice. Thirdly, the Fathers, albeit they di­rected their prayers sometimes to the Saints, yet they reposed most confidence in their prayers to God, and in the mediation [Page 225] of Christ, as appeareth by that which Chrysostome saith; Ad Chrysost. hom. 12 in Math. Deum non ostiar [...]o, &c. We need no Porter, nor Mediator, nor Minister, to bring vs to God: say but, Miserere mei Deus, &c. And in another place hee saith, that when wee pray our selues to Idem hom. de prof. Euang. God, wee obtaine more, then when others pray for vs. But the superstitious Romanists thinke to speede better when they pray to the Saints, then when vnto God: And therefore they are not ashamed to say, that we must appeale from the CourtBernardine in marial. of Gods iustice, to the Court of his Mothers mercy. Fourth­ly, the Fathers did not so much as dreame of any merits of supererogation which should be in the Saints, and by them should be communicated vntovs: but all the interest and be­nefit which we haue to & in the merits of the Saints, in their iudgement, was, by vertue of the Communion of Saints: that as the members of one body enioy the strength and vi­gor that is in each other; so the members of Christ militant,Aug. in Psal. 130 receiue a certaine benefit from the gifts of God, bestowedCassand. consult. de Inuoc. Sanct. vpon the Saints triumphant, and doe as it were merite by their merits, because they are all members of one and the same mysticall body. But the Romanists hold, that the Saints doe supererogate, that is, hauing more merits then they need themselues, doe conferre some of their superabundance vp­on their poore brethren that want. Fiftly, the Fathers, when they spake of praying to the Saints, did not speake positiuely, but tropically, and figuratiuely, by hyperbolicall, and Rhe­toricall Apostophers, as may appeare plainely in the Orati­ons of Nazianzen, and other of their writings: But the Ro­manists conclude positiuely, and doctrinally, without any Rhetoricall figures, or Hyperbolicall elocutions. Sixtly, as Cassander confesseth, when the Fathers said to the Saints, Orate pronobis, they meant, Vtinam oretis pro nobis, Would to God they would pray for vs; and so they were rather wishes, then prayers: But the Romanists admit no such extenuation, but flatly affirme, that wee ought directly to pray vnto them as our Patrons, Protectors, and Intercessors. And lastly, the Fathers relyed not vpon the intercession of Saints, except there were in themselues a care and conscience of a godly [Page 226] life: but in Popery, notorious, wicked, and vngodly persons, that neuer thinke vpon amendment of their liues, but per­seuere in their sinnes without repentance: yet doe assure themselues to bee saued by the merits and intercession of the Saints. And thus, howsoeuer they make a shew of Fathers, to cloke their Idolatry withal; yet the Fathers, if they be right­ly vnderstood, are as much different from them, as blacke is from white. And the Fathers might bee free from Idolatrie, when as they remaine guiltie.

66. The third and last way whereby they turne the bles­sed Saints into Idols, is by putting their trust and confidence in their merits and mediation: which kinde of spirituall wor­ship is due only vnto the diuine Maiestie, as hath been shew­ed. The truth of which assertion may be proued, first, by their doctrine, & secondly, by the publike practice of their Church. Touching their doctrine, to omit the impious, impudent, and blasphemous opinions of their Monkes and Friers, who haue egregiously exceeded the bounds of all pietie in this point, left the Romanists should say, that they were but priuate mens conceits, and not the receiued doctrines of the Church; I will onely relate some few sentences out of their most pub­licke and athenticke writings.

67. And to begin with Peter Lumbard; he saith, that theLumbard lib. 4. dist. 45. Saints doe intercede for vs both by their merite, and by their af­fection: therefore we pray vnto them, that their merits may helpe vs, and that they would will our good; because, if they will it, God also will will it, and it shall be done. Thus hee makes Gods will to depend vpon theirs, and not theirs vpon Gods; and consequently, more trust to be reposed in them, then in God. Alexander Alensis, the most ancient of the Schoolemen,Alex. Alensis in 4. Sentent. q. 92. me [...]b. 1. art. 4. writeth, that the Saints are to bee prayed vnto for three cau­ses: First, eyther for our pouerty in meriting, that where our me­rits faile; others may patronize vs: or for our pouertie in contem­plation, that wee not being able to behold the highest light in it selfe, may behold the same in the Saints: or for our pouertie in louing, because the efficacie of prayer ariseth from deuotion: and for the most part, an imperfect man doth feele himselfe more [...]f­fected [Page 227] towards the Saints, then towards God. Secondly, for the glory of the Saints, that whilst wee obtaine that which wee desire by their suffrages, wee may magnifie them. And thirdly, for the reuerence of God, that a sinner that dares not come vnto him in his owne person, may fly to the Saints, and implore their helps. Bonauenture affirmeth, that the Saints by their merits haue not Bonauent. in 4. sentent. D. 45. onely deserued happinesse and glory to themselues, but also by their merits of supererogation, haue power to helpe others that pray vn­to them. And againe he saith, He that was before vnworthy, by praying to the Saints is made worthy. Aquinas giueth this reason for praying to the Saints; Quia vltima reducun­tur Aquinas suple [...] ▪ 3 part. qu. 72. art. 2. in Deum per media: Because the extremes are reduced to God by the meanes, therfore Gods benefits are conuayed vnto vs by the meanes of the Saints. Biel saith, that we oughtGab. Biel. su­per Canon. to fly to the refuge of the Saints, that we may be saued by their merits and prayers: and he saith further, that God hath giuen halfe his Kingdome to the blessed Virgine, the Queene of hea­uen; as Assuerus promised to Queene Ester: and so retayning iustice to himselfe, he hath graunted mercy to her to be exercised. And vpon this ground, is that saying of Bernhardine, that weBernhardine in marial. Antonin. part. 4. tit. 15. must appeale from the Court of Gods iustice, to the Court of his Mothers mercy. But Antoninus, the Archbishop of Florence is more playne then them all: for hee telleth vs, That it must needs be, that to whomsoeuer the blessed Virgin turneth her eyes, they must be iustified and saued. And againe, that Christ is not only an Aduocate, but a Iudge: and therefore a sinner dareth not approch vnto him; but that God hath prouided vs of an Ad­uocatresse, which is sweet and milde, and in whom is no bitter­nesse. And againe, Mary is that Throne of grace, spoken of Heb. 4. 16. to whom we must approch with confidence, that we Heb. 4. 16. may obtayne mercy, and find grace, in the time of neede: Againe, he calleth the Virgin Mary, the gate of heauen, because what­soeuer grace euer came out of heauen into the world, came out by her meanes: and whatsoeuer thing entreth into heauen, must en­ter by her: and so he calleth the other Saints, Portas coeli: The gates of heauen. Because by their prayers they carry vs intoSotus in confess. Cathol. heauen. Sotus saith, that the Saints are coadiutors, and [Page 228] cohelpers in the worke of our saluation. Many such-like blas­phemousSotus in confess. Cathol. sayings might bee alledged out of their subtile Schoolemen, whereby it euidently appeareth, that in those dayes the poore ignorant Romanists were taught to repose the trust and confidence of their saluation, in the merits and mediation of the Saints; yea, and that more then in Christ: as that publike Picture which was extant in many of their Churches doth more fully prooue: when as Christ our Saui­our was painted like a sterne man casting darts, and the peo­ple flying for succour to the Virgine Mary, who interposed her selfe, and shewing her Sonne her brests, receiued his darts in her garment. If this bee not, besides Idolatrie, hor­rible and fearefull blasphemy, let all men iudge.

68. But what? is the doctrine of latter times any whit purer? no verily: for the Councill of Trent, that was called in pretence to this end, to reforme abuses in the Church, and to restore Religion to some puritie, doth approoue and con­firmeConcil. Trident. Sess. 9. all these grosse opinions of the Schoole Diuines: for thus it decreeth; that it is good and profitable, humbly to inuo­cate the Saints, and to fly to their prayers and succour for the ob­tayning of blessing from God in Christ. And that wee may see the meaning of this Decree, the Romane Catechisme, whichCatechis. Roman. was made by the commaundement of the Bishop of Rome, doth more expressely affirme, that the Saints are therefore to be called vpon, because they pray continually for the saluation of men: and God bestoweth many benefits vpon vs for their merit and grace sake: and that they obtaine pardon for our sinnes, and reconcile vs into the fauour of God. And for the refining Ie­suites, they haue not yet refined this errour: for, Coster wri­teth,Coster Enchir. that the Saints are to be inuocated, both that they may me­diate our cause to God, and also, that themselues may helpe vs. Ʋiega, another Iesuite, saith, that they are as it were the dores, Viega in Apocal. by which an entrance is opened to vs vnto the most holy places in heauen. Osorius, another of the same stampe, affirmeth, thatOsorius [...]om. 3. co [...]ci [...]. pa. 6 [...]1. God giueth vs all good things by the intercession of the Saints. And lastly, to make vp the messe, Bellarmine himselfe, that isBell. de Sanctor. be [...]t. li. 1. ca. 20. more wary then all the rest, doth not blush to say, that Gods [Page 229] predestination is helped & supported by the prayers of the Saints, Bell. de Sanctor. beat. l. 1. c. 20. because God hath determined to vse their prayers for the effe­cting of mans saluation. Behold here a Map of the Romish do­ctrine. Who can now choose but account them Idolaters, when they thus teach the people, That all blessings descend vpon them by the meanes of the Saints; and so encourage them to repose their confidence in their merits?

69. But from their doctrine, let vs come to the practice of their Church, and we shall see this more cleerely: and heere some few examples shall serue for a taste; for to propound all in this kinde, would bee both tedious and needlesse. Thus therefore in their publike Seruice Bookes, Rosaries, and Bre­uiaries, they pray vnto the Saints:

To Saint Paul.

To Saint Iames the greater.

To Saint Thomas thus:

To Saint Iohn.

To Saint George thus:

Here Saint George is made a Sauiour, and that from sinne: and so either Christ is cleere put out of his office, or George ioyned with him in his office.

[Page 230]Againe, to Saint Erasmus.

To Saint Christopher.

To Saint Cosmus and Damianus.

To Francis the Fryer, thus:

This Frier Francis they make equall to Christ: and thereforePosseuine bibl. select. pag. 295. [...]oz de sig. eccles. tom. 2. pag. 200. they say, that Christ imprinted his fiue wounds vpon him, as if he also were to suffer for the world, and redeeme mankind, and that they were alike in all things: as those blasphemous Verses of two shamelesse Iesuites, Turselline and Bencius doeExue Francisc [...] [...]unica lacera (que) cu [...]ullo: qui Franciscus erat, iam tibi Christus crit. declare.

70. What should I trouble thee (gentle Reader) with any more of this trumpery? their Bookes are full of such-like prayers, if any please to read them: and that we may plaine­ly see, that they put their trust and confidence in them, not onely the words doe sufficiently signifie, but also the libe­rallFrancisci exuvijs (si qua lice [...]) in­due Christum▪ iam Franciscus crit, qui modo Christus erat. indulgences their Popes haue annexed to the deuout say­ings of such Orisons: As Pope Sixtus hath promised eleuen thousand yeeres pardon to them that shall say a certaine prayer before the Image of the Virgine Mary, beginning thus; Aue sancta Mater Dei, &c. But to leaue the rest of the Saints, and to come to the blessed Virgine, whom with Epiphanius, we blesse and honour, but in [...] cas [...] worship: it is aEpiphan. lib. 3. [Page 231] wonder into what an abominable Idoll they haue transla­ted, not her (for shee abhorres their impietie,) but the Idea and fancy of her, which they haue deuised in their owne braynes: for they call her the Queene of heauen, the Mother of mercy, the Gate of Paradise, the Life and hope of a sinner, the Light of the Church, the Lady of the world, the Aduocatresse and Mediatrix of mankinde: yea, they say, that the deathBernhardin­mariale. and passion of Christ and the holy Virgine, was for the re­demption of mankinde; and that she also must come betwixt God and vs for the remission of sinne; and that her Sonne Pet. Galatin. de arcan cathol. verit. pag. 515. and she redeemed the world with one heart: as Adam and Eue sold the world for one apple. And thus they ioyne the Virgine Mary with Christ in the office of our redemption, and so make her equall with him, which were somewhat tolerable, if they could stay there, but they climbe higher in impuden­cy, and not onely match her with Christ, but set her aboue him: For they tell vs of a vision, How Christ preparing to iudge the world, there were two Ladders set, that reached to heauen: the one red, at the top whereof Christ sate; theSpec. exempl. d. 7. 11. 4. other white, at the top whereof the Virgine Mary sate: and when the Friers could not get vp by the red Ladder of Christ, but euermore fell downe, Saint Francis called them to the white Ladder of our Lady, and there they were receiued. And a late Iesuite hath set forth to the view of the world certaineCarolus Scriban. alias, clarus Benarscius. Verses, wherein he preferres the milke of our Lady, in many respects, before the bloud of Christ: yea, they subiect Christ, now raigning in the heauens, to his Mothers command: as it is sung in some of their Churches:Gab. Bi [...]l lect. 80. in Canon miss [...]. Cassand. consult. pag. 155.

71. And this the Rosarie of the Virgine Mary doth more euidently manifest: for Dominicke, who was the first inuen­tor of it, ordayned that fiftie Ane Maries should be recited, and at euery tenth, one Pater noster, which together make a [Page 232] Rosarie: and for this purpose the same Dominicke framed fiue and fiftie Stones or Beades, and hung them together on a string, betwixt euery ten little ones, one great one, and cal­led them Patriloquia, as it were prayers to the Father; which he might more properly haue called, Matriloquia, prayers to the Mother: for here are ten Aues, to each Pater noster. And this was the originall of praying vpon Beads. Now out of these Rosaries, sprung there Mary Psalters: for three Ro­saries, to wit, an hundred and fifty Aue Maries, and fifteene Pater nosters, make one Mary Psalter, because, forsooth, the Psalter of Dauid consists of so many Psalmes: and to the fraternitie of this Psalter, and the sayers thereof, were giuen by diuers Popes, as Sixtus the fourth, and Innocent the eighth, threescore thousand yeeres of indulgence, and ple­nary remission both from the punishment and fault, one, in the time of life, and one in the houre of death. Is not heere, I pray you, the worship of the Virgine Mary exalted aboue the worship of Christ? who can doubt of it, seeing the pro­portion is ten to one, fifty to fiue, an hundred to ten, an hundred and fifty to fifteene? And no maruell, if it bee thus in their prayers, seeing it is as euill or worse in their deeds: for whereas wee haue one Church, or religious house, dedi­cated to Christ, we shall finde ten dedicated to Mary the Mo­ther of Christ: and so the Mother is aduanced aboue the Sonne, and yet she but a woman of flesh and bloud, saued by her Sonne, and blessed by that faith which shee had in him, and hee the Sonne of God, as well as the Sonne of Man, the Sauiour and Redeemer of mankinde.

72. But the most horrible Idolatrie and blasphemy of all the rest, is to be found in another Mary Psalter of theirs, compiled (as they say) by Bonauenture, and authorised in theCassand. consult. pag. 155. Church of Rome: wherein they apply all the whole Psalter of Dauid, to the Virgine Mary; and wheresoeuer they finde the name, Dominus, Lord, they put in, Domina, Lady: as for example, in the third Psalme, for, Lord, how are my foes in­creast; they say, Lady, how are my foes increast! and in the sixt Psalme, for, O Lord, correct mee not in thy wrath; they say, [Page 233] O Lady, correct me not in thy wrath. And in the 31. Psalme, for, Blessed are they, O Lord, whose sinnes are forgiuen; they say, Blessed are they whose hearts loue thee, O Virgine Mary; for their sinnes shall be forgiuen them by thee: and so cleane through the Psalter. If any desire to see the gulfe and dunghill of Super­stition and Idolatrie, practised in the Church of Rome, vnder the Inuocation of Saints, let him but read this one Psalter, which alone, if there were no other argument, is sufficient to conuince their whole Church of open and notorious Idola­trie: and that, Cassander himselfe confesseth in the place a­boue quoted.

73. Thus they exalt the Virgine Mary aboue Christ, and equall her with God: yea, which is horrible to speake, and fearefull to be recorded, they place her aboue God himselfe: for they teach, that a man may appeale to the Virgine Mary, not onely from a Tyrant, and from the Diuell; but euen from God himselfe. This writeth Bernardine de Busto, about 120.Bernardine de Busto. marial. p. 3. ser. 3. pa. 96 Posseuine in Appar. sacr. Pet. Mathaeus com. sub constit. Pii. 2. pag. 20. yeeres since, and his booke was authorised by Pope Alex­ander the sixt, and yet remaines so farre from all disallow­ance, that it is approoued by Posseuine, as a learned and god­ly booke. Out of which it must needes follow (which I trem­ble to vtter) that by their doctrine, the Virgine Mary is grea­ter then God; because euery appeale is from the lesser to the greater.

74. But no maruell, if they preferre Mary to Christ, that is, the Mother before the Sonne, seeing they doe as much to two Fryers, Francis and Dominicke. He that would see how Francis is matched and exalted aboue Christ, let him read the booke of his Conformities, and hee will bee astonished at their madnesse. Also, of Dominicke they write most strange things, and such, as Christ neuer did the like: as for exam­ple; Christ raysed but three dead (saith Antoninus:) but Do­minicke Antonin. part. 3. tit. 23. c. 1. [...]. 3. raysed three at Rome, and forty that were drowned in a Riuer neere to Tholosse. Christ being made immortall after his resurrection, entred twice into the house, the dores being shut: but Dominicke, being a mortall man, entred in­to a Church in the night, the dores being shut, that he might [Page 234] not waken the brethren. Christ had all power commit­ted vnto him in heauen and earth: and Dominicke did par­take the same power with him; for the Angels serued him, the Elements obeyed him, & the Diuels trembled at him. Christ was the Lord absolutely, and by authority: but Dominicke principally, and by possession. Christ was laid at his birth in a Manger, and wrapped in clouts to keepe him from cold: but Dominicke being an infant, would often get out of his bed, and as if hee abhorred all delights of the flesh, lye vpon the bare ground. Christ neuer prayed, but hee was heard, if he would; except in the Garden, when hee prayed that the Cup might passe away from him, where praying according to his sensuall part, would not be heard according to reason: but Dominicke neuer desired any thing of God, but it was graunted vnto him. Christ being borne, a Starre appeared in the East, which directed the Wise-men to him, and fore­shewed that he should be the light of the world: but Domi­nicke being borne, and ready to bee baptized, his Godmo­ther saw a Starre in his forehead, foretelling a new light of the world. Lastly, Christ loued vs, and washed away our sinnes by his bloud: so did Dominicke; for hee whipt him­selfe thrice euery day with an Iron chayne, and drew bloud each time out of his sides: once for his owne sinnes, which were very small; the second for those that were in Purga­tory; and the third for those that liue in the world. Is not Dominicke heere in some things equalled, and in others pre­ferred before our blessed Sauiour, Iesus Christ?

75. And thus to passe ouer all their false and counterfeit Saints, which eyther neuer were in rerum natura, or were not such as they make them: as Christopher, George, Cathe­rine, Bel. de beat. Sanct. lib. 1. ca. 9. and such like. For it is a true saying of Augustine, or of some other; Multorum corpora honorantur in terris, quorum animae torquentur in inferno: The bodies of many are honou­red on earth, whose soules are tormented in hell. And to o­mitCaict. tract. de concept. & In­dulg. Bel. de eccles. tri­ump. l. 1. c. 9. that the Pope may erre in the canonizing of Saints, it be­ing grounded vpon false miracles: as Caietane acknow­ledgeth, and others; though Bellarmine be of another minde, [Page 235] and laboureth to prooue the contrary: but (God wot) with very shallow reasons, as any may discerne that will but read him. To omit (I say) all this, by that which hath beene sayd it is most cleere, that vnder the doctrine and practice of In­uocation of Saints in the Church of Rome, lyeth lurking most abominable Idolatry.

76. The last principall branch of Idolatry, maintayned and practised in the Church of Rome, is the adoration and worshipping of the Crosse. Now by the Crosse they vnder­stand, eyther the true Crosse of Christ, together with any part or portion thereof; or the picture or image of that Crosse, whether it bee materiall and permanent, or transeunt and formall onely. Of both which this is the doctrine of the Church of Rome: that not onely that Crosse whereon Christ dyed, but euery picture and representation of it, whether grauen or paynted [...], or expressed in the ayre, with the hand and fingers, is to be kissed and adored. This is the positionVasques de Adora. l. 3. c. 2. Bel. de Imag. l. 3. c. 27. 28. 29. of Ʋasques the Iesuite; and hee saith, that it is the doctrine and faith of the Romane Church. And the same is auouched by Bellarmine, and confirmed by many arguments (weake ones, God wot) in three whole Chapters: wherein hee la­boureth to prooue; first, that the Crosse it selfe: secondly, that the Image of the Crosse: and thirdly, that the signe of the Crosse, are all to be worshipped: and with what kind of worship? Aquinas resolues vs in that point, whē he affirmeth,Aquin. Sum. part. 3. art. 4. that the very Crosse of Christ, whereon he was crucified, is to bee worshipped with diuine worship: for two causes; both for the representation or resemblance it hath to Christ; as also, for that it touched the body of Christ: but the signe of the Crosse or Crucifix, is to be worshipped with latria, onely in the former respect. And this is still the doctrine of their Church: for neither is it taxed in their late editions for er­rour, nor contradicted by any other Romish Doctor. Yea, aChrys. a visitat. de verb. domi­ni, tom. 4 l. 6. c. 7 late famous Papist, and a professor of Diuinitie, doth plainely confirme the fame: dedicating his booke to Pope Clement the eighth, for he saith in playne words, that they worship the Crosse with the same worship wherewith they adore Christ him▪ [Page 236] selfe: and that they pray vnto the Crosse, as vnto him that was crucified on it, and repose the hope of their saluation vpon it.

77. And this is the doctrine of the Romish Synagogue at this day; and their practice is correspondent thereunto: for they kneele vnto the Crosse, they kisse it, they creepe vn­to it, they pray vnto it; yea, they repose the hope of their sal­uation in it: as appeareth in that forme of prayer vsed in their Masse booke:

Now that this is heathenish Idolatrie, may appeare by these reasons: First, because outward religious adoration is giuen to a piece of wood, or brasse, or gold, or some other matter.Aug. in Faust. lib. 15. Secondly, because diuine worship, euen latria, which Augu­stine saith, is proper onely vnto God, is giuen to a creature: for such is the Crosse, at the best. Thirdly, because they pray vnto it, as vnto a liuing thing. Fourthly, because they repose the hope of their saluation in it. And lastly, because many, if not all of these Reliques, which are beleeued to bee frag­ments of Christs Crosse, are false and counterfeit; as hath beene shewed already. In all these respects the Crosse is made an Idoll, and the worshippers of it are no better then Idola­ters.

78. Ob. I, but the Crosse touched Christ, and therefore it is to bee worshipped with diuine worship. R. So did the Manger wherein hee lay, being an infant; and the Graue wherein he was layd, being dead; and the Pillar whereunto he leaned, being whipped; and the Asse where on hee rode, being in his iourney to the City: yea, so did the wombe of the blessed Virgine his Mother, before hee was borne: and yet they will not say that any of these are to bee worshipped with latria. I am sure the Apostles cannot bee found to haue giuen any maner of religious worship to any of these things, much lesse diuine worship: though I deny not, but that the true Reliques of Christ, and those things that any waies per­tayned vnto him, were reuerenced without doubt by his [Page 237] friends after his departure: and so farre we also willingly con­descend vnto them; but that any religious worship was giuen vnto thē they can neuer prooue. Ob. I, but the Crosse was theBell. de Imag. lib. 2. cap. 27. instrument of Christs passion, and Mans redemption, and the Altar of that great Sacrifice, and the Ladder by which Christ ascended into heauen; therefore it is to bee worshipped. R. So was Iudas an instrument of Christs passion, and our redemption: as Saint Augustine teacheth, when he saith, thatAug. in Psal. 34. Iudas was elected by Christ, to the end, that by him hee might fulfill our redemption; and so was Pilate and Caiphas: yet these are not therefore to be worshipped, vnlesse wee will reuiue the old heresie of the Cai [...]nians and the Marrionites. And soAug. de baeres. cap. 18. Iraen. li. 1. ca. 29. was the Speare that let out his heart bloud, which was the price of our redemption; and yet they themselues doe not giue diuine worship vnto it for that cause, albeit they make an Idoll of it, as hath beene declared. Ob. I, but manyBell. de Imag. lib. 2. cap. 27. mysteries are signified by the Crosse: as first, Christian per­fection, in the longitude, latitude, height, and profunditie of it: the profundity signifying faith; the height, hope; the latitude, charitie; and the longitude, perseuerance. Second­ly, the effect of Christs passion: the highest peece of wood signifying, that heauen was opened, and God pacified: the lowest, that was fastned in the ground, that bel was emptied, and the Diuell conquered: the ouerthwart peece, that the whole world was redeemed, &c. Thirdly, the vniting of Iewes and Gentiles: the two armes of the Crosses vnder one title, representing the vnion of two people vnder one head. These, and diuers other mysteries are hidden vnder the Crosse, therefore it is to be worshipped with diuine worship. R. Suppose that all these mysteries were there to be cōceiued; yet to say, that therefore it is to be worshipped, is a silly rea­son, and scarce befitting the learning of Bellarmine: for by the same argument, all their Sacraments, and many other things, should be worshipped with diuine worship. Ob. I, but the Crosse was miraculously found out by Helena: and that not before Constantines time, when it might safely bee wor­shipped; and it was reuealed to bee the true Crosse, by eui­dent [Page 238] miracles: therefore it is to be worshipped with diuine worship. R. Graunt all this to bee true, which notwith­standing may probably be questioned: yet that this doth not prooue that the Crosse is to bee worshipped, Helenes owne example doeth shew: for as Ambrose writeth, Shee wor­shipped Ambros de obitu Theodos. not the wood of the Crosse, but him that hung vpon the wood, because this (saith he) is a heathenish errour, &c. neither can they euer prooue that it was therefore reuealed, that it might be worshipped.

79. Did euer any man read more pittifull arguments? the rest which [...]ee vseth are all of the same stampe. Ob. I, but a Crucifix is like vnto Christ, saith hee, therefore it i [...]to beeBell. ibid. worshipped with latria. R. But the Virgin his Mother was more like to him, and yet they giue not vnto her so high a worship. Ob. I, but the Fathers held the Crosse in great reuerence, and the Image of the Crosse, and worshipped them. R. True, they reuerenced them, and held them in great estimation: but yet there was no worship giuen vnto them, vntill neere 400. yeeres after Christ. About that time began this superstition: for in Saint Ambrose time it was not crept in, as appeareth by that testimony before alledged: not in Arnobius time, who plainely affirmeth, that they did Arnob. lib. 8. not worship Crosses. Againe, those Fathers that did adore them, did not worship the Crosse or the Crucifix, but him that hung vpon the Crosse; as may appeare by Hieroms testi­monyHierom in epit. Paulae. concerning Paulae, who saith, that shee falling prostrate before the Crosse, worshipped as if shee had seene the Lord there hanging before her: by which it is playne, that she worship­ped not the Crosse, but the Lord. And Ambrose also witnes­sethAmbros. de obitu Theodos. the same, when he calleth it an heathenish errour, and the vanitie of wickedmen to worship the Crosse. But the Romanists teach, that the Crosse it selfe, and the Crucifix are to be wor­shipped, and that with the highest worship. Ob. I, but ma­ny and strange miracles haue beene wrought by the signe of the Crosse; therefore it is to bee worshipped. R. The ar­gument is naught: for if euery worker of miracles should be worshipped with diuine adoration, then all the Apostles [Page 239] might challenge this honour vnto them. So might Iannes and Iambres that resisted Moses. Yea, so might Antichrist himselfe: for his comming is with lying signes and won­ders: lying, not onely in respect of their substance, which is sometimes counterfeit: but also in respect of the end, which is to seduce, when the miracle for substance may bee true: and this is both Saint Chrystostomes and Saint Augustines ex­positionChrysost. in 2. thes. 2. Aug. de ciuit. lib. 20. c. 19. of that place: besides, the myracles that were done at or before this signe, were effected by the power of the faith and inuocation of Christ crucified; and not by the bare signe of the Crosse, as most of the Fathers confesse, and all ofAug. ser. 19. de▪ [...]and. Cyril. ca­techis. 13. Nazian. ad Ne­mes. Orig. cont. Cels. Euseb. hist. l. 8. c. 7. them doe secretly insinuate. And therefore the signing of themselues with the Crosse, was a secret kinde of inuocation of Christ crucified; as Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth. And thus it followeth, that those myracles which they talke of: as the driuing away of Diuels, and ouercomming mor­tall enemies, and such like, are not to be ascribed to the signe of the Crosse, but to inuocation, and prayer, and faith in Christ crucified.

80. Ob. I, but the Apostle Paul saith, God forbid that I Gal, 6. 14. should reioyce in any thing, but inthe Crosse of our Lord Iesus Gal. 2. 14. Christ: and, He tooke the handwriting that was against vs, and Gal. 2. 20. nayled it on his Crosse: and, he set all things at peace through the bloud of his Crosse, &c. therefore it is to be worshipped. R. The consequent of this arguments as good as the former; for how can it follow, that because the Crosse was the instru­ment of our redemption, therefore it should be adored? The weaknes of this sequell is before discouered. Besides, by the Crosse is vnderstood most commonly in the Scripture, eyther the whole worke of Christs passion, or afflictions and perse­cutions for Christs sake; neyther of which, especially the lat­ter, are to be adored with diuine adoration. In a word, there is nothing they can alledge, that doth carry with it any shew of sound reason, to hide the shame of their Church in this o­pen Idolatrie, and yet they labour tooth and nayle for it; but they profite but a little.

81. Wee confesse that there was a holy and commendable [Page 240] vse of the transcant signe of the Crosse in the primitiue Church: to wit, as a badge of Christian profession, to signi­fie that they were not ashamed of their crucified God, which the heathen and wicked Iewes vsed to cast in their teeth: and so of the permanent Crosse erected in publike places, to be as it were a trophee and monument of the exaltation of him that dyed on the Crosse. But now Popery hath turned this laudable vse of the Crosse into Paganish abomination; and hath giuen to it that honour which belonged to him that dyed vpon the Crosse: and therefore wee most iustly accuse them of fou [...]e Idolatrie, and finde them guilty without all controuersie, and that not onely in th [...]s last enditement, tou­ching the Crosse, but also in the foure former heads. And therefore the conclusion is by necessary consequence most firme and true, that seeing the Church of Rome is thus many wayes guiltie of Idolatry, therefore it is to bee abandoned and forsaken, and that religion which maintayneth this im­piety, worthily to be abhorred.

MOTIVE. VIII. That Religion which implyeth manifold contradiction in it selfe, and is contrary to it selfe in many things, cannot be the true Religion: but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome: ergo, &c.

1. IT is an old saying and true, Oportet mendacem esse me­morem: It behooueth a lyar to haue a good memory, lest he crosse himselfe in his tale, and so discouer his falshood. This saying is verified in our Aduersaries the Romanists, whose Religion, being nothing else but a bundle of lyes, and a hotch-potch of olde heresies, crosseth it selfe in many sub­stantiall poynts, and thereby reuealeth the manifold errours and falsities that lurke in the bosome thereof. That this is true, the discourse ensuing thereof (I hope) shall make so ma­nifest, that they themselues shall not be able to gainfay it.

[Page 241]2. The Maior proposition in this argument is of such eui­dentMAIOR. verity, that by no shew of reason it can possibly be con­tradicted; considering that truth is alwayes, and in euery part, like to it selfe, and agreeing, consenting, and conspi­ring with it selfe, as a perfect body, wherein there is such a sweet harmony of all the members. that one is not contrary to another, but all tend to one and the same end, and vnite their forces together, for the good of the whole: for which cause the Orator defineth truth to bee that which is simple and Cic. offic. lib. 1. Terent. Bernard. in ser. syncere. And the Poet saith, that it seeketh no corners. To which Saint Bernard alluding, thus writeth, Non amat ve­ritas angulos, non ei diuersoria placent, in medio stat, &c. i. It loueth no corners, by-wayes doe not please it, it standeth in the miast. And therefore the Ancients in their Hierogliphicks represented truth by the picture of the Sunne, not onely inPierius valer. Hieroglyph. l. 44. pag. 430. respect of the puritie and clarity of it; but also in respect of the simplicitie and vnitie. Duplicia enim & multiplicia sunt veritati contraria; (i) Duplicity and multiplicity, are con­trary to verity. But falsity, errour, and lying, is full of doubt­ings, windings, and contrarieties, like a dreame in the night, the end whereof, for the most part is neuer agreeable to the beginning. And this is that which the Philosopher teacheth,Aristotle. when he saith, that Mendacium de seipso duplex est; A lye is double of it selfe. And as Chrysostome noteth, Mendacia si Cprysost. super Mato. 21. non habent quem deciptant, ipsa sibi mentiuntur; Lyes, if they haue not one to deceiue, they deceiue and beguile them­selues. So that it must needes follow, that that Religion which infoldeth in it selfe contradictions, and contrarieties, cannot be the truth, but must of necessitie be lying and erro­nious.

3. I therefore leaue the Maior thus cleared, and come toMINOR. the proofe of the Minor, or second proposition, which is, that the Religion of the Church of Rome is replenished with many contradictions, and is at variance and discord in it selfe, and therefore cannot stand: as our Sauiour concludeth of anMat. 12. house or a kingdom. And to shew this to be true, let vs first be­gin [Page 242] with the Sacrament: in the doctrine whereof are en­wrapped many absurd contradictions; as for example.

4. It is a ground and principle of their Religion, and of1. Contrad. ours, and of the truth, that Christ our Sauiour tooke verily and truely, flesh of the Virgine Mary, and had a true hu­mane body, like to vs in all things, sinne onely excepted: and therefore that this body of his had all the demensions and circumscriptions of a body, and all the properties and qualities naturally belonging thereunto. This ground of truth the Church of God hath euer defended against all He­retikes of former and latter times, that impugned the same: to wit, the Marionites, the Manichees, and the Eutychians, with diuers others, that thought, and taught erroniously concerning the humanity of Christ: affirming that he had no true, but a fantasticall body. Now this error is in outward appearance condemned by the Church of Rome, and ad­iudged as a damnable heresie. But if we looke into other of their doctrines, and necessary consequences that may be de­riued therefrom, we shall fi [...]de, that they crosse their owne positions, and hold in substance as much as the olde Here­tikes did.

5. For in their doctrine of the Sacrament they teach, that Christ gaue his owne naturall body with his owne hands toBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 19. Coster Enchirid. his Apostles, when he said, This is my body: by which it must needs follow, that he both kept his body to himselfe, sitting at the Table, and also gaue it to his Apostles: so that at this first Supper there were thirteene bodies of Christ; for euery one (by their doctrine) had the true naturall body of Christ wholly communicated vnto him. Now how is Christs bo­die heere a true naturall body, being in thirteene places at once? From hence thus I reason: A true naturall body is circumscribed, and can be but in one place at once: but by the Popish doctrine of transsubstantiation, Christs body was in diuers places at once; therefore it was no true naturall body. And so the doctrine of Transubstantiation dōth con­tradict and ouerthrow the doctrine of the truth of Christs [Page 243] humane nature: and that, not onely after it was glorifyed, whereof, peraduenture, there might be some better shew of reason, but euen whilst it was here vpon the earth, subiect to all humane sinlesse infirmities, yea, to death it selfe. And this conclusion is not ours, but S. Augustines: that is, Take away Aug. Epist. [...]7. ad Dardan. from bodies (saith he) space of place, and they will bee no where, and because they will be no where, therefore they will not be at all. And againe, in the same Epistle he saith, speaking of Christ, that [...] We must take heed that we do not so build vp the Diuinitie of Christ a man, that we take away the truth of his body. But the Romanists destroy the truth of Christs humanitie, by giuing vnto it an essentiall being and subsisting in many distant pla­ces at once; and make it no body in truth, by denying vnto it a certayne circumscription of one singular place at one time, which [...]s a necessary acc [...]slarie to all quantitiue bodies.

6. Bellarmine, to salue this contradiction, labours maine­ly,Bell. de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 4. 5. stretching all the strings of his wit to the highest straine, euen till they cracke againe: but all his labour is not worth a rush: euery childe may say that he doth but tryfle; for first, hee saith that Christs body is but in one place locally, but in many places sacramental [...]y. Secondly, that it is in the con­secrated hoast, definitiuè, and not circumscriptiuè; definitely, and not circumscriptiuely. Thirdly, (not satisfying himselfe with this euasion neither) he saith, that it is in the Sacrament, Tanquam Deus est in loco, As God is in a place: that is, by a supernaturall presence onely. Lastly, he flyeth to Gods om­nipotency, and disclayming all naturall respect, saith, it is a miracle: so that (in truth) he knoweth not what to say, one part of his speech thwarting and crossing another.

7. For if the body of Christ bee in the Sacrament, sacra­mentally onely, then it is not, either definitely, as Angels and Spirits are said to be, or diuinely, as God is: for, sacra­mentally to be in a place, is to bee there by way of relation, and not by corporall existence, as all know; and so we say, that Christs body is there present. Againe, if it be definitiuely, then it cannot be a substantiall body, subsisting of parts, and members, and quantitie, as they say Christs body doth in the [Page 444] Sacrament: because it is proper to Spirits, and intellectuall essences, to bee in a place after that manner, and not to bo­dyes;Aquin. p. 1. q. 52. art. 2. as their learned Aquinas telleth vs: and if it bee there after the manner of Gods presence, then it cannot bee there after the manner of a body; vnlesse with the Anthropomor­phites, he will impiously ascribe a body vnto God. And lastly, touching Gods omnipotency, and the miracle arising there­from, Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth, that God cannotBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 2. doe that which doth imply contradiction; for that is to bee vnlike to himselfe, and to deny himselfe: but these things are contradictories, a body with quantity, that is, with iust length, bredth, proportion, sitting at the Table, and at the same time, the same body without length, bredth, or pro­portion, hidden in the bread; a body visible, and yet the same inuisible at the same instant: a body with position and situation of parts, and yet the same without position and situ­ation of parts, included in euery cr [...]mme of the hoast. Yea, lastly, one body sitting at the Table with his Apostles, spea­king, breathing, spreading his hands, and full of infirmitie: the other in the stomacks of his Disciples, neither speaking, nor breathing, nor stirring, no [...] subiect to infirmitie. Now compare the termes together: Sitting, and not sitting: visi­ble, and inuisible: with situation, and without situation: one, and not one, and all at the same instant and moment of time, are grosse contradictions, which, as Bellarmine confes­seth, Almighty God himselfe cannot reconcile, who by his omnipotent power is able to doe all things: but this is no­thing, and therefore is rather to be accounted a defect of im­potency then an effect of omnipotency: Dicitur enim Deus Aug. de ciuit. lib. 5. cap. 10. omnipotens faciendo quod vult, non patiendo quod non vult. i. For God is sayd to be omnipotent, by doing that which he will, not by suffering that which he will not.

8. From hence it must needes follow, that heere can bee no miracle; and that not onely because miracles are extra­ordinary works of God; and this change of substances is or­dinary in euery Sacrament, as they say: and miracles are not contrary, but aboue or beside nature; but this is flat con­trary, [Page 245] not onely to nature, but to God himselfe, the Authour and Creator of nature: and miracles are alwaies sensible, but this is insensible, and cannot bee discerned by any outward meanes: but also for that no miracle can imply contradicti­on in it selfe, as this must needes doe, if it were as they would haue it. For when Aarons Rodde was turned into a Serpent, it left to be a Rodde; and when it turned into a Rodde, it left to be a Serpent. And when the Water was turned into Wine, it left to bee Water, it was impossible that it should haue beene both Water and Wine at one time, in one and the same respect; or a Rodde and a Serpent at once. And so of all other miracles, there is not one to be found that enwrap­pethAug. detrinit. cap. 10. contradictions. Besides all which, Saint Augustine con­cludeth peremptorily, that Sacraments may haue honour, vt Religiosa: but not amazement vt admiranda, as miracles. And Thomas Aquinas more plainely saith, Ea quae contradictionem Aquin. p. 1. q. 25. art. 3. implioant, sub diuina potentia non continentur. i. Those things which imply contradiction, cannot fall vnder the power of God.

9. They reply, that they teach no more then Cyprian did, thirteeene hundred yeeres since, who said that Christ did Cyprian. ser. de coena dom. beare himselfe in his owne hands at the last Supper. I answere, that Cyprian in that place, & the rest of the Fathers elsewhere, did often vse hyperbolicall speeches, to extoll the dignity of the Sacrament, and to shew the certainty and efficacy of our communion with Christ, and of our spirituall eating of him: but they neuer meant so as the Romanists doe; that Christ bore his reall, naturall, substantiall body in his owne hands, and gaue it to his Apostles after a fleshly manner. For Cyprian Cyprian. epist. 202. ad Euodiū. expoundeth himselfe in another place, when hee saith, that Sacraments haue the names of those things which they signifie. And Saint Augustine more plainly saith, that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands after a sort. If it had beene really, and substantially, what neede hee haue added, after a sort? for this word, as they vse to speake in Schooles, is, Terminus diminutiuus, qui realitati vbique detrahit. A diminitiue terme, which detracteth from the realtie and true being of a thing. And [Page 246] this speech, Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands after a sort, is all one with that in another place, After a certaine manner the Sacrament of Christs body, is Christs body. So that it is playne, that when the Fathers said, Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands, they meant nothing, but that he bore in his hands the Sacrament of himselfe: and thus this first contra­diction is irreconciliable. I come to a second, and that in the Sacrament, which is no lesse palpable.

10. It is a principle of their Religion, and of the truth2. Contrad. it selfe, that Christ after his resurrection ascended into hea­uen, and there filleth a place, and hath figure, forme, and disposition of parts, and is circumscribed within a certaine compasse, according to the nature of a body. This is Bellar­mines Bell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 7. owne assertion, and it is consonant to sound doctrine, confirmed both by manifest Scripture, and vniforme consent of ancient Fathers: for Scripture, Christ is said to bee like vnto vs; and not barely like, but like in all things, that is, both in nature, and in the qualities and quantities of nature. And to put the matter out of doubt, onely one thing is ex­ceptedPhil. 2. 7. Heb. 2. 17. Heb. 4. 25. wherin he is not like vnto vs, and that is Sinne, where­by he is absolutely left to bee like vnto vs in all other things. And lest any should thinke, that that was true onely whilst he was here vpon earth, the Apostle in the forenamed places applyeth it to him being in heauen: for hee saith, Wee haue not an High-priest which cannot be touched with our infirmities, and therefore let vs boldly goe vnto the throne of grace: where the Apostles argument were of no force, if he were like vnto vs here on earth, onely in the state of his humilitie, and not also now, being in heauen, in the state of glory: for sinfull man might thus reply, True, Christ was like our nature whilst he liued amongst vs; but now, being glorified, he hath put off our nature, and therefore we dare not presume to come vnto him. Yes, saith the Apostle, he is still like vnto vs, and hath not put off our nature, but the infirmities of our nature onely, which were the sequels of sinne, as we also shall doe when we shall be translated into heauen after the resurrecti­on. And this Saint Luke more plainely auoucheth, when he [Page 247] saith, that after he had blessed them, he departed from them, and Luk. 24. 5. was carryed vp into heauen: and that whilst they beheld, he was taken vp by a cloude out of their sight. Where we see plainelyAct. 1. 9. a locall motion of Christ from earth to heauen: and there­fore there must needs be of him a locall situation in the hea­uens. As also Saint Peter in expresse words doeth affirme, when he saith, that the heauens must containe or receiue him, Act. 3. 21. vntill the time of restauration of all things. Thus this doctrine is consonant to holy Scripture.

11. Now let vs see how it was entertayned by the ancient Fathers: thus they write. Athanasius: When Christ said, I Athanas. in dis­put. contra Ar­rian. goe to the Father, he spake of the humane nature which hee haed assumed: for it is the propertie of him to goe and come, who is circumscribed with certaine limits of places; and forsaking that place where it was, commeth to the place where it was not. Na­zianzene Nazianz. ad Cledonium. saith, Wee professe one and the same Lord, passible in the flesh, impossible in his Godhead; circumscribed in body, vn­circumscribed in deity; the same both earthly and heauenly, vi­sible, and inuisible; comprehended in place, and not comprehen­ded. Ibid. Againe, Christ as man is circumscribed, and contayned in place; Christ as God is vncircumscribed, and contayned within no place. Augustine saith, Christ, as man, according to his bo­dy, August. in Ioh. tract. 21. Cyril in Ioh. lib. 6. c. 14. Fulgent. ad Thrasimind. Vigil. contra Eutych. lib. 4. is in a place; but as God, filleth all places. Cyril saith, Though Christ hath taken from hence the presence of his body: yet in the maiestie of his deitie, hee is alwayes present. Fulgentius saith, One and the same Christ, a locall Man of a Woman his mother, who is the infinite God of God his Father. Ʋigilius the Martyr, Christ is in all places, according to the nature of his deitie: but is contayned in one place, according to the nature of his humanity. Damascene, The difference of natures in Christ is not taken away Damasc. apud. Euagrium lib. 2. histor. c. 4. Leo. in solemn. natiuit. ser. 1. by their vnion in one person: but the proprietie of each nature is kept safe. Leo, one of their Popes, Christ hath vnited both na­tures together by such a league, that neither glorification doth consume the inferiour nature, nor assumption doth diminish the su­periour. To these I might adde many more, but these are suf­ficient to prooue, that this doctrine, touching the truth of Christs humanitie, now glorified in the heauens; that he hath [Page 248] retained our nature with all the proprieties, sinne onely and infirmities excepted, is concordant both with holy Scripture, and with the voited opinions of all reuerend antiquitie.

12. Now this doctrine is crossed and contradicted by that other doctrine of theirs, touching Transubstantiation, and the carnall and corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament, for this they teach, that the body of Christ is in the Sacra­mentBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 5. with the whole magnitude thereof, together with a true order and disposition of parts, flesh, bloud, and bone, as he was borne, liued, crucified, rose againe: and yet they say that the same body in the Eucharist, though it hath magni­tude and extention, and disposition of parts agreeable to the forme of an humane body, neuerthelesse doth not fill a place, neither is to bee extended nor proportioned to the placeBell. Ibid. which it possesseth: here be pregnant and manifest contra­dictions, Christ hath one body, and yet many bodies: euen as many as there are consecrated hoasts in the world, that is, it may be a thousand bodies at once; and so his body is one, and not one at the same time. Againe, this body is in hea­uen in a place, and the same body at the same instant is on the Altar, without being compassed about with place: to be in heauen, and to be in earth at one instant, are contradictory propositions, being vnderstoode of finite substances, and not of that infinite essence which filleth all places: for they im­ply thus much, to be in heauen, and net to be in heauen; to be in earth, and not to be in earth, which be the rules of Lo­gicke, and Reason the mother of Logicke, cannot be toge­ther true. Againe, at one moment of time to be aboue, and yet below, to bee remooued farre off, and yet bee neere ad­ioyning, to come to one place, and yet not to depart from an­other, are so meerely opposite to each other, that they can­not be reconciled. And lastly, a body to haue forme, mag­nitude, extention, and disposition of parts, and yet not with these to fill a place, is as much as to say, it is a body, and yet not a bodie, it is in a place, and yet not in that very same place: these are contradictions so euident, that it is impossible for the wit of man to reconcile them.

[Page 249]13. Notwithstanding the aduocates of the Romish Syna­gogue labour might and maine in this taske, and by manyBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 3. arguments endeauour to reunite these oppositions: first, by Gods omnipotency: secondly, by the qualities of a glorifi­ed body: and thirdly, by arguments from the discourse of reason. From hence they thus argue, All things are possible to God, and therefore this is possible; neither is there any thing excepted from the omnipotency of God, saue these things, Quae facere non est facere, sed deficere (as Bellarmine speaketh) that is, which to doe, is not to doe, but to vndoe, and doe argue rather impotency then potency, of which sort (that one body should be in many places at once, is not, saith he) because it is not in expresse words excepted in Scripture, as to lye and to denye himselfe are. To this I answere, first, that albeit the Scripture doth not expresly except this from Gods omnipotency, to make one body to bee in two places at once, yet implyedly it doth, for it denyeth power or rather weaknesse to God to doe those things which imply contra­diction:2. Cor. 1. 19. of which kinde this is, for one body to be in many places at once. And Bellarmine himselfe saith, that this is aBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 2. first principle in the light of nature, euery thing is, or is not, which being taken away, all knowledge faileth. Secondly, I answere, that the power of God is not so much to be considered as his will, nor what he can doe, but what he hath reucaled in his word, that hee will doe; for if wee argue from his power toTertul. aduers. Prax. cap. 10. the effect, Wee may deuise God (saith Tertullian) to doe any thing, because he could doe it. And therefore the same Au­thour saith, Dei posse, velle est, Dei nonposse, nolle. God can of stones raise vp Children vnto Abraham (saith Iohn Baptist.)Mat. 3. 9. Now if any should hence conclude, that any of Abrahams children were made of stones, in a proper speech, all would thinke him to haue no more wit then a stone. And to this accordeth Theodoret, when hee saith, That God can doe all Theod. Dial. 3. things which hee will, but God will not doe any of these things which are not agreeable to his nature. But for to make a body to be without quantity, and a quantity to be without dimen­sion, and dimension without a place, that is as much to say, a [Page 250] body without a body, and quantity without quantity, and a place without a place, is contrary to Gods nature; and there­fore cannot bee agreeable to his will, and so hath no cor­respondence with his power. And lastly, I answere, that it is no good reason to say, God can doe such a thing, therefore he doth it; but rather thus, God will doe such a thing, there­fore he can doe it: and thus the Scripture teacheth vs to rea­son: Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord, that did hee in heauen and in Psal. 135. 6. earth, and not whatsoeuer hee could doe, but whatsouer it pleased him to do; and the Leper said to our Sauiour Christ, Master, if thou wilt, thou canst make me cleane: no [...], if thou canst, thou wilt; but if thou wilt, thou canst.

14. Secondly, whereas they obiect that Christs bodie af­ter his glorification, is indued with more excellent qualities then any other naturall body, by reason of that super-excel­lent glory wherewith it is adorned aboue all others, and thereby as he came to his Apostles, the dores being shut, and rose out of his graue, notwithstanding the stone that lay vpō it; and appeared vnto Paul on earth, being at the same time in heauen: so he is in the Eucharist after a strange and mira­culous manner, and yet is in heauen at the same time. I an­swereTheodoret. Dial. 2. p. 268. first with Theodoret, that Christs bodie is not changed by his glorification into another nature, but remaineth a true bodie, filled with diuine glory: And with Augustine, that Christ gaue Aug. ad Dardan. Epist. 57. vnto his flesh immortality, but tooke not away nature: and in another place, That though Christ had a spirituall body after Idem ad Consen. Epist. 146. his resurrection, yet it was a true bodie, because he said to his Disciples, Palpate & videte, feele and see; and as his body was then after his resurrection, so it is now being in the hea­uens. Secondly, that when hee came out of the graue, the Angell remoued the stone, with Hierome, and Iustine Martyr: Hierom. in Psal. 104. Iustin Martyr quaest. 117. Theodor. Dial. 2 Cyril Alex. in Io [...]. lib. 12. Cap. 53. and when he entred into the house, the dores being shut, that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage, as vnto their Creator, with Theodoret, and Cyrill: and that when hee ap­peared vnto Paul going to Damascus, if it was in the aire, or on the earth (as it may be doubted) that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant: for farre bee it from vs so [Page 251] to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens, that he cannot be where he pleaseth. And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresseAquin. Sum. q. 57. art. 6. ad 3. words, which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth.

15. Thirdly, by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions, and thus disputeth: God be­ingBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. c. 3. but one simple and inuisible essence, is in infinite places at once, and he might create another world, and fill it with his presence, and be in two worlds at one instant: and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body, and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body: therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once: againe, one place may containe two bodies, and yet be not two places, but one; as when Christ rose out of the graue, the Sepulchre being shut; therefore one body may be in two places at once, and yet not two bodies, but one. Last­ly, there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this, and yet are beleeued, there­fore this also is to be beleeued as well as they.

16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences: the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause: for, who knoweth not, but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature, nor any pro­portion betwixt a Spirit and a body: and that à posse, ad esse, from may bee, to must bee, is no good consequence? Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies, nor euer did, except they were so vnited, that in respect of place they made but one: And lastly, that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth, to wit, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resur­rection, the Creation, and Annihilation, &c. haue their foun­dation in holy Scripture, and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth, though transcending the spheare of na­ture and reason: but this strange mysterie of Transubstanti­ation hath no ground in Scripture, as he himselfe confesseth:Bell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 23. and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are, without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof: but like lips, like lettuces; such as the cause is, such are the defen­ces, both nought and weake, as any man may see that is not [Page 252] muffled with errour; and thus this second contradiction re­maines irreconciliable.

17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacra­ment,3. Contrad. which is this, they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements, and partly the thing signifi­ed and represented by them; and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude, as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water, and the thing signified, which is the bloud of Christ, make the matter of that Sacrament, or the outward wasting, by water, and the inward, by the Spirit, and the relation is; as the water washeth and purgeth away all fil­thinesse of the body, so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule: and so in the Eucha­rist, the Elements of Bread and Wine, together with the bo­die and bloud of Christ, are the matter of the Sacrament, andBell. de sacram. lib. 1. cap. 18. the relation is, as those elements doe feed, nourish, and streng­then, and cheare the bodie of man; so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed, nourish, and strengthen, and cheare the soule vnto eternall life: and as those elements must be eaten and digested, or else they nourish not: so Christ must also be eaten, and, as it were, digested, and after a sort conuerted into our substance, or else he is no food vnto our soules. This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome, and it is agreea­ble to the truth, for Bellarmine thus speaketh, Species illae sig­nificant Bell. de Euchar. lib▪ 4. cap. 6. quidem cibum spiritualem, sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiri­tualis, that is, The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode, but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe. And in ano­ther place he saith, that signum in Sacramento reisignatae simili­tudinem Idem de Sacra. lib. 1. cap. 11. gerit, The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the simili­tude of the thing signified. And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely, that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another, vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it. And herein he accordeth with the Master of senten­ces,Lumb. li. 4▪ dist. 1 who defines a Sacrament thus, To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace, bearing the Image of that grace. And with Hu­go, Hugo lib. 1. part. 9. cap 2. who saith, That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall ele­ment, propounded outwardly to the senses, by similitude represen­ting, [Page 253] and by institution signifying, and by Sanctification contai­ning some inuisible and spirituall grace. And that this relation is in eating and nourishing, Bellarmine in another place con­fesseth in direct words, when he saith, that That same outward Bell. de Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 6. eating in the Sacrament, doth signifie the inward eating and re­freshing of the soule, but is not the cause thereof: and that that is so necessarie a condition, that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment. And to this agreeth Saint Augustine, who plainely affirmeth, that if Sacraments Aug. Epist. 23. ad Bonifac. had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sa­craments, they were not Sacraments at all. And what this simi­litude is he declareth in another place, where hee saith, that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament; but the Sacrament Idem in Iohan. tract. 26. is one thing, and the vertue of the Sacrament is another. And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament, because men most com­monly Aqui. pa. 3. q. 74. are nourished therewith: his words are these, As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme, to the vse of spirituall washing, because corporall washing is commonly made by water: so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished, are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, to the vse of the spirituall eating. By which it followeth, that if water did not wash, it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Bap­tisme: so, if bread and wine doe not nourish, they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper: and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament, gaue this commandement to his Disciples, that they should take and eate: and the Apo­stle1. Cor. 10. 21. 1. Cor. 11. 20. calleth it the Lords Supper, and the Lords Table.

18. This therefore is their own doctrine, and it is grounded vpon the truth. But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation: for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly changed into the body and bloud of Christ, and that onely the accidents remaine: I would faine know of them how these outward signes doe nourish the bodie: can the accidents of bread and wine nourish the substance of the bodie? mustSimile nutritur simili. there not be a similitude and proportion betwixt the nourish­ment [Page 254] and the thing nourished? but betwixt accidents and a substance there is no similitude nor proportion. Aristotle tel­lethAristot. de [...]nima. 2. vs as much, when he saith, that Foode doth nourish, as it is a substance, and not as an accident. Now if the outward signes doe not nourish the body, what analogie is there betwixt them and the things signified? or why were they ordayned to represent the spirituall refection of our soules by Christ, if they minister no corporall refection vnto our bodies? or how can they represent that where of they beare no similitude? for, as in Baptisme, if the nature and substance of the water were taken away, and onely accidents did remayne, so that it could not wash, nor clense the body, without doubt, it could be no fit signe to signifie the inward ablution of the soule, by the bloud of Christ. So they that take away the nature and substance of the Bread and Wine, and leau [...] bare accidents, make it, without all question, a dead and liuelesse Sacrament, not fit to represent so high a mystery.

19 Behold now the contradictions: first accidents with­out a substance, that is to say, accidents, and no accidents; for therefore they are called accidents, because they adhere, and are ioyned to a substance, in which they haue their sub­sistance, & vpon which they haue their dependance: so that, take away their substance, and they presently [...]urcease to beeArist. metaph. l [...]. 5. text. 35. accidents. For, Aristotle saith▪ Accidentis esse est in esse: The es­sence of an accident is to bee in a subiect. Secondly, two parts of the Sacraments, the visible elements, and the inuisi­ble grace, & yet but one part of the same Sacrament: for the elements bee taken away, and accidents onely remayne; therefore two parts, and not two parts. Thirdly, the exter­nall matter of the Sacrament is the outward elements: and yet there are no elements at all; and so elements, and no ele­ments, matter, and no matter. Fourthly, the outward ele­ments are signes of the inward grace, and the same by their doctrine being but accidents, are signes of the outward ele­ments, which are signes of the inward grace: and so they are signes of the signes, rather then of the thing signified. Lastly, the outward feeding by bread & wine, represents the inward [Page 255] feeding, by the body and bloud of Christ: & yet there is no outward feeding by bread and wine, because there is no bread and wine, except they will make accidents to [...]eede a substance: which is against all reason: for the PhilosopherArist. de [...]ene [...]. lib. 2. saith, that Ex i [...]sdem nutrimur, ex quibus sumus, wee are nou­rished by the same things, of which we consist: but we do not consist of accidents, but of substances.

20. Out of this snare they seeke to ridde themselues by a double euasion; first, they say, that accidents may be without a subiect, though not naturally, yet by the supernaturall po­werBell. de Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 24. of God. This is Bellarmines: and hee prooueth it by two instances; first, because Saint Basil affirmeth, that That light which was created the first day, was without a subiect: and se­condly, because as the substance of Christs humanitie had no subsistance in it selfe, but in the word; so, though an acci­dent naturally doth inhere in a subiect, yet supernaturally it may bee, and yet not inhere. To this I answere: first, that though Saint Basil be of that opinion, yet Saint Augustine isAu [...]. in Ger. ad Li [...]. lib. 1. ca. 3. not; for he thought it to be a spirituall and no naturall light. Nor Beda, Lyran [...]s, and the master of sentences, who suppo­sedDamas. de [...]ide lib. 2. cap. 7. it to be a bright and lightsome cloude▪ which was carried about, and gaue light vnto the world. Nor Damascene, who supposed that this light proceeded from the element of fire, as an effect thereof. Nor yet the Fathers, who though they dif­fered in their opinions touching this light, yet none of them were of Saint Basils mind, to thinke that it was an accident without a subiect. Now, why should we beleeue Saint Basil herein, more then S. Augustine, venerable Bede, Damascene, or the rest? This therefore is but one priuate mans opinion, crossed by many others, and so maketh little for his purpose.

21. Secondly, I answere, that though the humanitie of Christ had no subsistance in it selfe, yet by reason of the vnion with the God-head, it was sustained and vpholden by it: but there is no such vnion betwixt the accidents in the Sacra­ments, and the body and bloud of Christ, that the body and bloud of Christ should sustaine and vphold those accidents: and therefore they themselues say, that they are not sustained [Page 256] by the body of Christ, but by the extraordinary power of God; and so this instance maketh nothing for this purpose neither. Lastly, I answere, that we are not so much to consi­der what God can doe by his omnipotent power, as what he hath done heretofore, or what he hath said hee will doe here­after: let them therefore shew, that accidents haue beene without a substance in times past, or that God hath said, hee will haue them so to be, and then wee will yeeld vnto them: but till then wee haue more reason to hold conclusions of na­ture not crossed by religion, then to relye vpon supernaturall imaginations.

22. The second euasion is by Aquinas, who affirmeth thatAquin. par. 3. q. 77. art. 6. supernaturally, the accidents of bread and wine may nourish, because they receaue miraculously the strength and vertue of a substance, and that they doe nourish he proueth, because by the same reason they may be turned into the substance of the body, by the which they are turned into ashes & wormes: and also because wee see by experience that the body is nou­rished by the signes in the Sacrament: to which a short an­swere will suffice: for first that there should be such a miracu­lous nourishing by accidents, hath no ground either in expe­rience, or in Scripture. And secondly, he should rather con­clude, because the body is nourished by outward elements, and they are often conuerted into ashes and wormes, there­fore they are not bare accidents but substances, then that therefore bare accidents may nourish: for let the reader iudge whether concludes more reasonably, we, when we say the e­lements doe nourish the body: therefore they are bodily sub­stances; or they that thus reason, the elements do nourish the bodie, therefore accidents without a substance may nourish: and thus the snare is not broken, neither are they escaped.

23. A fourth contradiction, and that about the Sacrament,4. Contrad. they hold that the wicked and reprobate receaue the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament, and yet reape no bene­fit thereby to their owne soules, but rather iudgement and damnation, as if the merits, grace, and vertue of Christ could be separated from his person: or as if a man could receaue [Page 257] life, and yet not liue, sanctification, and not be sanctified, righ­teousnes, and not be righteous, redemption, and not be re­deemed: for all these is Christ made vnto vs, Life, Righte­ousnes, Sanctification, and Redemption, as the Scripture testifi­eth.1. Cor. 1. 30. Bellarmine spendeth one whole Chapter in this argu­ment,Bell. de Euchar. lib. 1. cap. 13. to proue that the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacra­ment, and therevpon expresly affirmeth, that though they receiue him, yet they receiue not his iustifying grace, nor his merits, nor the fruit and effect of his death and passion toge­ther with him. Of the same mind is Aquinas, & the rest of theirAquin. 3. q. 80. art. 1. & 3. Diuines. Now this position is contrary both to Scripture, Fa­thers, and to their owne diuinity. To Scripture, for our Sa­uiour saith in expresse words, Whosoeuer eateth my flesh, and Ioh. 6. 54. 56. drinketh my bloud, hath eternall life, and I will raise him vp at the last day. And againe, He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, dwelleth in me, and I in him. But say they, The wic­ked, yea, the reprobate, eate the very flesh, and drinke the very bloud of Christ. Therefore conclude that they haue eternall life, and dwell in Christ, and Christ in them: nei­ther can they escape by saying, that the spirituall eating ofBell. de Euchar▪ lib. 1. cap. 6. Aquin. 3. p. q. [...]. art. 2. Christ by faith, and not the eating in the Sacrament is here vnderstood, seeing they doe all (for the most part) interpret this place of the Sacramentall eating and drinking: but more plaine (if it be possible) is that of S. Iohn, Ioh. 5. 12. He that hath the Sonne, hath life: and hee that hath not the Sonne of God, hath not life. From which place thus a man may reason, He that hath Christ, hath eternall life, but hee that receiueth Christ verily & truely, as all the wicked do in the Sacrament by their doctrine, hath Christ: therefore the very reprobate, euen Iudas himself, hath eternal life, & is saued: for either they must deny that they receiue Christ in the Sacrament; or else they must grant, being conuicted by these Scriptures, that to­gether with him they receiue eternall life.

25. They reply to this two things, first, that the wicked receiue Christ onely Sacramentally, and not Spiritually, and therefore they haue no benefite by him: and secondly, be­cause they receiue him vnworthily, therefore they receiue [Page 258] their owne iudgement and not saluation, not discerning the body and bloud of Christ. To which I answere, that though they receiue Sacramentally, and vnworthily, yet by their do­ctrine they receiue v [...]ry Christ: and so by these Scriptures it must needs follow, that they also receiue the fruite and effect of his death, which is life and saluation. Adde hereunto, that the termes here vsed are generall, both in respect of the per­sons that receiue, and also the manner of receiuing, without any such exception or distinction, as they deuise: and ther­fore I conclude, that it is as impossible to make a separation betwixt Christ and his sauing grace, as to separate the Sunne from light, fire from heate, or the soule from naturall life.

26. Thus this position is an opposition to Scripture, so it is also to the opinions of the Fathers. To giue a taste of some two or three, Origen saith, That Christ is that true meat, which Orig. in Mat. cap. 15. August. de Ciuit. lib. 21. c. 25. whosoeuer eateth shall liue for euer which no wicked man can eat. Augustine more effectually saith, Hee that is in the vnity of Christs body, that is, a member of Christ, he is truely said to eate Christs body, and drinke his bloud. Note, hee saith truely, to signifie that all other eate him falsly, that is in shew and not in substance. And in another place yet more plainely, Hee Idem in Sent. [...]ent. 339. which disagreeth from Christ, doth neither eate his flesh, nor drinke his bloud, though he take the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement. Theodoret as plainely saith, That Christ is Theodor. in Psal. 32. Cyril. in Ioh. lib. 4. Basil. in. Psal. 3. meate for his owne sheepe onely, that is, his elect. And Cyrill that as many as eate his flesh, haue life in them being ioyned to him who is life it selfe. And Basill saith, that they which are fed with the foode of life, to wit, the bread that came downe from heauen, haue an inward mouth of the minde whereby they eate that spiri­tuall food. Many more such like sayings might be heaped to­gether to this purpose, which for breuity sake I passe ouer: all which are contrary to that Romish position, that the wicked eate and drinke the very body and bloud of Christ; which they must needs doe, if the bread and wine, after the words of consecration, be changed into the very body and bloud of Christ.

27. Lastly, it is contrary to their owne diuinity: for they [Page 259] hold, that the parts of this Sacrament, as of all others, are two, to wit, the matter and the forme: the forme in this Sacra­mentBell de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 18. is to the whole word of consecration, together with the sense thereof: the matter is the whole element, with the signification thereof. As for example, in the Eucharist, the matter is the species of Bread and wine, containing vnder them the body and bloud of Christ: and the forme is (for this is my bodie, this is my bloud.) Now, hence I thus reason. The wicked either receiue the whole Sacrament, or they receiue it not; if they do, then there is no difference betwixt the faith­full and them, for they receiue no more; and why should not they be saued then as well as they? if they do not, then either they receiue not Christ at all, because we are sure they receiue the outward Elements: and therfore if any thing be wanting, it must needs be the thing signified, or there are more parts then these two of the Sacrament. Againe thus if the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament, and yet not the vertue of Christ, then they receiue not the whole Sacrament, because the vertue of the Sacrament is in the Sacrament, as the vertue of euery thing is in the thing it selfe. And so it followeth, that the wicked in the Sacrament receiue Christ, and yet not Christ the whole Sacrament, and yet but a part of the Sacrament: and that there are but two parts of it, and yet more then two. Obserue (gentle Reader) these contradicti­ons, and wonder.

28. Againe, Transubstantiation is contradicted both by the5. Contrad. doctrine of adoration of Images, and by the Canon of the Masse: by the doctrine of adoration of Images thus; they teach that diuine adoration is to be giuen to the pictures, of Christ, and God the Father, because they represent their most excellent and diuine persons, and yet they would haue the ve­ry body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament transub­stantiated, because some of the Fathers pretend [...]o say, that it is to be adored with diuine worship. Now, if it bee true that they say, that Images of God the Father, and of Christ our Sa­uiour, ought to be adored with diuine worship, because they represent their persons: then it must bee false, that therfeore [Page 260] the bodie and bloud of Christ are really and carnally in the Sacrament, because it is to be worshipped: for, why may not those mysteries of bread and wine instituted by Christ, to put vs in mind of his death and passion, bee, for such their effectuall representation, adored and worshipped with di­uine worship, as well as Images and pictures for their repre­sentation, especially seeing they carrie a more exact resem­blance and liuely signification of him then any picture can doe? Here is a plaine contradiction betwixt the proofe of their Transubstantiation, and their doctrine of adoration of Images, standing vpon these termes, An Image must be wor­shipped, because it representeth the person of Christ: but the Sacrament is not to bee worshipped, though it represents Christ more fully then any Image, except he be corporally and substantially present in it.

29. Secondly, it is crossed by the Canon of the Masse di­uers6. Contrad. waies: First, by the praier that is vsed before the eleua­tion, where the Priest desireth God to behold the same sacri­fice with a propitious and fauourable countenance, like as the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham, Melchizedech &c. If Christ were really offered by the Priest, hee need not pray that God would be propitious to that sacrifice, for in him hee is euer well pleased: neither can his sacrifice be possibly disrespec­ted of God, being of infinite merite and price to satisfie the rigour of his Fathers iustice: it were therefore either horri­ble blasphemy in their Masse to equalize this absolute sacri­fice of Christ, with the imperfect sacrifices of Abel, and Abra­ham, which stood in need of Gods mercifull acceptation: or it is false, that Christ is really sacrificed in the Masse: one of the two must needs be either blasphemy in the Canon of the Masse, or falshood in their doctrine of Transubstantiation.

30. Againe, by another prayer which is vsed in the conse­cration,7. Contrad. where the Priest prayeth, that God would command those things to be carried by the hands of the holy Angell vp to the high Altar, into the sight of the diuine Maiestie. Now by these words (those things haec) cannot bee vnderstood Christ, neither in Grammaticall construction, nor in any re­ligious [Page 261] sense: for in true Grammaticall Latine, he should haue said, if he had ment Christ, either hunc, this; or hoc, viz. sacri­fici [...] this sacrifice, and not haec, these things: for though the elements be two, yet by their own doctrine whole Christ is in each of them, and therefore cannot bee spoken of in the plurall number, as if he were either diuided in himselfe, or multiplied to more then himselfe: & in the construction of re­ligion it can be no lesse then blasphemy to imagine, that an Angell must carry vp Christ into Heauen, and present him there vpon the high Altar to the diuine maiestie; for it impli­eth in him either inability, or vnwillingnesse to present him­selfe: to say he is vnable, is to deny him to be God, and so Almighty: and to say he is vnwilling, is to deny him to bee our high Priest and Mediatour, to whose office it onely per­taineth to offer vp the sacrifices of the faithfull vnder the Gos­pell, as the Priest in the law of Moses might onely offer the sacrifices of the law, and enter into the most holy place, to make reconciliation for the people: so that it remaineth, that the composer of the Masse could not vnderstand by (haec) these things, Christ himselfe: but the elements Bread and Wine which are a representation and commemoration of that one all-sufficient sacrifice on the Crosse: and so either the Masse is erronious, or Transubstantiation a false doctrine; for if the Masse be true, then Transubstantiation is false; and if Tran­substantiation be true, then the Masse is false.

31. Thirdly, it is crossed by their manifold crossings, vsed8. Contrad. by the Priest in the Masse: for, if Christ in person bee really present, as a complete sacrifice, what neede such signings or crossings by the earthly hands of a sinfull Priest? is hee sanctified by them? that were blasphemy to thinke. He nee­deth no sanctification, being the Holy of holies. Is the diuell driuen away by these meanes? that is a greater blasphemy to beleeue: for hee once conquered the diuell, in such sort, that he dareth neuer meddle with him any more. And yet the blasphemous Iesuites are not afraid to affirme, that the diuels may, and doe so come neere to their Sacrament, that theySuar [...]z. tom. 3. l. 55. sect. 1. can both carry it away, and abuse it also. Surely, if this bee [Page 262] true, then the diuels know, Christ is not there: for they durst not come so neere vnto him sacrificed on the Altar, by whose true sacrifice on the Crosse, they receiued such a deadly wound. Lastly, is God put in minde of his Sonnes sacrifice on the Crosse, by their crossings of him vpon the Altar? This is impudency to thinke: for Almighty God cannot forget the sacrifice of his owne Sonne; neyther can his Crosse bee any whit dignified by their crossings. Which way soeuer they turne them, here is eyther impietie in their Masse, or falsity in their doctrine of Transsubstantiation.

32. Thus much touching the contradictions in the Eucha­rist.9. Contrad. Now let vs see their concordance in other Articles of their Religion; and that with greater breuitie. And first in their Article of Iustification, therein there lurke foure maine contradictions: First, they say, that the first iustification, when Censur. Colon. pag. 140, 141. Becan. disput. pag. 199. Trident. Concil. sess. 6. cap. 6. Bell▪ de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 13. Ibid cap. 17. a man of vniust and wicked, is made iust and good, is the free gift of God, and deserued by no precedent works▪ and yet they say againe, that a man doth prepare and make himselfe fit for this iustification by certayne acts of faith, Feare, Hope, Repentance, and the purpose of a new life. Yea, Bellarmine doth not sticke to say, that this faith iustifieth by way of merite, and deserueth forgiuenesse of sinnes after a certaine manner. And all of them [...]each, that those dispositions and preparations arise partly from grace, and partly from free-will, as two seuerall and de­uided agents, and that it is in the power of mans will, eyther to accept that grace of God, or to refuse it: as hath beene at large discouered in the fourth Reason. Now heare the contradictions: If it bee meerely Gods free gift, then it is no wayes mans free-will: and if it bee any waies mans free-will to prepare himselfe, then it is not euery way Gods free gift▪ For it is not in this case, as in other externall donations: the King may giue a pardon freely, and yet the prisoner may haue power to receiue or to refuse the pardon, because the pardon is one thing, and the prisoners will on other: but in the iustification of a sinner, the gift it selfe is the very change of the minde, and the will, and the whole man: for it is (as they say) when a sinner is made righteous, and an vniust man is [Page 263] made iust: and so the will hath no power to reiect it, when God effectually giues it; nor power to accept it, till God al­ter and change it by his grace. And hence it followeth, that to say it is Gods free gift, and yet that we in part prepare our selues thereunto by our owne free-will, implyeth contradicti­on, as also this, to merite it, and yet to haue it freely giuen: if it be any wayes of merite, then it is not euery way free. Merite in the receiuer, and freenesse in the giuer, can in no respect stand together.

33. Another contradiction in this Article, is this; that they10. Contrad. say a man is iustified by his works; and yet for all that, he is iustified by grace too. Both these propositions they peremp­torily defend, and take it in great scorne, that we charge them to be maintayners of works against grace: and call vs loud Lyers, in casting that imputation vpon them. But by their leaues, they maintaine either works against grace, or else they breathe hote and cold out of one mouth (which the Satyre could not endure) and speake contraries, let them choose whe­ther: for the holy Ghost himselfe placeth these two, Works and Grace, in diametrall opposition; If it be of grace, it is no Rom. 11. 6. more of works, or else were grace no more grace: but if it bee of works, it is no more grace; or else were worke no more worke. Here we see a manifest opposition betwixt grace and works, so that one doth exclude the other, and this in our election: and therefore much more in our iustification, which is but an effect thereof: for election hath nothing to doe with our good works, according to our doctrine, nor with our euill, according to theirs: but iustification hath respect vnto our sinnes and euill deeds; and therefore much greater must bee the opposition in this then in that: & greater reason that here works should be excluded by grace, then in the other.

34 Bellarmines exception is, that the Apostle here exclu­dethBell. de Iustis. lib. 1. cap. 21. onely the works that be of our selues without grace, be­fore we be iustified: but as for those that come after, they are works of grace, and therefore be not excluded by grace, but may well stand together. To which I answere three things: First, that the Apostle hath no such distinction, but speaketh [Page 264] generally of all works; and therefore according to the olde rule, Vbi lex non distinguit: Where the law distinguisheth not, there we must not distinguish. To say therefore that it is both by grace and works, is to confront the Apostle, and to fasten vpon him a flat contradiction. Yea, it is to extinguish grace vtterly: for as it hath beene before alledged out of Au­gustine, grace is not grace in any respect, except it bee free in euery respect. Secondly, that the Apostle meaneth works af­ter grace, and such as proceed from faith, as well as works of nature, appeareth by another like place; where works are also excluded, and opposed to the free gift of God, that is, toEphes. 2. 8. grace: and that the Apostle intendeth works of grace, ap­peareth by the reason following in the next verse (For we are his workmanship, created in Christ to good works.) Now in this last place, works of grace must needs be vnderstood, be­cause he saith, we are created in Christ Iesus vnto them: and therefore the same also must necessarily bee meant in the for­mer: vnlesse wee will say, that the Apostle, or rather the ho­ly Ghost, disputes not ad idem. Lastly, I answere, that in A­brahams iustification, who was the Father of the faithfull, andRom. 4. 2. his iustification a patterne, how all his spirituall posteritie should be iustified, works of grace are excluded: for at that time, of which the Apostle there speaketh, Abraham was re­generate, as Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth: and yet his works are excluded: therefore works of grace are meant by the Apostle. I, but replyeth the same Cardinall, when the A­postleBell. Ibid. c. 19. saith, that Abraham was iustified by faith, and not by works, he excludeth those works which Abraham might doe without faith: for they which haue faith, yet doe not alwaies worke by faith: as when they sinne, or performe meere mo­rall duties, without relation to God. But this is no better then a meere shift, without any ground of reason or truth: for if it bee true which the Scripture saith, that whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne; then those morall works, which hee mentioneth, being not of faith, are no better then sinnes, and so need not to bee excluded by the Apostle; for they ex­clude themselues. Besides, it is manifestly false, that a iust, [Page 265] and faithfull man, doth any worke, which is not sinne, where­in he hath not relation vnto God; if not in the particular act, yet in the generall purpose of his minde: for, euery morning he prayeth to God for the direction of all his wayes, and that all his works may be sanctified by his Spirit. And thus it ap­peareth, that in saying, wee are iustified by grace, and yet by works too, they speake contraries.

35. A third contradiction in this Article is about their11. Contrad. works of Preparation, which, they say, goe before the first iu­stification: these they call, vertuous dispositions, good qua­lities,Bell. de Iustif. l. 1. cap. 21. Bishop. contra Resor. Cathol. art. 35. good preparations, merits of congruitie; and that they haue a dignitie of worke in them: and yet they say agayne, that no good works goe before the first iustification: belike then they are both good, and not good, by their doctrine: and therefore thus I argue: If they be not good, why do they call them good? if they bee good, then it is vntrue, that no good works go before the first iustification of a sinner: either in the one, or in the other, they must needs erre; and in hol­ding both, the one part of their doctrine crosseth the other.

36. Fourthly, they say, that faith alone doth not iustify:12. Contrad. Bell. de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 13. Osor. Dom. 23. post Pentec. con. 2. Milet. contra Heshus. and yet, notwithstanding, they say, Fide Catholica Christiana eaque sola hominem iustificari, nulli vnquam negauerunt, nec [...]e­gant Pontificij. That no Papist euer hath, or doth deny, that a man is iustified by the Catholike Christian faith, and that a­lone. This is the assertion of Miletus, against Heshusius; and it is not condemned by any of the rest; but his booke appro­ued as contayning nothing contrary to their Catholike Reli­gion: and so it seemes to be one of their Catholike doctrines. And Bellarmine insinuates asmuch, though not in playneBell. Ibid. speech, yet by necessary consequence, when bee saith, that faith is the beginning, and first roote of iustification. Now if it be so, then as soone as a man hath faith, iustification is be­gun, and taketh roote in him, euen before he hath any other grace: and if it hath taken roote, then it is eyther whole iu­stification, or a peece thereof: but a peece it cannot be; for it is indiuisible; therefore, eyther whole or none. For grant there be degrees in iustification (as they say) which neuerthe­lesse [Page 266] they are neuer able to prooue: yet they bee degrees of persection, not of essence: as a man is a man as soone as hee is borne, though not a perfect man before hee come to com­plete age, stature, and strength. So their supposed iustifica­tion, is iustification in the roote, though not perfect and ab­solute, vntill it come to ripe age. I speake in their language, because I deliuer their owne doctrine. Now how can these two contraries bee reconciled? Faith alone doth not iustify, and yet faith alone doth iustify? If they say, that they speake of one kinde of faith, and we of another, they say nothing to the purpose: for euen that any faith alone should iustify, is contrary to their owne positions, who affirme, that the for­mer cause of our iustification, is the inherent righteousnes ofBell. de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 18. works: and not the righteousnes of Christ, apprehended by faith. And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe, to be atoned by their best wits, if it be possible.

37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes, and see how13. Contrad. that agreeth with it selfe: and here first they hold, that works done before faith and regeneration, are not good workes, but sinnes. This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine, whoAug. lib. 4. in Julian. cap. 3. affirmeth, that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes: and if the workes of vnbeleeuers, then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate; seeing, as the same Father else-where speaketh, Impij cogitant, non credunt, the wicked doe not be­leeue, but thinke; they haue but a shadow of faith, without substance. It may be prooued also by that generall and infal­lible axiome of the holy Scripture, Whatsoeuer is not of faith, is sinne: but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith, and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God, be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men. OrNazianz. orat. in sanct. Lauac. as Gregorie Nazianzene saith, As faith without workes is dead, so workes without faith are dead: and dead workes are sinnes, as appeares, Heb. 9. 41. Besides, Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason, because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God, whome they are ignorant of. To which I adde another reason drawne from our Saui­ours owne mouth, Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring [Page 267] forth good fruit: but euery man, til he be ingrafted into Christ, is no better then an euill tree, and therefore cannot doe a good worke.

38. This is their doctrine, and it is sound diuinitie: but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood; for the same men that teach this, notwithstanding affirme, that the workes of Infidels are good, suo genere, in their kind:Bell, de iustif. lib. 4. cap. 16. so they are good, and not good; sinnes, and yet good works: but this is in their kind, say they, that is, Morally, and not The­ologically. I, but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are (by their owne principles) sinnes: how then can they be good any waies? Can sinne, which is a transgression of Gods law, and simply in it owne nature euill, be in any respect good, as it is sinne? But to take cleare away this scruple, another of them auoucheth, that they are not onely morally, but euen Theologically good; for he saith, that such works as are doneSalmer. Jesuit. tit. 15. pag. 41. by the light of nature onely, without grace, doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification, though it be longè & valdèremotè, remotely, and a farre off; for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes, is thereby lesse vndisposed and re­pugnant to diuine grace. Now, how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification? is God delighted with sinnes? Either therefore they are not sinnes, or they doe not dispose to iustification, neither farre nor neere: or which is the pre­sent contradiction, they are sinnes and not sinnes, good and not good, at one time, and in one and the same respect. And to put the contradiction out of all question, the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session, enacteth asConcil. Trident. Sess. 6. ca. 7. much, and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contra­rie: the words are these, If any man shall say, that all the works which are done before iustification, by what meanes soeuer they are done, are truely sinnes, or deserue the hatred of God, let him be Anathema. And Andradius the interpretor of that Coun­cill,Andradius. authorised by the Fathers of the same, doth more perspi­cuously explaine the meaning of that Canon, when hee saith, that men without faith, destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse, free from all fault, [Page 268] and defiled with no sinne, and by which they may obtaine saluation: then which, what can be more contradictory to that which be­fore was deliuered, that all the workes of Infidels and vnbe­leeuers are sinnes, be they neuer so glistering with morall ver­tue? or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iu­stine, Clemens, and Epiphanius, who affirmed that Socrates, and Her aclitus were Christians, because they liued according to the rule of reason: and that the Grecians were iustified by Phi­losophie: and that many were saued onely by the law of nature, without the lawe of Moses, or Gospell of Christ?

39. Againe, their doctrine of doubel merit, the one of14. Contrad. Congruity, the other of Condignity, as they terme them, is not onely contrary to the truth, but to it selfe. For this they teach, that the merit of congruity, which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustificati­on, is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke, and not vpon the promise of God: but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke, and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon, or else it is no merit. This is Bellarmines Bell. de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 21. plaine doctrine, and is consonant to the residue of their Do­ctours, both Schoole diuines, and others: for thus they de­fine the merit of congruity, It is that by which the subiect is Compend. Theol. lib. 5. cap. 11. disposed, that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice. Here is onely iustice required, and not any promise to the merit of congruity; though (I must confesse) Gabriel Biel Gabriel. 3. Sent. dist. 27. somewhat crosseth this definition, when [...]e saith, that when a man doth what in him lyeth, then God accepteth his worke, and powreth in grace, not by the due of Iustice, but of his liberalitie. And Aquinas, who affirmeth, that when a man vseth well the Aquinas. 2. 2 ae. q. 114. art. 2. Coster. Enchir. pag. 284. power of free-will, God worketh in him according to the excellen­cie of his mercy. But yet they all agree in this, that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise, as the merit of condignity is, but onely vpon the worthin [...]s of the worke done. Now here lurketh a flat contradiction, for by this it should follow, that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity. Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter, because this dependeth vpon it [Page 269] owne dignity, and hath no neede of a promise, as the other hath: and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other; being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification, and the other the matter of iustifi­cation it selfe. And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him▪ but onely outwardly mouing him, nor is yet iustified, should haue more power to deserue and merite, then he that is fulfilled with grace, and fully iustified. Thus error, like a Strumpet, bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities: but let vs proceede.

40. Their merite of condignitie bringeth foorth a like15. Contrad. monster; for they build it vpon two foundations, whereofBell. de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 21. Coster. Enchir. pag. 284. &c. Aquin. 1. 2. q. 114. art. 6. Bell. de Iustif. lib. 5. cap. 14. Coster. Enchir. pag. 285. Bell. de Justif. lib. 5. cap. 17. one ouerwhelmeth the other: to wit, the dignity of the worke, and the promise of God: for what can be more con­trary, then mercy and iustice? Now if it depend vpon the dignity of the worke, then it is a due of iustice: and so they call it, Meritum ex iustitia. A merite by iustice: but if it re­ly vpon the free promise of God (as they call it,) then it must needs be, Meritum ex misericordia. A merite by mercy: for Gods promise is a voluntary fruit of his mercy. They answer, that they may both well stand together: for, say they, God dealeth with vs, as we deale with our hyred labourers; we agree with them for a certayne price, for doing a peece of worke, and when they begin, we giue them an earnest penny; and when the worke is done, according to the couenant, we giue them their wa­ges: So dealeth Almighty God with Christians; he first maketh a couenant with them, that for labouring in his Vineyard they Mat. 20. 2. shall haue a penny, that is, eternall life: then he giueth them the Ephes. 1. 13. earnest of his Spirit, to assure them thereof: and lastly, at the end, when they haue done their worke, hee payeth them their wa­ges. Apoc▪ 22. 12. But by the Iesuites leaue, this similitude is lame of all foure: for first, when a man hyreth a labourer, and bargaineth with him for wages for his worke: this is a couenant of iu­stice, and no promise of mercy: and therefore if he performe this bargaine, hee is not therefore called mercifull, but iust: but Almighty God, as they themselues confesse, promiseth freely, and is bound to none: and therefore this must needs [Page 270] be a worke of mercy, and not of iustice. Secondly, there is a proportion betwixt the labourers worke and his hire: but betwixt the Kingdome of heauen, and our good works, there is no proportion, no more then betwixt a finite, and an i [...] fi­nite thing: or a drop of a B [...]cket, and the huge Ocean. And third y a man standeth in need of his workman & his worke: but God hath no need of vs. And hence it must of necessitieIob. 35. 7. follow, that the labourers hire i [...] a debt of iustice: but a Chri­stians hire is a reward of mercy. And so I conclude, that be­ing of mercy, it cannot be of iustice too; or if it be of iustice, it cannot be of mercy t [...]o: f [...] what need [...] iustice, if it bee of mercy? and what need mercy, if [...] b [...] of iustice? And there­fore if this merit [...] of condignitie be grounded vpon the worth and valour of he worke done (as they teach) [...] cannot bee grounded vpon the promise of God, as the [...] teach also; because the dignitie of the worke requires [...] as a d [...] by iu­stice, and the gracious promise of God imparts it, as a [...]eward of mercy.

41. Againe, in their merite of congruitie there is another16. Contrad. Bell de iustif. lib. 5. cap. 21. Co [...]c [...]. Trident. Sess 6. c. 13. [...]an. 4. contradiction: for they teach, that the who [...]e dignitie of the worke dependeth vpon grace; and therefore that it is not so much man that meriteth, as Gods grace in man. And yet the same af­firme▪ that this grace doth not inhabitare: that is, awell in a man; but onely outwardly mooue and helpe him: and that it is in mans power, either to accept, or reiect the [...]s me Now how can the power of meriting issue from grace alone, and the whole dignitie of the worke depend vpon grace, when as that grace is not in vs, and when as our owne free will is the chiefe worker, being able of it selfe, either to vnlocke the dore, and let it in, or ba [...]re the doore, and shut it out? And besides, if the whole dignitie of the worke depend vponBell. Ibid. grace, why doth he call [...]t Meritum in [...]hoatum & imperfectū? A lame and vnperfect meri [...]e? I Gods grace [...]ame and im­perfect? eyther therefore that grace dwelleth in vs, and is the chiese worker▪ or else it doth not wholly depend vpon grace. And againe, if it wholly proceede from grace, then it is not a lame and imperfect, but a complete & perfect merice. [Page 271] See, [...] beseech you, how falsehood needeth no other Engine but it selfe to ouerthrow it.

42. Lastly, concerning works, their doctrine is, that the17. Contrad. Concil. Trident Sess. 6. cap. 11. can. 25. Bell. de Iustif. lib. 4. cap. 10. good works of the regenerate are fully and absolutely iust, and perfectly good: and yet neuerthelesse, that they may grow in goodnesse, and are also mixed with many veniall sinnes. If they bee perfectly good, how can they grow in goodnesse? and if they increase in goodnesse, how are they perfectly good, see­ing that onely is perfect, to which nothing can be added? If they say that this perfection is but begun, and not finished; why then also, they should say, that they are imperfectly per­fect: or else, they pull downe with one hand, that which they build with the other. And againe, if they, most holy and iust men, haue their works intermixed with many veniall sins, for which they need to cry daily, Forgiue vs our trespasses, how can they either perfectly fulfill the law of God, or doe such works as may bee able to abide the censure of Gods iustice, seeing Saint Iames saith, that he that transgresseth one Commande­ment,Iam. 2. 10. is guiltie of the whole law, because he violateth the body of iustice, contained in the law? as he which hurteth the little toe, doth herein wrong the whole bodie. It is a contradicti­on therefore, to say, that the works of the regenerate are per­fect, and yet are intermingled with many sinnes: and it is all one, as if a man should say, that his face is perfectly cleane, and yet hath many spots: or that the bodie is perfectly in health, and yet is pestred with many diseases.

43. And thus much of good works. Now, besides these,18. Contrad. there are certaine works in their Religion, which are more then good, and more perfect then perfection: these be their works of Supererogation, arising from three grounds: First,Bel. de Monach. lib. 2. cap. 6. 7. when the Saints in this life do more good works, then are ne­cessarie for themselues to the attainment of saluation. And secondly, when they suffer more and greater punishments then are due vnto them for their sinnes. And thirdly, when they vndertake, no [...] onely works, commanded by the law of God▪ but also, such as are commended by the Euangelicall Councells: as, voluntary pouertie, abstayning from marriage, [Page 272] and regular obedience. These superabounding actions and passions of Gods Saints, are the works of supererogation, spoken of, and magnified so much in the Church of Rome: which both are the Churches Treasure, mingled with the su­perabounding merits of Christs passion; and are layd vp in a Treasury, the keyes whereof and dispensation is committed to the Pope of Rome, that hee, either by himselfe or his Fa­ctors, may dispence them at his pleasure: that is, to them that will buy the same for money: and also (as they say) are more excellent, and perfect, and meritorious of a greater reward. This blasphemous doctrine might easily be woūded to death by the Sword of the Spirit: for it is contrary to all Religion, & to the experience of euery mans owne conscience. But I leaue this to others, who haue, or shall meddle in this argument: my taske is to shew, how it contradicteth both it selfe, and other doctrines of their Religion.

44. It selfe, thus: They teach, that works of supereroga­tion,Bell. Ibid. grounded vpon Euangelicall Counsels, are (as you haue heard) more excellent, perfect, and meritorious, then those which are done in obedience to the law of God: and that in three respects: First, comparing seuerall Counsels with se­uerall Precepts which concerne the same matter: As, to sell all and giue to the poore, is a more excellent worke, then any commanded in that Precept, Thou shalt not steale. And the Counsell of Single life, is more perfect then the Precept, Thou shalt not commit Adultery. As if men could bee more perfect then God had commanuded, or then Christ himselfe was, whose righteousnes consisted in this, in being obedient to hisHeb. 10. 7. Psal. 103. 20. Fathers will. Or then the Angels, whose perfection consisteth in executing the Commandements of God. Or, as if the law of God was not a perfect rule of righteousnes. Secondly, comparing the state of men, obseruing Euangelicall Coun­sells, with the state of them that onely yeeld obedience to Precepts: as if a man could be in a higher and happier estate then they are, which loue God with all their heart; and their Neighbour as themselues: which is the summe of the Law. And thirdly, (marke this) comparing Counsells with any [Page 273] precept whatsoeuer, euen with that great Commaundement of the Law, Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart, Mat. 22. 37. 38. and with all thy strength. As if a man could loue God more then with all his heart, and with all his strength. Gods chil­dren labour for so much, let them take the more for their shares. Hence they conclude, that in respect of matter, the Precept is good; but the Counsels better: and in respect ofBell. de Mona h. lib. 2. cap. 7. the end, the fulfilling of Precepts hath a reward; but the ex­ecution of Counsels hath a greater reward. This is their plaine doctrine. And yet neuerthelesse the same men teach, that the perfection of a Christian man consisteth essentially, in the obseruation of Precepts: and instrumentally, in the obser­uationBell. Ibid, c. 6. of Counsels. And secondly, that the Precepts of cha­ritie are the ends whereunto Counsels are ordayned: and the works of Counsels are but the way and meanes for the betterAquin. 2. 2. q. 184. art. 3. Idem. Ibid. q. 189. Salmer. c. 7. pag. 37. keeping of the Precepts. Now to the purpose. How can works of supererogation bee more perfect then works of o­bedience? Counsels then Precepts? seeing perfection con­sisteth in the one instrumentally, and in the other essentially, and Precepts are the end of Counsels, and not Counsels of Precepts? Is an instrumentall perfection greater then an es­sentiall? or the meanes more perfect then the end? This is contrary to naturall reason: for Aristotle saith, Maius bonum Aristot. Rethor. lib. 1. cap. 7. est finis, quàm quod finis non est. The end is a greater good then that which is not the end: and the instrument is neuer so per­fect as the essence of a thing.19. Contrad. Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. c. 11. can. 25. Bell. de Justif. lib. 4. cap. 10. Idem. de Grat. & lib. arbit. l 5. c. 30. Et de bon, oper­in partic. l. 1. c. 6. Iam 3. 2. [...]idem de grat. & lib. arbit l. 6. c. 10

45. Againe, it crosseth another of their doctrines thus: They teach, that though the law of God bee possible to bee kept by the regenerate, & the works of the faithfull be simply and absolutely iust: yet they are mixed with many veniall sinnes: and therefore there is none so iust, but that sinneth sometimes, and hath neede to vse that petition in the Lords Prayer daily, Forgiue vs our trespasses. According to that generall axiome of Sain: Iames, In many things wee sinne all. Yea, Bellarmine himselfe affirmeth, that the regenerate may fall into many deadly sinnes, and that hee cannot possibly a­uoyd veniall sinnes, Nisi priuilegio singulari: But by a singular [Page 274] priuiledge. Which priuiledge hee cannot instance to haue beene granted to any man liuing or dead, except Christ only, who was God & man. Obserue now the contradiction: (to omit that this necessitie of sinning doth ouerthrow the possi­bility of fulfilling the law, and doth imply an impossibilitie) how can these two extremes be reconciled? The regenerate cannot performe all they should do, & yet do performe more then they should do. They cannot auoyd veniall sins, and yet can supererogate. It is as much as to say, that a man is not able to pay his owne debts, but must aske pardon for them; & yet hath ability to pay another mans, far greater then his owne. Or, an Archer cannot by any means shoot home to the marke & yet with the same Bow & Arrowes, sent forth by the same strength of his arme, he can shoote farre beyond the marke. He that is tainted and stained with many veniall sinnes, in that respect, is not perfect: but hee that doeth supererogate, is more then perfect: For so they say, when they giue a higherBell. de Monach. lib. 2. cap. 2. degree of perfection to these works, then to the perfect obe­dience of the law. If they say, that veniall sinnes doe not hin­der the perfection of good works: I answere, that neuerthe­lesse, they hinder the perfection of the worker: & if they stick fast to the worke it selfe, they hinder that also: as the least spot of inke blemisheth the whole face, and the lightest dis­ease disableth the health of the whole body. Eyther there­fore they must deny them to be sinnes, and so spots & defects in the soules of the regenerate: or they must confesse, that they are not so perfect as they should be. And how then can they be more perfect then they should be?

46. Further, they teach, that one degree of superero ga­ting20. Contrad. Bell. de Monach. lib. 2. cap. 8. Salmer. tom. 5. tract. 5. Bell. de Monach. lib. 2. cap. 2. perfection, is the vow of Monasticall pouerty, renoun­cing all propriety in worldly goods, and holding in Com­mon the vse of temporall things: and yet they say, that the state of Bishops, who possesse lands and goods, and enioy the propriety of them, is more perfect then the state of Monks; who depriue themselues thereof, because Bishops haue alrea­die atchiued this perfection, and Monks are but in the way to it. From which ground a man may thus argue: If per­fection [Page 275] consist in voluntary pouerty, which is an alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods; then Bshiops, possessing Lordships and reuenues, are not more perfect then Monks, that haue renounced all: and if Bishops, possessing, be more perfect then Monks, not possessing, then perfection consist­eth not in the alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods. One or the other must needes bee false, except hee will place perfection in two contraries: to wit, possessing, and not pos­sessing. And the rather may this absurditie appeare, because, aske them, why Monks are more perfect then other men? they will answere, because they remooue from them all im­pediments of their loue to God (in which ranke they place worldly wealth) and consecrate themselues wholly to Gods seruice. By which reason, Bishops cannot bee more perfect then either they or other men, because they retayne those impediments: and so by their doctrine, doe not wholly con­secrate themselues to Gods seruice.

47. From their actions, let vs come to their passions: to21. Contrad. wit, their Satisfactions, or, as Melanchton calleth them, Satis­passions, wherein there are as fat and foggie contradictions, as in the former. For, first they teach, that Christ hath made a perfect and full sufficient satisfaction for all the Elect; and thatConcil. Trident. Sess. 4. c. 8. Bell. de poenit. lib. 4. cap. 14. Coster. Enchir. pag. 395. his death was a sufficient price for the redemption and expi­ation of the sinnes of the whole world: and that his satisfacti­on was of infinite valew, &c. This they affirme in semblance of words, because, if they should not, all men would cry shame vpon their Religion. And yet, in truth, they ouer­throw the same by another crosse doctrine of our owne satis­factions: for the same men say, that Christ hath onely satisfi­ed for the fault of our sinnes, and the eternall punishment due vnto them: but wee our selues must satisfie for the tem­porallConcil. Trident. Sess. 4. cap. 10. c. 12. & 13. Bell. de poenit. lib. 4. cap. 4. & 3. & 7. punishment, eyther here on earth, by necessary afflicti­ons, or in Purgatory, by the indurance of those paynes which are there ordayned to purge men withall. Now what can be more contrary then these two propositions? Christ hath made a full satisfaction for vs; and yet we must also satisfie in part for our selues. If Christs satisfaction be full and perfect, then [Page 276] it hath payd the whole debt which we ought: but if we must pay part of the debt, then is not this satisfaction full and per­fect. That the temporall punishment is a part of our debt, Bellarmine himselfe confesseth, writing vpon the fi [...]ft petitionBell. de bonis [...]per. in partic. [...]. [...]. cap. 6. of the Lords Prayer, where hee giueth this one reason, why sinnes are called debts: because he which breaketh the Law, is a debter, to vndergoe the punishment which the Law requireth. But the Law bindeth transgressors, not onely to eternall, but also to temporary and transitory punishments. As a Suretie therfore, that payeth for his friend, owing an hundred pound, fourescoreand ten, leauing the remainder to the debter him­selfe to be satisfied, cannot be sayd, to haue made full satisfa­ction: So, if any part of our debt is to be payed by our selues, Christ, our all-sufficient Surety, cannot be sayd to haue made a full satisfaction. But they answere, that this our satisfacti­onConcil. Trident. [...]ess. 4. cap. 8. is wrought in vs by Christ; and is so in vs, that it is not of vs, but of Christ. And ag [...]i [...], that it is nothing but an instrumēt ordained by God, to apply Christs death vnto our selues,Bell. de poenit. [...]. 4. cap. 14. and so to expiate the punishment of our sinnes instrumental­ly, and not causally. To which I answere: First, that this in­wrappeth another contradiction: for, if it bee Christs in vs, and not ours of our selues, then it must needs be the satisfacti­on it selfe, and not an instrument to apply it: for one and the same thing cannot bee both the instrument to apply, and the thing that is applyed. But of this see more in the fourth rea­son. And secondly, though it be from Christ, yet that is but in part; because, as they teach, it is not onely in euery mans power, eyther to admit, or to exclude the grace of God, and the efficacy of Christs merite, by his owne free-will: but also, for that it is wrought by our selues, and vpon our selues, cooperating with grace at least. And thus the knot of the contradiction remaineth still as fast tyed as euer it was.

48. Againe, they say, that our satisfactions, when they [...]2. Contrad. Bell. de poenit. lib. 4. cap. 1. are at the best, are imperfect, and no wayes proportionable to the iustice of God: for when we sinne, we offend him, who is an infinite God; and whatsoeuer we haue, it is but a small and finite thing: and therefore there must needes bee an im­perfect [Page 277] compensation from vs to God, depending rather vpon his mercifull acceptation thē any proportionable satisfaction. This is their doctrine. And yet they teach also, that there isIdem de poenit. lib. 4. cap. 7. an equalitie and proportion betwixt Gods iustice, and our sa­tisfactory works: and that they are in some sort of infinite valew, by reason of the infinite power of Gods Spirit dwel­ling in vs, from which they proceede. And thus by their do­ctrine they are perfect, and not perfect: infinite, and finite: haue equality and proportion, and yet haue no equality nor proportion to Gods iustice. Either therefore they are not of infinite valew, though they proceede from the Spirit: or if, because they doe proceede from the Spirit, therefore they are of infinite value, then they cannot bee imperfect. Let them choose which they will, they haue a Wolfe by the eares.

49. Further, they teach, that the passions of the Saints doe23. Contrad. Bell. de Indulg. lib. 1. cap. 2. not onely profite themselues, but also others, whether liuing or dead; not so much, by example, for their edification, as also, for their satisfaction, by redeeming them from tempo­rall punishment. Which doctrine is not onely contrary toGreg. de Valent. de Indulg. c. 1. Saint Gregory, one of their owne Bishops, who taught that Christs sufferings are herein distinguished from the sufferingsGreg. Mag. of all others; because hee suffered without sinne, and all men suffered with sinne: but also to the receiued doctrine in their Church, which holdeth, that the righteousnes by imputation, whereby we say a man is iustified, is a meere fiction and Chi­mericall conceit. For a man (say they) cannot bee righteous by another mans righteousnes, nor wise by another mans wisedome: and so not iustified by Christs righteousnes im­puted vnto him. Cannot a man be iustified by Christs righte­ousnes imputed? & can satisfaction be made by the passions of the Saints imputed? Is the death of Christ of lesse p [...]ice & force then the sufferings of the Saints? The righteousnes of Christ imputed, is a Monster in Religion; & yet the satisfacti­on of the Saints imputed, is with them a Catholike doctrine. And thus with one doctrine they establish imputation, and with the other, pull it downe againe. With one breath they condemne it, and with another they iustifie it.

[Page 278]50. Ioyne vnto Satisfactions, their bastard Purgatorie:24. Contrad. for out of this doctrine, That men must satisfie in themselues, and for themselues, for the temporall punishment of their sinnes, springeth Purgatory: because, when they haue not satisfied sufficiently in this life, then (as they teach) they must make vp that which is wanting in the life to come, in the fireBell. de Pur at. lib. 1. cap. 7. of Purgatory. This doctrine of Purgatory is directly oppo­site to their Sacrament of Extreme vnction: for there they teach, that by this Sacrament all the reliques of sinne are vt­terly abolished and wiped away. Si quae delicta sint adbuc ex­pianda abstergit (saith the Councell of Trent:) If any sinnes Concil Trident. Sess. 14. ca. 2. Bell. de extrem. vnct. lib. 1. cap. 8 remayne vnpurged, or to be satisfied for, this Sacrament wypeth them cleane away. And the Councell of Florence affirmeth, that the effect of this Sacrament is, Sanatia animae: The hea­ling of the soule. And Bellarmine concludeth, that therefore the fiue Senses are anoynted, because they are, as it were, the fiue doores, by which sinnes enter in vnto the soule: to wit, that there might bee a generall purgation of all sinnes which remayne. This is their absolute doctrine: and yet the same men affirme, that Purgatory is ordayned to purge away theBell. de Pargat. lib. 1. cap. 7. reliques of sinnes, which in our life time wee haue not satis­fied for: and that many sinnes sticke so fast and close vnto vs, that we carry them with vs out of this life, to bee purged in that purging fire. This is also their doctrine. Now I would aske of them, if all the reliques of sin be wyped away by this annoynting Sacrament, then what vse is there of Purgatory? and if the reliques of sinne bee to bee purged in Purgatory, then what vse of this Sacrament? Either therefore this fire doth dry vp the vertue of that sacramentall Oyle, or this sa­cramentall Oyle doth quench that fire. They will say, perad­uenture, that eyther all are not anoynted with this Oyle [...] or that some that are anoynted, by their owne infidelity and impenitency, barre out the vertue thereof. Or, lastly, that the sinne being remitted, yet the temporall punishment due vnto it, is to bee payd in Purgatory. To which I reply: first, that it is against the rule of their owne Religion, that none that are anoynted with this Oyle, should goe to Purgatory: [Page 279] for then a very small number should goe to that place, seeing their Priests are so diligent, for their owne belly sake, that they seldome suffer any to passe away without this Pasport. Secondly, for them which barre out the efficacy of the Sacra­ment by their owne infidelity or impenitency, not that pur­ging fire of the Suburbs, but the deuouring fire of Hell it selfe is prepared, as they themselues acknowledge. And thirdly, if there be not a purging away of some filthy staines of sinnes from the soule by that fire, but onely a satisfactory punishment, why do they call it a Purgatory? Nay, and why doeth Bellarmine thus define it to bee a place, wherein, as it Bell. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 1. & lib. 2. cap. 1. were in a Prison, after this life those soules are purged, which were not sufficiently purged in this life; to the end, that being so purged, they may enter into heauen, whither no polluted thing can haue admittance? And thus it remaynes a necessary con­clusion, that either the reliques of sinne are not clensed away by Extreme vnction, and so that Sacrament is of no force: or, if they be, they are not then purged in Purgatory: and so that fire must needes be quenched.

51. But if this Oyle will not serue to extinguish Purgato­rie,25. Contrad. because the fire burneth so hot: let vs adde vnto this the Popes Pardons, which will (at least) evacuate and empty it, that there shall be no fuell for that fire. For they teach, that a Pardon or Indulgence, is the remission of temporal punishment, due for actuall sinnes, out of the dispensation of the Churches Tollet. Instruct. Sacerdotum. lib. 6. cap. 21. Bell. de Indulg. lib. 1. Greg. de Valen. tom. 4. pag. 1846 Treasury. Thus doth Tollet define it, and Bellarmine, and Gregory de Valentia, adding onely, that it is by meanes of application, of the superabounding satisfaction of Christ and the Saints, made by him that hath authority there unto. Now none hath authority thereunto but the Pope onely, and such as are delegated by him to that purpose: for the keyes of this Treasury were committed to Peter, and his Vicar, saith Osorius, Osor. tom. 4. con. in publ. Iubil. another Iesuite: and from them is deriued to Cardinalls, Archbishops, Bishops, and other inferiour Clarkes. And the Pope by his iurisdiction, may absolue all that are in Pur­gatoryAntonin. part. 3. [...]it. 22. c. 5. [...]. 6. from the paine, and so empty Purgatory at once, saith Antoninus, the Archbishop of Florence: which if it be true, [Page 280] then either the Pope is vnmercifull, if he can, and will not: for who would suffer such a number of poore soules to bee so tormented, when with a word of his mouth he might release them? or, if hee would, and cannot, then their doctrine is false of his absolute Iurisdiction. Let them choose whether they will. But of this, more hereafter. Now to the purpose. Some of them hold, that the paynes of Purgatory hold but ten yeeres: some, an hundred: some, two hundred: they that stretch them farthest, yet say, that they must end at the day of Iudgement: because then, all must bee Sheepe or Goates, none betwixt both, of middle nature, as Beliarmine affirmeth. Well, then, if Purgatory dure no longer, then we shall not neede to feare it no more, then that fire which the Philosopher calls, Ignis fatuus. For let any man goe to Ve­nice, and say but a prayer of Saint Augustine, printed in a ta­ble, and he shall haue 82000. yeeres pardon: that is longer then the world is like to endure by their owne confession, and therefore longer then needes. This indulgence was gran­ted by Pope Boniface the eyghth. Or, if Venice be too farre a iourney, let him stay at home, and but nod the head at the Name of Iesus, and hee shall haue twenty yeeres pardon for euery time. I would nod twenty times a day if this were true, and that commeth to 7300. in the yeere. O how a man may disappoint this Purgatory, if he haue any wit in his head! This Indulgence came from Pope Iohn the two and twentieth. Or, if this be also too great a matter, let a man weare but an Ag­nus Dei about his necke, and thinke onely in his heart on the Name of Iesus at the houre of his death, and hee shall haue plenary forgiuenes of all his sinnes. And for them that are there already, they are helped out daily, or at least may bee, by the Suffrages and Masses of those that are aliue: and if any remaine there, the fault is in the Priests, that say not Masses fast enough: and the reason of that is, because they receiue not money fast enough: for there is the common Prouerbe most true, No penny, no pater noster. To conclude, [...]ser. tom. 5. pag. 859. in the yeere of Iubile a perfect and full p [...]rdou is graunted to all that desire the same, or on whom the Pope will bestow it: [Page 281] therefore the soules in Purgatory cannot be excluded. NowEmanuel. Sa. in Aphoris. Barrad. in con­cord. Euang. pag. 6 [...]1. if all these things stand true, then Purgatory must fall: for who would fall into Purgatory, that may thus easily preuent it? or who would suffer any of his friends soules and ac­quaintance to lye burning there one houre, when it is in his power thus to redeeme them? Either therefore the doctrine of Pardons is false and fayned, or else Purgatory is no better then a scarcrow.

52. Adde to these, that soules onely are tormented in Pur­gatory,26. Contrad. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 9. and not bodies: but bodies sinne as well as soules: and some sinnes are committed by the whole man, to wit, bo­die and soule together: and therefore the body is not free from the relicks of sinnes, no more then the soule, especially from obligation vnto temporall punishment. How can then these relicks bee purged away in this fire, when as the one part of man, which standeth in neede of purging as well as the other, neuer commeth thither? Bellarmine sawe this contradiction well enough, and therefore labours to salue it by a false position, driuing out one nayle of error with another: to wit, That sinne is onely an act of free-will; Bell. Ibid. and therefore, after the dissolution of the body and soule by death, remayneth onely in the soule, and not in the dead body. But this is first false: for albeit properly it is the soule that sinneth, yet the body also sinneth, by being an instrument of the soule in sinning: and he himselfe saith, that some sinnes cannot bee committed but a toto composite, by the whole man. And if the bodie doe not sinne as well as the soule, I wonder why it is punished both in this life, with corporall diseases and plagues, and after death, with putrefaction and depriuation of life, and in the day of iudgement, with eternall torment in hell fire. Secondly, if it were so, that a dead carkasse had no relique of sinne in it, yet in that it was an instrument of sinne, it is lyable to temporall punishment, which is the chiefe ground of Purgatory, as hath beene shewed. And therefore I con­clude, that either the body goeth to Purgatory as well as the soule; or else a full satisfaction is not made for the temporall punishment: or at least, that the fire of Purgatory is but an ima­ginary [Page 282] and witty conceit to keepe men in some awe, and to maintaine their owne pride and pompe.

53. Next vnto Purgatory, is Prayer for the dead, which27. Contrad. is both the mother and daughter of that fire; for as it is vpheld by Purgatory, a weake and imaginary foundation; so it vpholdeth Purgatory, a paper building: neuerthelesse it is ouerturned by it owne poyse and weight. For this theyBell. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 18. teach, That the prayers and suffrages of the liuing, doe no­thing profite those that doe enioy blessednesse, as the Mar­tyrs, and such like: according to that of Saint Augustine, August de verbis Apostol. ser. 7. Iniuriam facit martyri qui or at pro martyro: He doth wrong a Martyr, that prayes for a Martyr: nor the damned, whether they be in the lowest Hell, as reprobates, or in Lymbo, as vn­baptized Infants: but onely the soules in Purgatory. And yet notwithstanding, they both alledge the authorities of ancient Fathers, to prooue the prayer for the dead, who prayed for those whom they assured themselues to be in hea­uen: and also by their owne doctrine and practice declare, that they haue vsed to pray for the damned. As touching the Fathers, Nazianzene prayed for Cesarius, and Ambrose forNazian. in land. Cesarii. Ambro. de obitu Theod & Valent. in August. confes. lib. 9. c. 13. Theodosius, Valentinian and Saint Augustine for his mother. And in the ancient Leiturgies of the Church, prayers were made for Patriarks, Prophets, Martyrs, and the blessed Vir­gine Mary her selfe: yea, for the Popes also: as for Pope Leo for example; and yet they thought all these to be in the state of blessednesse, as it appeareth in the same places where these prayers are expressed: and therefore Cassander, theirCassand. consult. art. 24. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 18. iudicious reconciler, calleth those prayers, Testimonies of cha­ritie towards the dead, congratulations of their present ioyes, and professions of their faith and hope, concerning the immortality of their soules, and resurrection of their bodies; not supplica­tions for their releasement out of Purgatory, as our Romanists imagine. Now hence thus we reason: If the Fathers prayed for them who were in possession of blessednes, then their te­stimonies serue nothing for their purpose, who affirme, that soules in Purgatory are onely benefited by such prayers: and if soules in Purgatory bee onely benefited by such [Page 283] prayers, as they say, then they deale impertinently and de­ceitfully to bring in the testimony of the Fathers for main­tenance of such prayers; in the one, bewraying the imbecil­litie of their cause; in the other, the weaknesse of their iudge­ments, and in both crossing themselues in that which they would build vp, as the builders of Babel did. Neyther doth this onely bewray their fraude in misapplying the authorities of the Fathers: but also it implyeth a playne contradiction: for they teach, that though wee ought not to pray for the soules of the Saints that are in heauen, yet wee may pray for the resurrection and glorification of their bodies, which not­withstanding are not tormented in Purgatory, but asleepe in their graues. And so it followeth, that by their doctrine we may not pray at all for the Saints departed, and yet wee may pray for their bodies, which are the one halfe of them. And againe, we may not pray for any that are dead, except they be in Purgatory; and yet we may pray for the bodies of the dead, that are not in Purgatory, but in their graues.

54. If they reply as Bellarmine doth, that we may pray for28. Contrad. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 18. the Saints in Heauen, not for releas of any paine, but for in­crease of their glorie, either of their soules presently, or of their bodies futurely at the Resurrection: then (I say) they contradict themselues againe. For, how doe the Praiers of the liuing doe no good to any, but those that are in Purgato­rie; whereas they are meanes to increase the glorie of their soules, and to procure the consummation of their bodies glorie also? As for their practice in praying for the damned, Damascene reporteth, that Gregorie the Pope absolued Tra­iane, Damas. in or at. de defunct. and a Martyr Falcenilla from the paines of hell: and al­so relateth out of the historie of Palladius, that Saint Mae­hary demanded of the dead skull of an Idolater, whether the Praiers of the liuing did good vnto them in Hell or not to whom the skull should answere, When thou offerest vp Prai­ers for the dead, we in the meane time feele some refreshing. The like wee read of Iudas, in the Legend of Saint Branden. Bellarmine indeed reiecteth this Tale of the skull as a Fable,Bell. Ibid. but yet he gain-saith not the deliuerie of Traiane, by the prai­ers [Page 284] of Gregorie. But Antoninus, the Archbishop of Florence, Antonin. part. 3. tit. 22. c. 5. §. 6. Aquia. in 4. dist. 45. art. 2. q. 2. approoueth the first as an authenticall Storie, so doth Aqui­nas the last, and frameth this answere thereunto: that the soules of the damned receiue no mitigation of their paine by the Praiers of the liuing; but onely a certaine vaine and de­ceitfull ioy: and the Schoole men deuise strange reasons, how this should be brought to passe, some saying that Traian, by the vertue of Gregories Praiers, returned to life, and did pe­nance, and so obtained pardon, and glorie: others affirming that his soule was not simply absolued from the guilt of pu­nishment, but that his paine was suspended vntill the day of Iudgement: others imagining, that his soule was not freed from Hell, but from the torments of Hell; so that he should re­maine there, but should feele no paine: And lastly, Bernardine reiecting all these opinions, and concluding that Traian was not definitiuely condemned, but conditionally, to wit, the diuine Wisdome fore-seeing that Gregorie should pray for him, and therefore to haue deferred his damnatorie sentence. Thus they labour in by-paths that forsake the way of Truth, and wander they know not whither. But to the point, either that is false, that soules in Purgatorie are onely helped by the Praiers and Sacrifices of the liuing, or this, that by them the damned may be either released or refreshed.

55. Lastly, both the Doctrines of Purgatorie and Praier29. Contrad. for the dead, are directly crossed by their Canon of the Masse: for there those dead persons for whom Praier is made, are said to rest in Christ, and to sleepe the sleepe of peace: and yet here they say, that none are to be praied and sacrificed for, but those onely that are in Purgatorie. What, is there then any rest in Purgatorie? is to be tormented restlessely in those burning flames, which in their iudgement are equall for ex­tremitie, and anguish (excepting onely continuance) to the paines of Hell, to be at rest, and to sleepe in peace? is Purga­torie become a Paradise? and the skirts of Hell the suburbes of Heauen? this is new & strange Doctrine: and yet this must needes bee, if both their practice of praying for the dead in their Masse, and their doctrine of the same in their bookes bee true.

[Page 285]56. Concerning inuocation of Saints, it is intangled with30. Contrad. diuers absurd contrarieties: for first if it bee true, which the former Doctrine requires, that wee must pray for the Saints which are in blisse, that their glorie may bee increased: thenBell. de Purgat. lib. 2. cap. 18. it is false that wee must pray vnto them. For if they stand in need of our Praiers, as they doe, if by them their glorie is in­creased, then they should pray vnto vs, aswell as wee vnto them: and if they stand in need of our helpe being in Hea­uen, how can they helpe vs being on Earth? if we be Media­tours for them, how are they Mediatours for vs? True it is, that here below one man prayeth for another, because they stand in need of one another: but by another Doctrine which is also the truth, the Saints enioy the sight and presence ofIdem de Sanct. beat. lib. 1. cap. 2. God, and therefore are most blessed, for in him they enioy all sinnesse of ioy and glorie; so that nothing can bee added to that happinesse, which in their soules they enioy: and there­fore one of these two necessarily are false, either we must not pray vnto them, or we need not pray for them.

57. Againe, they a leage testimonies out of the olde Te­stament,31. Contrad. to prooue the inuocation of Saints, as that Praier of Moses, Remember, O Lord, Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, thy Bell. Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 19. Ecchius Enchir. cap. 14. 15. Coster. Enchir. cap. 14. seruants: and Ier. 25. If Moses and Samuel stand before mee, my soule should not bee to this people: and Gen. 48. 16. and Iob the 51. & 2. Machabees 15. with diuers others: and yet they teach, that before Christ, there was no Saint in Heauen, but all in Lymbo. Now, if they were in Lymbo, and could not help themselues, vntil the Mediatour came, how could they help others? and if they did not enioy the presence of God them­selues, how could they be certified thereby, as by a glasse, of the necessities and Praiers of the liuing? so that it must needes follow, that either the Saints were not praied vnto, or else if they were, then they were in Heauen, and not in Lymbo. E­specially, seeing Bellarmine confesseth, that the Saints in Lym­bo Bell. Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 20. did not ordinarily know the necessities of the liuing: that be­ing a prerogatiue of perfect blessednesse: neyther tooke care of hu­mane affaires, nor were protectors of the Church, as the Saints in Heauen are. Bellarmine indeede, seeing this absurditie, [Page 286] acknowledgeth, that for the reasons afore alleaged, it was not a custome in the olde Testament to direct their Praiers pur­posely to the Saints; but in their praiers to God, to alleage the merits of the Saints: but herein hee both crosseth him­selfe, and all his fellowes: for if it be so, why doth he and they produce testimonies out of the olde Testament, to prooue their inuocation which is made directly vnto the Saints?

58. Lastly, they affirme that no Saints may bee worship­ped32. Contrad. publikely, that is, in the name of the Church, vnlesse hee be canonized by the Pope, for the auoiding of misprision:Bell. Ibid. c. [...]. & 10. and yet they confesse that none were canonized till 800. yeeres after Christ, by Pope Leo the third, and also that it is lawfull priuately to worship any of whose sanctity I haue an opinion: now I would gladly know, if this bee a way to a­uoide mistaking, why was it forborne so long? or why is it not vrged priuately aswell as publikely? if canonization were necessary 800. yeeres after Christ, to auoide mistaking, then there was much mistaking before, or else this remedy would not haue beene hatched: and if it was necessary in the pub­licke seruice, then is it much more in priuate deuotions, seeing priuate men are more propense to false suppositions, then a whole congregation is: and so this new doctrine of canoni­zation, not onely condemneth the Idolatry offormer times, in the inuocation of Saints, but also openeth a wide doore to priuate superstition, in that kind: and so indeed crosseth and vndermineth it selfe: for Bellarmine confesseth out of Sulpi­tius, that the people did long celebrate one for a martyr, who after Bell. de Sanct. beat. lib. 1. cap. 7. appeared, and tolde them that hee was damned: and Alexander the third reprehendeth certaine men, for giuing the honour of a martyr, to one that dyed drunke: and no doubt but many such Saints are in their Martyrologe at this day, notwithstan­ding their canonization: so that by canonizing, they preuent mistaking, & by giuing liberty to priuate inuocation, they giue occasion, if not cause of mistaking: then which, what can be more contradictory?

59. Againe, when they barre all children that are vnbap­tized,33. Contrad. out of Heauen, and confine them to Limbo, there to en­dure [Page 287] the punishment of losse for euer: doe they not contra­dict another doctrine of theirs, which teacheth, that men dying without the baptisme of water, if they haue baptismum flaminis, vel sanguinis, that is, either suffer martyrdome for Christs sake, or, bee regenerated by his Spirit, and so haue a desire to bee initiated by that Sacrament, but are preuented by some meanes, may notwithstanding goe to Heauen: for if want of baptisme bee a sufficient cause to keepe from Heauen, then it is so as well in men growne, as in infants: and if it bee not a sufficient cause, to shut vp Heauen gates against men of yeeres, then how can it be to yong infants? especially, see­ing infants by their doctrine, are equall to men in two things: first, that they may bee martyrs, as well as they: as the children whom Herod slew in Bethl [...]em, are celebrated in their leitur­gies: and secondly, that they may bee sanctified as well as they, as Iohn Baptist was in his mothers wombe: and in these two are precedent vnto them, first, that they are void of actu­all transgressions, with which, men of yeeres are infinitely stayned, and so neerer to Heauen, then those: and secondly, though they haue no desire of baptisme in themselues, yet they are deuoted thereunto, both by the desire of their pa­rents, and by the purpose and intent of the Church. And therefore, all considerations, being equall in the persons, and the oddes remaining, if there be any on the infants side, it can bee no lesse then a direct contradiction, that children vnbap­tized cannot bee saued, and men vnbaptized may bee saued: for it implieth thus much in effect, that the outward baptisme of water is necessary to saluation, and yet the outward bap­tisme of water is not necessary to saluation.

60. Againe, concupiscence in the regenerate, is denyed34. Contrad. Bell. de amiss. grat. & stat. pec­cat. lib. 5. cap. 7. Concil. Trident. Sess. 5. by them all, to bee in it owne nature sinne, and yet they all confesse, that it is malum, an euill, and vitium, a vice. Is any thing naturally euill, which is not sinne? or a vice in Philoso­phy, that is not a sinne in diuinity? This is strange diuinity. The name of euill, we know, is vsed of annoyances, crosses, and afflictions; but these are naturall euils, and not morall: but to doe euill, can bee said of nothing, but sinne: and how­soeuer [Page 288] ti bee true, that vice is rather the habit, then the act of sinne: yet because it is the habit, is it therefore lesse sinfull then the act? noy, is it not more sinfull, seeing it groweth out of many actes, and is confirmed by custome, and almost turned to nature? In this therefore they are most contrary to them­selues, when they grant concupiscence to bee of it owne na­ture an euill, and a vice, and yet not a sinne: for nothing is na­turally euill, but that which swarueth from good: nor any thing vice, but that which is contrary to vertue. Now all mo­rall good and vertue is within the compasse of the Law of God, and all morall euill and vice, a transgression of that Law; therefore, it cannot but follow, that concupiscence being a morall euill and vice, and therefore a transgression of the Law of God, should bee cleared from being sinne, of it owne na­ture, especially, seeing as Origen saith, This is the nature of Orig. in Rom. 7. sinne, if any thing bee done, which the Law forbiddeth: and Bede, Beda in 1. Ioh. Caesar. Dial. 3. apud Nanzianz. that all that swarueth from the rule of righteousnesse, & sinne: and Caesarius Gregory, Naianzens brother, that sinne is euery assay to resist, and euery resistance it selfe against vertue. And Saint Augustine, that therefore a thing is sinne, because it ought not to August. [...]e not. & grat. cap. 14. & contra Iulian. lib. 4. cap. 3. bee done, and that to doe any thing amisse, is to sinne: but euery moral leuill and vice is forbidden by the Law, swarueth from the rule of righteousnesse, is a resistance against vertue, and a thing that is done amisse, and ought not to bee done: there­fore is also sinne in it owne nature. They haue no wayes to helpe themselues out of these briers, but by the distinction of properly and improperly, which they say, they fetch out of Saint Augustine, as if concupiscence in the regenerat should be sinne improperly, and not properly, by which the contra­diction is not taken away: for they say, that it is not sinne at all in it owne nature, but onely euill: now; if it bee improper­ly sinne of it owne nature, then it is some way sinne: and so that proposition is false, that it is not sinne at all: and besides therefore it is said by that distinction in Saint Augustine, to be improperly sinne, because it is not come to so high a perfecti­on, as other sinnes are, by being without consent of will: ne­uerthelesse, hee neuer meant, but that it was a transgression of [Page 289] the Law of God: and so a sinne in it owne nature: as may ap­peare by almost infinite places, in his bookes: as for instance one for all, Concupiscence (saith he) is not onely the punishment Aug. contra Ju­lian. lib. 5. c. 3. of sinne, and cause of sinne, but euen sinne it selfe, because there is in it a rebellion against the Law of the minde: and therefore heeIdem de ci [...]itat. lib. 1. cap. 25. & contra Juli­an. lib. 6. cap. 7. & de Joh. tract. 41. & denupt. & concupisc. lib. 1. cap. 25. calleth it a concupiscentiall disobedience, which dwelleth in our dying members: and in other places, an euill quality, vitious de­sires, vnlawfull lusts, &c. Therefore Saint Augustine, when he called it [...]in improperly, neuer dreamt that is was not a trans­gression of the Law, but either that it was not so high a de­gree of sinne, as those which are done with consent of will: or that because the guilt of it is taken away by baptisme in the regenerate; as hee speaketh in another place, ConcupiscenceIdem contra Iu­lian. lib. 2. is not called sinne in such manner, as sinne maketh guilty, be­cause the guilt thereof is released in the Sacrament of regene­ration. And thus this distinction rightly vnderstood, standeth them in no stead, to keepe their doctrine from manifest contra­diction.

61. This subiect might bee prosecuted in many more35. Contrad. points of their Religion, but I conclude with these two, Anti­christ, and the Bishop of Rome, which I ioyne together in this discourse, because in truth they are all one: and though they differ in name, yet they agree in nature: one egge is not liker to another, nor milke liker to milke, then the Pope is to Anti­christ. As touching Antichrist therefore thus they confesse, that by mysticall Babylon in the Reuelation, is meant `Rome, Bell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3. c. 13. Viega. sup. A­pocal. 11. v. 12. Rhem. Annot. in Apocal. 17. 8. Ribera com. in Apocal. 14. and by and by with an other contrary blast, they puffe away that againe, and affirme, that Rome is not Babylon. The first is auouched in plaine termes, both by Bellarmine, and Viega, and Ribera, two other Iesuites, and the whole colledge of the Rhemists, and diuers others, conuicted by the euidence of truth: and the second is insinuated by a necessary consequence out of another position: for they say, that Ierusalem shall bee the seat of Antichrist: and in so saying, they inferre necessarily, that Ierusalem is mysticall Babylon, and not Rome, because the whore of Babylon is set foorth in the Scripture, to be the seat of Antichrist: and it must needs bee so, seeing shee is called [Page 290] the mother of all fornications, that is, of Superstition and Ido­latry, of all Atheisme and heresie: and seeing shee maketh drunke the kings and inhabitants of the earth, with the gol­den cup of her fornication, and is died red, and made drunke with the bloud of the Saints, and of the martyrs of Iesus: And lastly, seeing Antichrist must bee one of the seuen heads, to wit, the last of the Romane beast, and the last King of the Ro­mane Empire, though not called the Romane Emperour, asBell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3. c. 15. Bellarmine himselfe confesseth. All these things considered, and laide together, it must needs bee inferred by necessary consequence, that the whore of Babylon cannot choose but bee the seat of Antichrist; and if it bee so, then either Ierusa­lem is not the seat, where this man of sinne must raigne; or by Babylon is not meant Rome, but Ierusalem: let them choose which: one of these is apparantly false.

62. Againe, when by Babylon they vnderstand Rome, they36. Contrad. restraine it to heathenish Rome, vnder the persecuting Empe­rours; and say, that it is not meant of Rome Catholicke and Christian, but of Rome Ethnick and Heathenish. Now if Rome be Babylon, and Babylon the seat of Antichrist, as hath beeneBell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3. c. 13. proued out of their owne confession, how can Rome heathe­nish, vnder the Emperours, be it, when as they all agree, that Antichrist shall not come, vntill a little before the end of the world? That state of Rome, which they speake of, is past aboue a thousand yeeres since, and Antichrist is not yet come accor­ding to their doctrine. Necessarily therefore it followeth, that either Antichrist sate there then, and so is come long agoe; or else that Rome was not Babylon, whilst it was vnder the hea­then Emperours, but is, or shall be after it hath receiued the Christian faith.

63. Againe, the Romane Empire must bee remoued be­fore37. Contrad. the comming of this great enemie: this, all our aduersa­riesIdem l. 3. cap. 5. yeeld vnto: and most of the ancient fathers so interpret that place, When he that hindereth, shall be taken out of the [...]. Thes. 2. 8. way: and yet the state of the Romane Empire, vnder the Em­perours, is made by them the whore of Babylon, and the seat of Antichrist: and so the Romane Empire by their doctrine, [Page 291] is both vtterly abolished before the raigne of Antichrist, and yet is not abolished at all.

63. Againe, they teach, that Enoch and Eli [...] must come38. Contrad. Bell. de Roman. Pontif. l. c. 6. & cap. 12. and preach against Antichrist, and at length conuert the Iewes: and yet they also affirme, that the Iewes shall receiue Antichrist for their Messias. If the Iewes shall receiue him for their Messias, how shall they bee conuerted by Enoch and Elias to the true Messias? And if they shall be conuerted, how doe they receiue him for their Messias? If they shall be con­uerted before Antichrists comming, and then fall away from Christ; then this could not be done by Enoch and Elias, who, by their doctrine, must come in Antichrists time: and yet it seemeth by them, they must be called before; because Bel­larmine confesseth, that Antichrist must be an Apostate, and the head of the Apostacy: but the Iewes cannot make an Apo­stacie before they be called. Againe, if they shall bee conuer­ted in Antichrists time, how shall Antichrist raigne three yeeres and an halfe, when all his Subiects shall be taken from him? And lastly, if they shall bee called after the destruction of Antichrist, as indeed they suppose, thē how can that be, see­ingIbid. cap. 9. the destruction of Antichrist shal not be but immediately before the end of the world, euen fiue and fortie daies, and no more? Shall a whole Nation bee conuerted in so short a time, and being conuerted, continue no longer, to make pro­fession and practice of their conuersion? Thus one absurditie being granted, a thousand follow.

64. Besides, they say, that Antichrist shall bee borne of the 39. Contrad. Ibid. cap. 12. Tribe of Da [...]: and yet the Iewes shall receiue him for their Mes­sias. Whereas notwithstanding it is a manifest and confessed thing that the Iewes looke for their Messias out of the Tribe of Iuda, and not out of the Tribe of Dan. To stoppe which g [...]p, they are driuen to say, that indeed he shall truly rise out of the Tribe of Dan, but shal faine himselfe to be of the Tribe of Iudah, and of the familie of Dauid. As if the Iewes were so credulous to beleeue his report without proofe: or that they kept so sleight an account of their Genealogies, in which neuer any people were more scrupulous: or, as if a distinctiō of [Page 292] their Tribes remained to this day, their Genealogies being defaced so long since by Herod: and themselues scattered through all Countries of the world. Either therefore he must be of the Tribe of Iuda, in truth, more then by a counterfeit simulation; or else the Iewes will neuer receiue him.

65. Lastly, they teach, that Ierusalem is to bee the seat of40. Contrad. Antichrist, and the Iewes his peculiar Subiects: and yet they also confesse, that hee shall bee the last Emperour of Rome, though not called by that name; and therefore that the Ro­manes shall bee his Subiects. From whence I thus conclude; that if the Romane Empire bee the Dominion of Antichrist, then it is not likely that hee should bee the expected Messias of the Iewes, nor that Ierusalem should be his seat: for ne­uer any Romane Emperour kept his Imperiall residence in that Citie: and if the Iewes bee his Subiects, and Ierusalem the seat of his Kingdome, then it cannot bee that hee should be the last Emperour of Rome.

66. And thus much of Antichrist in generall. Now of the41. Contrad. Bishop of Rome in particular; who, if he be not, as we con­stantly beleeue, this very Antichrist; yet, (as Gregory their owne Pope confesseth) is his fore-runner, because hee clai­meth to himselfe the title of Vniuersall Bishop. Concerning the Pope, their presumption is, that hee cannot erre in any case, in those things which pertaine to faith, nor yet which concerne manners, when he teacheth iudicially, and speaketh out of his Chaire: and yet they doe not deny, but that hee may bee an Heretike. This is confessed by most Popish Do­ctors:Boz. to [...]. 2. de [...]ig. eccles. l. 28. cap. vlt. Fran. Victor. Re­lect. 4. nu. 6. Occham. quaest. de Sum, Pontif. cap. 9. Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. c. 6. as Bozius, who saith, that he may be an Heretike, yea, write, teach, and preach heresie. And Victoria, that in dispensing against the Decrees of Councils, and former Popes, he may erre and grieuously sinne. And Occham, that many things are con­tained in the decretals, which sauour of heresie. And it is so faint­ly denyed by Bellarmine, that his denyall is almost as good as a confession▪ for he saith, that it is probable, and may god­lily be beleeued, that the Pope cannot be an Heretike. Hee doth not resolutely auouch it, but only coniecturally expend his opinion: but yet denieth not, but that hee may erre in [Page 293] some causes as a priuate man. And it is a Decree of their owne, that the Pope may bee found negligent of his owne and his brethrens saluation, and draw innumerable peopleD. 4. Si Papa. with him into hell. This grosse and manifest contradiction they labour to couer by a silly and ridiculous distinction: for thus they creepe betwixt the barke and the tree: The Pope may erre as hee is Man, but not as he is a Pope. Orthus, He may erre in his priuate opinions, but not è Cathedra, by way of definition. Or thus, Hee may erre when hee instructeth a particular Church: but he cannot when he purposeth to direct the Vniuersail Church. Or thus, Hee may erre in the premi­ses, but not in the conclusion. But this is a senselesse and ri­diculous shift. For first, if hee may write, teach, and preach, and decree heresie, as out of Occham and Bozius: and erre in his Dispensations, as out of Victoria, then he may erre iudici­ally, and è Cathedra; for these are iudiciall exercises of the Chaire. Secondly, if the Pope may be an Heretike, as he is a Man, and haue a sound saith, as he is a Pope; then as hee is a Man, hee may goe to hell, and as he is a Pope, to heauen: but both mu [...] goe to heauen or to hell together; therefore both of them either erre or not erre together: and if he erre in his owne priuate iudgement, how can hee but erre in his publike determinations, which are but fruits of his iudge­ment; especially, seeing the maine promise whereupon this infallibil [...]ie of the Popes Chaire is grounded, was made not onely to the Office, but also to the person of Peter? Luk. 22. 32. I haue prayed for thee that thy faith may not faile: as Bel­larmine himselfe confesseth, and Augustine, Chrysostome, Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. c. 3 Aug. de correp. & grat. cap. 8▪ Chrys. hom. 83. in Mat. Theophil. in cap. 22. bic. Theophilact, and others of the Fathers expound it as a perso­nall priuiledge, without any mention of his Office: neuer­thelesse, let it belong to his Office, if that will doe them any good: then I say, What reason is there, that the priuiledge of Peters person should not be deriued to the Pope, as well as his Office, seeing they cl [...]ime the latter by the same title, by which Peter had the former? and if Peters faith could not faile, neither in himselfe, nor in his Office, by vertue of that promise; then the Pope, if he be Peters successor, must be in [Page 294] the same case, that is, neither to erre personally nor iudici­ally: or if he erre one way, then also to bee subiect to error the other. Lastly, experience hath taught, that Popes may erre, euen as they are Popes, and that iudicially: yea, and al­so haue beene condemned for Heretikes: As Honorius the first, whom three generall Councils condemned for a Me­ [...]othel [...]te. And Iohn the two and twentieth, who was con­strained to recant his iudgement touching the soule, by the Vniuersitie of Paris. And Iohn the three and twentieth, who was condemned for an Heretike, by the Council of Con­stance, Eras. annot. in 1. Cor. 7. for denying the immortality of the soule. And diuers others, who not onely in their priuate opinions, but in their publike doctrines, haue taught and maintained notorious errours.

67. Another doctrine of theirs is, that the Pope is the42. Contrad. head of the Church, and yet they denie not, but sometimes the Pope is no true nor sound member of the Church: how can hee be the head of the Church, that is no sound member thereof? nay, no member at all, not so much as the taile, as the Iewish Rabbines call the Bishop of Rome, in disdaine: ex­cept their last distinction helpe them, quatenus Papa, and quatenus homo, I know not how they will rid themselues out of this snare; and yet that will not helpe them, neither in this case: for is it likely, that Christ will make a reprobate, the head of his Church, and commit the cu [...]dy of the same to an Atheist, an Heretike, or an Epicure, or a Necromancer, or a monster of nature, as all stories [...]all Iohn 12. and as many of them haue beene? Surely either as he is a Pope, he is not the Churches head: or as hee is a man, hee must needs be a mem­ber of the same. If they say, that wee giue vnto a King the same title of head and gouernor of the Church, who notwith­standing is often a tyrant, and waster of the Church, and a ve­ry reprobate: I answere, that in attributing these titles of dig­nity to Kings, wee doe not positiuely set downe what euery one is: for if hee bee a destroyer of the Church, hee is not an vpholder of it; but what euery one ought to bee in regard of his office: but the Romanists absolutely set it downe, that [Page 295] though the Pope be a wolfe, wasting the flocke of Christ, and though hee lead by his doctrine and example, infinite soules with him to hell, yet hee is still actually the head of the Church, quatenus Papa, and no man may say vnto him, Why doe you so?

68. Againe, it was decreed by two Councils, and those43. Contrad. assembled, authorized, and confirmed by Popes themselues, that the Councill was aboue the Pope; and yet the CouncillConcil. Constant. & Basill. Bell. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 17. of Laterane, vnder Pope Leo the tenth, decreeth perempto­rily, that the Pope is aboue all Councils: & so also most of the moderne Romanists affirme. Now if the decrees of Councils lawfully assembled, and approoued by Popes, bee the do­ctrines of the Church, then here is one doctrine quite contra­ry to another, one Councill opposite to another, yea, one Pope to another: which is no new nor strange thing, but or­dinary in the Church of Rome. As witnesse, Pope Iohn the two and twentieth, and Pope Nicholas, about the question of our Sauiours manner of possessing earthly goods: and Pope Celestine, and Pope Innocent the third, in the question of diuorce, in the case of heresie: and Pope Pelagius, and Pope Gregory the first, in the question of putting away the wiues of Subdeacons; one of these crossing the other iudicially, and one gain saying, what the other defended. And most notori­ous is that which diuers Chronologers testifie of Pope Ste­phen Sigebert. Polo­nus. Sigonius de reb. Ital. lib. 6. Lui [...]prand. ver. per Europ. gest▪ lib. 1. cap. 8. Concil. Reuen. anno Dom. 898. the sixt, how hee decreed in a Councill, that they who were ordained Bishops by Pope For [...]sus, his predecessour, were not ordained lawfully, because the man was wicked, by whom they were ordained; & therfore he did vnordain them, and reordaine them againe: thus Stephen iudicially crossed Form [...]sus, and hee againe was crossed and condemned by Pope Iohn the ninth, euen for this fact, and his new ordainings marched with new baptizings.

69. Lastly, they constantly maintaine, that the Pope is44. Contrad. not Antichrist; and yet they affirme that hee is the Vicar of Christ heere on earth: a flat contradiction: for the word An­tichrist signifieth not onely an enemie vnto Christ, but also one that taketh vpon him the office and authority of Christ: [Page 296] the pr [...]position [...], affording naturally, and properly, both significations, as appeareth in these two wordes [...], an opposite, and [...], a Proconsull: in the first whereof it signifieth opposition, and the second substitution. Now then, if the Pope bee Christs Vicar generall on earth, then he is in the last sense Antichrist: and beeing so in the last sense, it is most likely that hee is also the same in the first: because the Antichrist spoken of in the Scripture, is described to be such a one as is not an open and outward, but a couert and disgui­sed enemie, hauing two hornes like the Lambe, that is, coun­terfeting the humility and meeknesse of Christ, and making aApoc. 13. & 17. glorious profession of religion, with a shew of counterfeit holinesse, when notwithstanding hee speaketh lyes in hypo­crisie, and vttereth wordes like the dragon, and is the greatest enemy to Christ Iesus and his Gospel that euer was: so that in that hee is Christs Vicar, hee is Antichrist, by their owne con­fession, in that sense, and being so, is probably Antichrist also in the other: because the true Antichrist must bee both the one and the other. And so for the conclusion of this point, wee haue not onely the mystery of iniquity, that is, Antichristia­nisme in the manifold contradictions and oppositions there­of, but euen Antichrist himselfe lurking in his den, professing himselfe and his followers to bee the onely true Church of God, and pretending himselfe to be the Prince of the couenant, as Saint Ierome speaketh, that is asmuch as to say, the Vicar of Christ: and without doubt, as the sweet harmonie in Christi­an Religion, and euery part thereof with it selfe, is a pregnant argument of the infallible truth thereof: so the miserable op­position and contrariety in the Religion of the Church of Rome, and that most of the doctrines therein contained, either with themselues, or with other, as I haue in part here shewed, leauing a fuller demonstration thereof to some other that shal more deeply search into them, doe euidently euince, that it is the Religion of Antichrist; and therefore not onely to be sus­pected, but euen to bee abhorred of all them that loue the truth, or that desire the saluation of their soules.

The IX. MOTIVE. That Religion, whose doctrines are in many points apparently op­posite to the word of God and the doctrine of the Gospell can­not bee the trueth: but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome, ergo &c.

1 IN the Chapter going before, I haue shewed how the Romish Religion is contrary to it selfe, that is, falshood to falshood: now in this, my taske is to demonstrate, how it crosseth the word of God, that is, falshood to truth; which be­ing proued, I hope, no man which is not drunke with the poi­sonous cuppe of the whoore of Babylons fornication, will doubt of the vanity and falshood thereof. Now my purpose is not to enter into the lists of disputation, and confute their opinions by strength of argument, (that combate hath beene valiantly performed by many of our Champions:) onely my intent is, first to shew how their doctrines cōtradict the plain text of Gods word, and secondly, to wipe away their subtle and intricate distinctions, whereby they labour to make a re­conciliation betwixt the word of God, and their opinions; which shall be my onely taske in this Chapter: for it is to bee noted, that there was neuer any generation so happie, or rather so miserable in distinctions, as the Romanists are: they maintain their kingdomes by distinctions, by them they blind the eyes of the simple, dazle the vnderstanding of the vnaduised, set a glose vpon their counterfeit ware, couer the deformity of their Apostate Church; and lastly, extinguish the truth, or at least­wise, so darken and obscure it, that it cannot shine so brightly as it would: but in seeking to extinguish the light of truth, they distinguish themselues from the trueth: and as Iacob by his party-coloured stickes, occasioned a brood of party-co­loured sheepe and goates: so they, by their fond distinctions, bring foorth a party-coloured and counterfeit Religion: as I trust to lay open to the world, in this discourse following.

2. The maior or first proposition beeing without all con­trouersie▪ [Page 298] I passe ouer in silence, and come to the minor or se­condMinor. proposition, which is, that the Religion of the Church of Rome in many doctrines is apparently opposite to the word of God.

3. The Gospell teacheth, that [...] one onely God is to bee1. Mat. 4. 10. Mat 6. 9. 1. Pet. 5. 7. Psal. 50. 15. Ier. 17. 5, 7. inuocated and worshipped, and that after that manner which he hath appointed in his word, and that all the confidence of our saluation is to bee placed in him alone: but the Roma­nists command not onely to inuocate God, but also Angels and Saints departed, and in time of danger to expect helpe and succour from them, and to repose our trust and confi­dence in them also.

4. Bellarmine distinguisheth and saith, that God alone in­deedBell. de Roman. Pontif. l. 3. c. 23. is to be worshipped, and inuocated with that kinde of adoration, which is due onely vnto God: but yet the excel­lent creatures may bee honoured, and some of them inuoca­ted, not as gods, but as such as are Gods friends, that is, with an inferiour kinde of worship.Answere. Aquin. p. 3. q. 25. art. 3. l. 4. Concil. Trident. Sess. 13. cap. 5. Gregor. de Va­lent. de Idolat. l. 2. cap. 7. Cerem. Rom. Ec­cles. l. 1. tit. 7. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 96. art. 4. & part 3. q. 25. art. 4. Pontif. Rom. part. 2. tit. de benedict. nou [...] crucis. [...]r [...]uiar. Rom. in hymn. ad beat. virgin. Apost. martyr. & in [...]ff [...]c. defunct. Biel. lect. 80. in expes. can. miss.

5. But these distinctions cannot extinguish the truth: for first they giue by name the highest worship that can bee, to wit, Latria, to the Image and reliques of Christ and the crosse, and to a piece of bread in the Sacrament, insomuch that Gre­gory de Valentia, a famous Iesuite, and Bellarmines compeere, is in this regard driuen to say, that some kinde of Idolatrie is lawfull. Secondly, if they should deny this, yet their doctrine and practice doth apparently proclaime asmuch: for when they say to their Agnus deis, It breaketh and quasheth all sinne as Christs bloud, doe they not equall them to Christ? when they place their hope and confidence in Saints and reliques, doe they not equall them to God? when they pray, that by the merit of a golden, siluer, or woodden crosse, they may be freed from sinne committed, doe they not equall it with our Saui­our that dyed on the crosse? when they desire at the Saints hands grace and glory, doe they not equall them to the God of grace, and glory? when they call the blessed Virgine the Queene of Heauen, and giue vnto her one halfe of Gods kingdome, euen the halfe of mercy, doe they not equall her [Page 299] to her maker? Lastly, when they offer sacrifice to reliques andMissal. Rom. tit. derit. seruand. in celebr. miss. Images, as namely, burne frankincense, set vp tapers, offer the calues of their lippes, doe they not equall them to God? for all these dueties are proper and peculiar parts of Gods seruice; and therefore in attributing them to creatures, they giue vn­to them plainely that seruice and worship, which belongeth to God alone.

6. The Gospell teacheth, that remission of sinnes, and e­uerlasting2. Esay 63. 3. 1. Ioh. 1. 7. 1. Ioh. 2. 2. Act. 4. 14. Rhem. Col. 1. 24. Biel. 3. d. 19. art. 2. cond. 5. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 14. Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. b. 3. c. 23. life, is bestowed vpon vs freely, not for any works or merits sake of our owne, but for Iesus Christs sake, the on­ly begotten Sonne of God, who was crucified for our sinnes, and rose againe for our iustification: But the Romanists teach, that wee are iustified and saued, not by Christs merits onely, but in part for Christs sake, and in part for our owne contrition, obedience, and good works.

7. Bellarmine answereth, that their doctrine is falsely charged, to say that sinners are iustified, partly for their owne works sake, and partly by Christ: for (saith hee) by a distin­ction there bee three kinde of works; one, of those that are performed by the strength of nature onely, without faith and the grace of God: another, of such as proceede from faith and grace, but not from a man fully iustified: and therefore are called works of Preparation; as Prayer, Almes, Fasting, Sorrow for sinne, and such like: and the third, of such which are done by a man iustified, and proceede from the Spirit of God dwelling in his heart, and sheading abroad charity in the same. Now concerning the first, hee acknowledgeth that we are not iustified by them, by the example of Abraham, Rom. 4. and therefore that they most impudently belye their doctrine, that fasten this opinion vpon them. As touching the second, he saith, that these works Preparatiue are not me­ritorious of reconciliation and iustification by condignity and iustice: yet in as much as they proceede from faith and grace, they merite after a sort; that is, obtaine remission of sinnes. The third sort of works hee boldly and confidently affirmeth, to merite not remission of sinnes, because that was obtayned before: but euerlasting glory and happinesse, and that truely and properly.

[Page 300]8. This Bellarminian distinction may be distinguished byAnswere. two essentiall qualities: first, Folly; secondly, Falsehood. Folly: for it maketh nothing to the taking away of the Anti­thesis before mentioned: for when as he confesseth, that the second kinde of works doe merite remission of sinnes af­ter a sort, and the third eternall life absolutely, what doth [...]e but acknowledge that which wee charge them withall, and which himselfe reiected a little before as a slaunder? namely, that wee are iustified and saued partly by our owne merits, and partly by the merits of Christ: for the Gospell saith, We are saued by Christs merits alone: and he saith, We are saued by our owne merits also. And thus the folly and vanity of his distinction euidently appeareth.

9. The falsehood sheweth it selfe in two things: first, in that hee affirmeth, that they doe not teach, that works done before grace doe merite any thing at Gods hand: for though it be a Canon of the Councill of Trent, charged with an A­nathema,Concil. Trident. [...]ess. 6. can. 1. If any man should say, that a man may bee iustified by his owne works, wrought by the power of nature, without the di­uine helpe by Christ Iesus: and Bellarmine seemeth to affirme as much in this place. Yet Andradius, that famous Interpre­ter of that forenamed Councill, one of the most learned men of his age, and that knew well the mysteries of that Councill, doth tell vs, that by diuine helpe the Councill vn­derstood not the grace of regeneration, and speciall worke of Gods sanctifying Spirit, but heroicall motions, stirred vp in the vnregenerate and vnbeleeuers: and that by this speciall helpe they might doe works void of all fault, and meritori­ous of saluation. And Bellarmine confesseth in other places,Bell. de Iustif. lib. 4. cap. 20. Salmer. t [...]. 5. pag. 41. Concil Trid. Sess 6. can. 7. that they are good, suogenere: that is, morally: and Salme­ron the Iesuite, that they dispose and prepare a man for iusti­fication: and the same Councill of Trent in the seuenth Ca­non following, doth curse them that shall say they are sinnes, or that they deserue the hatred of God. Now if these kinde of works be good in their kinde, and preparatiues to iustifi­cation, and not sinnes, nor deseruing the hatred of God, but such as whereby the Heathen were saued; then it is a probable [Page 301] falsehood in Bellarmine, when he saith by their doctrine, that these works doe not iustifie, nor helpe any thing to the iusti­fication of a sinner.

10. Secondly, it is false also which he affirmeth, concer­ning the second kinde of works: to wit, of preparation, that though they proceede from faith and grace, yet they doe not iustifie: for Bellarmine in another place doth not stick toBell. de Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 13. Idem. cap. 17. say, that this faith iustifieth by way of merite, and deserueth forgiuenes of sinnes after a certaine manner: and here in this place, that these works proceeding from faith, doe merite af­ter their manner, and obtaine remission of sinnes; which if it be true, then it must needes be false which he sayd before, That they make not our works to concurre with the merits of Christ, for the remission of sinnes, which is the point of opposition: and that which also he affirmeth here, That these works doe not iustifie, seeing remission of sinnes is of the ve­rie essence of iustification: for none haue their sinnes forgi­uen, but they are iustified; and none are iustified, but they haue their sinnes forgiuen: they concurre in one, if they bee not one and the same: And therefore if these works merite remission of sinnes, they must needs also merite iustification. And thus Bellarmines distinction doth no waies free their do­ctrine from opposition to the doctrine of the Gospell.

11. The Gospell teacheth, that hee which repenteth and3. Mark. 1. 15. Ephes. 3. 12. Heb. 4. 16. Heb. 10. 19, 22. Mat. 9. 3. Mat. 9. 22. Ioh. 16. 33. Rom. 8. 15. 1. Ioh. 3. 14. Chytraus. com in Reuel. cap. 9. heareth the promise, ought to beleeue it, and bee perswaded, that not only other mens sins, but euen his owne are pardoned for Christs sake, and that he doth please God, and is accep­ted of God, and in this faith ought to come vnto God by prayer. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that a man must alwaies doubt of the remission of his sins, and neuer be assu­red thereof; which doubting (as Chytraeus truely speaketh) is plainely repugnant to the nature of faith, and a meere hea­thenish doctrine.

12. Bellarmine answereth here not by a distinction, but by a negation, denying flatly that the Scripture teacheth any such doctrine, that a man may be assured of the remission of his sinnes, and his reconciliation with God: and this hee see­meth [Page 302] to prooue by two arguments; one, because it is contra­ryEccles. 9. to other plaine and manifest places of Scripture: another, because all Gods promises almost haue a condition annexed vnto them, which no man can iustly know whether hee hath fulfilled or no.

13. It is good for Bellarmine here to vse a plaine negation:Answere. for their doctrine is so manifest, that it will admit no distin­ction: the Councill of Trent hath put that out of all que­stionConcil. Trident. Sess. 6. cap. 9. and distinction. For it teacheth in expresse words, that no man ought to perswade and assure himselfe of the remission of his sinnes, and of his iustification; no though he be truly iustified, and his sinnes be truely and really pardoned. This doctrine is so euident, that Bellarmine could neither distinguish, as his cu­stome is, nor yet deny it; and therefore hee freely confesseth it: and yet Gropper condemned it as an impious doctrine:Gropper. Catharin. assert. & Apolog. Domin. Sot [...]. Apol. cap. 2. and Catharinus, at the Councill of Trent, defended the con­trary, that the childe of God, by the certainty of faith, know­eth himselfe to be in the state of grace. And so did also Domi­nicus a Sot [...], and diuers others of their owne stampe But there is great cause why the Church of Rome should maintaine this doctrine of doubting very peremptorily: for as Chemni­tius Chemnit. exam. pars 1. pag. 183. well obserueth, all the Market of Romish superstitious wares is built vpon this foundation: for when as the consci­ence, being taught to doubt of solution, doth seeke for some true and sound comfort, and not finding the same in faith, through the merits of Christ, then it flyeth to it owne works, and heapeth vp together a bundle of superstitious obseruati­ons, by which it hopeth to obtaine fauour at Gods hands: hence arise voluntary vowes, Pilgrimages, Inuocations of Saints, works of Supererogation, priuate Masses, sale of Par­dons, and a number such like trash: and when as yet they could not finde any sound comfort in any of these, at last was Purgatory found out, and redemption of the soules of the dead out of that place of torment, by the suffrages and pray­ers of the liuing. Now the Romanists, fearing lest these pro­fitable and gainefull wares, whereby an infinite tribute is brought into their coffers, should be bereft them, haue bar­red [Page 303] out of their Church this doctrine of certainty of salua­tion by faith, of which if mens consciences bee once perswa­ded, they will neuer repose any more confidence in those su­perstitious trumperies.

14. But we, with Luther, may boldly say, that so odiousLuther in Gen. cap. 41. and impious is this doctrine, that if there were no other er­ror in the Romane Church but this, we had iust cause of sepa­ration from them: and with Chytraeus, that it is repugnant to the nature of faith, and a meere heathenish doctrine. For it doth not onely nourish mens infirmities, who are too much pro [...]e to doubting, but euen encourage them thereunto, and teach that we ought to doubt. But that we may come to the point, is not this indeede the doctrine of the Gospell, that wee should not doubt of our saluation? why then doth our Sauiour command all to repent, and beleeue the Gospell? ByMat. 1. 15. which he plainely teacheth, where true repentance goeth be­fore, there beleefe in the Gospell, that is, assurance of for­giuenesse of sinnes by the bloud of Christ, doth follow: and that wee ought euery one to be thus assured, seeing this is a precept Euangelicall, which doth not onely giue charge of doing the thing commanded, as the Law doth; but also in­spireth grace and power to effect it: as Saint Augustine wellAug. de Spiritis & liter. informeth vs, when he saith, The Law was giuen, that grace might bee sought; and grace was giuen, that the Law might bee fulfilled. Why doeth Saint Paul say, that the Spirit of GodRom. 8. 15. witnesseth vnto our spirits that wee are the sonnes of God? Neither is this witnesse of the Spirit a doubtfull and vncer­taine certificate: for Saint Paul, in the words going before, calleth it, the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Fa­ther, and not the spirit of bondage, to feare any more. When therefore God doth shead abroad his Spirit into our hearts, crying, and making vs to cry, Abba, Father, in faithfull, not formall prayer, that is a certaine testimony to our spirits, that we are the sonnes of God. For as Saint Ie­rome Hierom. in Gal. cap. 4. well noteth, Wee neuer durst call God, our Father, but vpon conscience of the Spirit dwelling in vs. Neither doe we euer vpon this ground call God, our Father, but with­all [Page 304] we are, or ought to be perswaded that we are his children.

15. Againe, why doth hee say in another place, that all they which beleeue the Gospell, are sealed with the holy Spi­rit of promise? Are Gods children sealed? and can they notEphes. 1. 13. see nor know the Seale? Is not this one vse of a seale, to con­firme a couenant, assuring the certainty of the performance thereof to him to whom it is made? Yea, doth not Saint Iohn say, Hereby we know that we dwell in him, and he in vs; because Ioh. 4. 13. he hath giuen vs of his Spirit? And againe, doth not the holy Ghost so ascribe this knowledge of iustification and saluati­on on to a mans selfe, that he denyeth it to all others? To him that ouercommeth, I will giue a white stone, and in the stone a new Reuel. [...]. 17. name written, which no man knoweth sa [...] he that receiueth it. What is this white stone, but the absolution and remission of a sinner? what is the new name written in it, but the childe of God? This no man knoweth, but he that hath it; therefore he that hath it, knoweth it. What can be more plaine? And yet this is the exposition almost of all Diuines vpon that place. To omit all other testimonies, doth not the Scripture now teach this doctrine, touching the certainty of saluation?

16. I but, saith Bellarmine, all Gods promises, for the most part, are conditionall, and no man can certainely know whe­ther he hath performed the condition; and therefore cannot assure himselfe of the promise. To which I answere, that al­beit, in regard of our infirmitie, we are not able to fulfill the conditions required in Gods promises: yet wee are assured that we shall fulfill them, through him that strengthneth vs: and so, as the Apostle Paul said in one place, Wee can doe no­thing, no, not so much as thinke a good thought. Yet in ano­ther2. Cor. 3. 5. place he saith, I can doe all things through Christ that strengthneth me. So may we say of our selues, We cannot doPhil. 4. 13. anything of our selues: yet in Christ Iesus wee can doe all things: By his might wee can keepe his Commandements; though not perfectly, yet so, as our defects are made vp by his perfection, and our endeuours accepted in his mediati­on: for his sake it is giuen vnto vs, not onely to beleeue in him, but also to suffer for him: and by his neuer-faylingPhil. 1. 29. [Page 305] grace, and euerlasting loue, we are assured that we shall per­seuere vnto the end. And therefore Origen saith, that it is Phil. 1. 6. Orig. in Ierem. hom. 1. impossible that that which God hath once quickned should either by himselfe or any other be killed. Thus there is no condition required of the children of God; but they are assured that they can performe it, though not in full measure, and by their owne strength, yet in that measure which God will accept, and by the strength of his Spirit which dwelleth in them, and sanctifieth them to doe his will. And thus this third Antithe­sis is nothing empeached by Bellarmines cauill.

17. The Gospell telleth vs, that there is but one onely pro­pitiatory4 Heb. 9. 25. 28. Heb. 10. 12. 14. Sacrifice in the world, which is Christ Iesus the Sa­uiour of the world, who offered vp himselfe once, and no more, for to take away the sinnes of his people. But theConcil. Trident. Sess. 6. cap. 2. can. 1. 2. 3. 4. Church of Rome teacheth, that euery Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quicke and the dead: and that euery Priest, as often as he saith Masse, doth offer vp Christ vnto God the Father, as a Sacrifice for sinne.

18. Bellarmine here distinguisheth againe, and saith, thatBell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3. 6. 23. indeede there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world, to wit, that which was once offered vpon the Crosse; but yet that one Sacrifice may be reiterated in mysterie by the same high Priest Christ Iesus, by the hands of a carnall Priest. And againe, he in another place distinguisheth this SacrificeIdem. de missa. lib. 1. cap. 25. into bloudy & vnbloudy, & saith, that there was but one blou­die Sacrifice of Christ, and that on the Altar of the Crosse: but there are many vnbloudy sacrifices of the same Christ in their dayly Masses. And lastly, that the sacrifice of the Masse is but an application of the Sacrifice of the Crosse vnto mens soules, for the actuall remission of sinnes purchased by Christ vpon the Crosse.

19. Here is much adoe to little purpose, three distinctions,Answere. and all not worth a rush: for all of them are mutually contra­ry to each others, and vaine, and friuolous in themselues: first, if the sacrifice of the Masse bee a repetition of the sacrifice of the crosse, then it is not an application of it: for it is one thing to reiterate, and another to apply: and therefore if the Priest [Page 306] doth reiterate it, then hee doth not apply it: and if hee doth apply it, then hee doth not reiterate: for to reiterate, is to doe againe that which was done before, and to apply, is to make vse of that which was done, but not to doe it againe. Beside, if the masse bee a repetition, and application of the sacrifice of the crosse, then how is it an vnbloudy sacrifice? can that bloudy sacrifice bee repeated and applied after an vnbloudy manner? that is asmuch as to say, it is a sacrifice, and yet not a sacrifice, especially no propitiatory sacrifice: seeing as the A­postleHeb. 10. speaketh, without the shedding of bloud, there is no remissiō of sinnes. Againe, if the masse be a repetition of that bloudy sa­crifice of Christ on the crosse, then it is a repetition of Christs death, and a crucifying of him againe; for the sacrifice of Christ, and the death of Christ is all one: and if it bee so, then it must needs be bloudy aswell as that: for the repetition of a thing, is the doing of the same thing againe. And lastly, if it bee an application of it, then it cannot bee a repetition of it: nor indeed the same in specie with it; for the application of a thing, is not the thing it selfe in any reason: and thus these distinctions are at ciuill warre with each other: and indeed like deadly enemies doe cut each others throats.

20. But let one of their own learned masters, Peter Lumbard, Lumbard. lib. 4. o [...]st. 12. conclude this point for vs; who saith that Christ dying vpon the crosse, offered himselfe, & is sacrificed dayly in the Sacrament, be­cause in this Sacrament there is a cōmemoration of that sacrifice of the crosse which was once offered: this he spake, conuicted by the truth. And the Councill of Trent also in another placeConcil. Trident. [...]ess. 22. v. cap. 1. doth almost, if not fully speake asmuch, when it sayth, that Ie­sus Christ left to his Church a sacrifice, by which that bloudy sacrifice which hee made vpon the crosse, might bee represented, and the memory thereof continued: which if it be true, then be­ing conuicted by their owne consciences, and confessions, it remaines, that that doctrine which holdeth that the masse is a true, reall, propitiatory sacrifice, is opposite to the doctrine of the Gospell, which teacheth the contrary: and so this fourth Antithesis is safe and sound, for all that Bellarmine can say a­gainst it.

[Page 307]21. The Gospell teacheth, that both parts of the Sacra­ment are to bee ministred to all Christians; and of the cup it sayth expresly, Drinke ye all of this: but the Church of Rome hath decreed, that none should drinke of the cup, but theConcil. Trident. Sess. 5. cap. 1. & 3. Clergie, and that the people should content themselues with the other part of the Sacrament.

22. Bellarmine distinguisheth of the word (All) and saith,Bell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3. c. 23. By it is not to be vnderstood all the faithfull, but the Apostles onely; which hee prooueth by Saint Marke, who sayth, that they dranke all of it, that is, all the Apostles which sate at ta­ble with our Sauiour Christ, and not all the Christians that beleeued in him.

23. But to his distinction, (not all Christians, but all Apo­stles)Answere. Cyprian. de c [...]na Domin. Basil. de baptis. Cyril. catechism. myst. [...]. Theodor. 1. Cor. 11. & 12. Theophil. 1. Cor. 11. Aug. in Job. tract. 26 Ambros. 1. Cor. 11. Chrysost. hom. 1 [...]. in 2. Cor. Hier. in 1. Cor. 11 Aquin. 1. Cor. 11 Durand. Ration. l. 4. cap. 55. Biel. in Can. lect. 52. Alphons contra haeres. l. 6. Lorichius de pub missa. G. ossa. Cassand. Consult. art. 22. I answere, that this is Bellarmines conceit, or rather de­ceit; and hee borrowed it of Andradius the famous expositer of the Councill of Trent: but it is a miserable glosse (woe bee to it) that so soully corrupts the text: first, the fathers vnder­stood by the vniuersall All, all the faithfull; and that the A­postles heere in this great action, were not Pastors, but sheep, Christ himselfe the great shepheard, beeing the distributer and diuider of this Sacrament. I shall not need to repeat their words, they are so euident and ordinary. Let the margent di­rect the Reader to them, if they desire satisfaction in this point.

24. Secondly, many of their owne Doctors so interprete it, as Thomas Aquinas, Durand, Biel, Alphonsus de Castro, Lo­richius, the author of the glosse, and diuers others. Cassanders testimony shall stand in stead of all the rest: he sayth plainly, that the Westerne Church beleeued for a thousand yeeres, that our Sauiour Christ gaue this Sacrament to his disciples, represen­ting the persons of all the faithfull: and he addeth reasons, why the wine as well as the bread was to bee receiued; both for a more full representation of the passion of Christ▪ and signifi­cation of our full spirituall nourishment in Christ, and also the full and perfect redemption of our bodies and soules, by the body and soule of our Sauiour. This Cassander repeats to haue beene the opinion of the Latine & Greeke Church, for [Page 308] the space of a thousand yeeres. What an vpstart distinction then is this of Bellarmine, who notwithstanding ceaseth not to bragge that they haue all antiquity on their side?

25. Thirdly, wee haue Saint `Paul thus interpreting the words of his Lord and Master, who spake nothing but by the direction of the Spirit: for whereas our Sauiour sayth, Drinke yee all of it, Saint Paul sayth, Let a man examine himselfe,1. Cro. 11. and so let him eat of this bread, and drinke of this cup. But all must examine themselues before they come to the sacrament: therefore, all are enioyned to drinke of the Sacramentall cup: let vs chuse then whom wee will beleeue, whether Saint Paul or Bellarmine: for Saint Paul interprets this All one way, and Bellarmine cleane contrary.

26. Lastly, reason it selfe disapprooueth this exposition: for first I would aske him, whether that which our Sauiour commanded to bee done at his last Supper, were to bee done once and no more, or often, euen to the end of the world? If hee say once, and no more, the words will confute him which say, Doe this in remembrance of me: if often, then by All, he meant not the Apostles onely; for the Apostles liued not till the end of the world. Againe, if by All was intended the Priests onely, then not onely the people should bee excluded from the cup, but from the bread also: for if in these words, Drinke ye all of it, hee speaketh to Priests onely, then in these words, Eat ye all of it, hee speaketh to none but Priests: for they are both spoken to one and the same persons. And thus the people should haue no part of the Sacrament at all: for the same All that is in one, is in the other. And to conclude, if the Apostles stood heere in stead of Pastors or Priests, why did they not minister the Sacrament? It is the part of a Priest, as hee is a Priest, to minister the Sacrament to others, and when hee receiueth it himselfe, then hee standeth for a common Christian, and not for a Priest, for a sheepe, not for a shep­heard. But they did not minister, but receiue; therefore they stood not here for Priests, but for the whole body of the faithfull. And thus this distinction being battered by the te­stimony [Page 309] of fathers, confession of their owne Doctors, autho­rity of Saint Paul, and strength of reason, doth fall to the ground like Babel: and this fift Antithesis is nothing weake­ned by Bellarmines Sophistrie.

27. The Gospell teacheth, that true repentance, or conuer­sion6 Luk. 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. Mark. 1. 15. to God, is an earnest sorrow of heart for sinnes commit­ted, and faith perswading that they are certainely remitted for Christs sake. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that con­trition indeed is one of the parts of repentance: but they faine that it meriteth a remission of sinnes, and to it they adde au­ricular confession not commaunded by God, & satisfaction, or voluntary workes, by which they say, that the punishments of sinne are satisfied, & that these also may be redeemed by money and purse-penance. All which whole doctrine is very blasphemous against the merit of the Son of God, who onely made satisfaction for our sinnes.

28. Bellarmine heere from distinguishing, falleth to ray­ling, and accuseth vs of manifest lying and falshood, in laying that to our charge which wee are not guilty of: but whe­ther is the lyar hee, or wee, let the Reader iudge. First there­fore, that true repentance is not a bare sorrow of heart for sin, but such a sorrow, as is ioyned with, and ariseth from faith, appeareth by this, because contrition without faith, leads to desperation, and not to saluation, as the wofull examples of Cain, Esau, and Iudas declare: and therefore the Romanists themselues doe not exclude all manner of faith from repen­tance, but onely that faith which apprehendeth remission of sinnes by Christ, which speciall faith, whereby remission of sinnes is beleeued and obtained, is ioyned with repentance, Luke 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. This is our doctrine, and it is war­ranted by the holy Scripture: though it pleaseth Bellarmine to say, that it is a bare assertion, without Scripture.

29. As touching their crossing of it, wee need fetch no o­ther proofe, then from the Councill of Trent, which in ex­presseConcil. Trident. Sess. 4. cap. 3. can. 4. words denounceth Anathema to those that make this faith, whereby wee beleeue the remission of our sinnes, a ne­cessary ingredient into true repentance: and yet it propoun­deth reconciliation and remission of sinnes to such as doe re­pent: [Page 310] let all the world therefore know, to the eternall shame of the Romish Religion, that remission of sinnes, and reconci­liation, by their doctrine, may bee obtained by repentance, without faith, then which, what can bee more opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ?

30. If they reply that they make faith the foundation of repentance, I answere, why doe they then exclude it out of repentance? is the foundation no part of the house? yes, it is the chiefest part: either therefore it is not the foundation of repentance, or els it is necessarily required to the essence of it; one or the other must needs bee false: but heere is the myste­ry of this iniquity: by faith they meane nor a beliefe of the re­mission of our sinnes by the bloud of Christ, which is the true Euangelicall faith, but a generall perswasion of the truth of their Religion, and a particular conceit, that he which per­formeth the worke of penance, in the three parts thereof, shall thereby obtaine pardon of his sinnes, and reconciliation with God.

31. Secondly, whereas hee sayth, that wee doe not satis­fie for the eternall, but for the temporall punishments of our sinnes, either heere in this life, or in Purgatory: hee speaketh nothing for the clearing of their doctrine from opposition to the Gospell▪ for the Gospell teacheth, that Christ our Redee­mer hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sinnes ofIoh. 1. 29. 1. Ioh. 2. 2. all the world, yeelding a sufficient and worthy recompence and contentment to God for them: and therefore, they which say that wee must giue any manner of satisfaction our selues, whether for the temporall or eternall punishment due vnto them, doe euidently crosse the doctrine of the Gospell. AndAquin. part. 3. q. 48. art. 4. this Aquinas▪ one of their owne illumined Doctors, doth in effect confesse, when hee sayth, that the passion of Christ was a sufficient and super abundant satisfaction for the sinne and guilt of punishment of mankind, his passion was as it were a price or pai­ment, by which we are freed from both these obligations: to bring in then the foggy mist of humane satisfactions, is to eclipse and darken the glory of Christs all-sufficient redemption.

32. Thirdly, whereas hee findeth fault with Chytraus, for [Page 311] saying without proofe, that auricular confession is not com­manded of God, and yet hee himselfe doth not proue it is; we might driue out one naile with another, and returne vpon him his owne answere: but I reply further, that diuers of his owne fellow Doctors haue auouched asmuch: for Maldonate, Maldon. Sum. q. 18. art. 4. Eras. epistol. de amabil. [...]cel [...]s­concord. Gloss. apud Grat. Decret. de poenitent. di­stinct. Rhenan. praefat. in [...]rg▪ Tertul▪ de poenit. Erasmus, the glosse in Gratian, and Gratian himselfe, and Rhe­nanus, with diuers others, are of the same minde, as may ap­peare in the texts quoted in the margent, whose wordes I for­beare to set downe, because I shall haue occasion to handle the same in a more proper place; one thing I cannot omit, that the testimony of Rhenanus is so plaine, that our aduersa­ries, not able to giue answere sufficient vnto it, haue by their peremptory authority said, Deleatur, let it bee blotted out: as they deale also with Polidore Virgill in the like point, and with all other that stand in their way.

33. Lastly, the redeeming of penance by the purse, though Bellarmine shuffle it ouer neuer so cunningly, yet is so palpa­ble an abuse, and so contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell, that the very naming of it, is a sufficient declaration of the foulnesse of that Religion, which maketh a mart of sinne, and setteth repentance, which is the gift of God, to sale, for a little earthly drosse, and exchangeth punishment due to the body and soule, for a little pinching of the purse.

34. The Gospell teacheth, that marriage is permitted and7 Heb. 13. 4. 1. Tim. 4. 3. set free for all men, both Priests and people; and that the pro­hibition of marriage and meats is a doctrine of Deuils. But the Romish Religion forbids marriage to a great part of men, to wit, Priests and Monkes, and commands to abstaine from certaine meates, vpon certaine dayes.

35. Bellarmine excepteth, and saith by a distinction, thatBell. de Roman. Pontif. l. 3. c. 23 when the Apostle sayth, Marriage is honourable amongst all men, hee meaneth not all in generall, for then it should bee honorable betwixt the father and the daughter, the brother and the sister; but onely those that are lawfully ioyned to­gether, which they that are bound with a vow, cannot bee.

36. It is a strange fore-head, (but no maruaile, seeing it [Page 312] is the fore-head of the whore of Babylon) when the Scripture sayth, Marriage is honorable amongst al men, to exempt their Votaries from this honour, as if they were not in the number of men, but beasts: and as the assertion is strange in impuden­cy, so the reason is more strange in folly: for though the fa­ther may not marry the daughter, nor the brother the sister, without incest; yet the father may marry, and the daughter may marry, and the brother, and the sister also, so that they take those that are not prohibited by the Law of God, and nature. Now let him shew that Gods Law forbiddeth Vota­ries to marry, and then hee sayth something to the purpose: but by his owne confession, together with many of his pew­fellowes, the prohibition of marriage is no diuine, but hu­maneCassand. consult. art. 23. [...]ell. de Cleric. lib. 1. cap. 19. Aquin. 2. 2 q. 88 art. 11. Gratian. cons 26 q. 2. Esponsae. in tit. c. 1. Concil. Trident. Sess. 24. Socrat. histor. lib. 12. cap. 8. Synod. sexta in Trullo. can. 13. Hierom. ad Oce­ [...]. epist. 83. c. 2. ordinance and institution: yea, the Councill of Trent it selfe calleth it but an Ecclesiasticall Law; and therefore not a Law of God, but a decree of the Church.

37. Adde to this impudency and folly, his crossing of all antiquity: for in the Councill of Nice, Paphnutius alleadgeth this place of Scripture, against those that went about to take away the vse of marriage from the Clergie; and in the sixt ge­nerall Synode, it is expressely applied to the same purpose. And Ierome, in defence of Charterius a married Bishop, pro­duceth the same text.

38. As touching Chrysostomes speech to Theodorus the Monke, alledged by Bellarmine, though it seemeth a little to fauour them at the first view: yet in another place he clee­reth himselfe from that suspition: for he saith plainely, that Marriage is so honourable and precious, that a man with it may ascend into the sacred Chaire of a Bishop. What hath Bellarmine got now by Chrysostomes testimony? Surely this: If all that Chrysostome saith, bee sound doctrine, then it is an error in the Church of Rome, to inhibite all that are consecra­ted by holy Orders, from the vse of the marriage bed: For byAug contra Faust. lib. 30. c. 6 Chrysostome, Bishops may marry. Saint Augustines testimo­nies, alledged by him in the one and twentieth Chapter, are little to the purpose: for in the first he saith plainely, that the Church of God doth not forbid marriage; but onely preferre [Page 313] virginitie before it, as a greater good: and in the second hee approoueth onely abstinence from meates, and that from all in generall; and that to this end, for the castigation and mor­tification of the body: and not eyther for merite sake, or that it is a thing vnlawfull, or that wee may glut our selues with some kinde, and may not so much as touch others, vpon paine of heresie, which is the doctrine of the Church of Rome. This is all that S. Augustines words import; which, as they doe not deliuer them from opposition to the Gospell, so they manifestly imply these two conclusions: first, that the Synagogue of Rome is not the Church of God, for it forbid­deth marriage to Priests, not as a lesser good, but as a thing simply euill. And secondly, that they maintaine in this their Church that doctrine, which of S. Paul is called, The doctrine of Diuels: for they forbid both Meates and Marri­age at some times, and to some persons, as things sinfull and vnlawfull. And whereas the Fathers, almost in generall, say,Cyprian. lib. 1. cap. 11. Tertul. lib. de monogam. Coster. Enchir. cap. 17. that it is better for such as haue vowed continency, to marry, then to fall into the fire of lust; they conclude filthily, to their eternall disgrace, It is better for a Priest to play the whore­monger, and keepe a Concubine, then after his vow of conti­nency to be coupled in wedlocke.

39. But Bellarmine couereth her nakednesse (whereof heBell. quo supra. is, as it seemeth, some what ashamed) with a figge leafe of a distinction: for he saith, that fornication is not simply bet­ter then marriage, but in respect that a man hath before entred into a vow, in which regard to marry after the vow, is a greater sinne then to commit fornication: and this hee proueth by an example from a married woman, whose hus­band is eyther continually absent or sicke, so that hee cannot performe the marriage debt vnto her. It is not sayd vnto her, It is better to marry then to burne; but shee ought to keepe her faith to her husband, and by fasting and prayer keepe vn­der and tame the concupiscence of her nature: and therefore, saith hee, that precept or permission, Let him marry, is not spoken to all, but only to such as are free, and not if they be bound and haue giuen their faith vnto God.

[Page 314]39. To which I answere two things: First, I aske him, whether this vow which [...] talke of, be onely against marri­age, or against all manner of incontinency? If they say that it is the vow of chastitie, and that it is against all manner of incontinency, then how can it bee that it should bee broken more by marriage, then by fornication, by hauing a wife, then by keeping a whore? and that to marry, in respect of the vow, should be a greater sinne, then to commit whoredome? especially, seeing marriage is Gods ordinance, and fornicati­on, of the Diuels institution: that an honourable and holy e­state, and this a filthy and vgly sinne. If they say that the vow is against marriage onely, then what a Religion is Pope­ry, that teacheth her people to vow against marriage, and not against fornication? against wiues and husbands, but not a­gainst whores and varlets? Surely that Religion that main­taineth this, cannot be of God.

40. Secondly, to his example I answere: Marriage can­not be inioyned to her that is married already, albeit her hus­band bee eyther absent or impotent: for that is contrary to Gods ordinance, Mal. 2. 14. Mat. 19. 5. But the vow of single life is not Gods ordinauce, especially in so high a de­gree as marriage is: for at the most it is but a Council, where­as the other is a flat Precept to all that cannot containe: and besides, they that are married, may expect the blessing of God vpon them, vsing the meanes for their restraint in a godly manner, and begging continency at Gods hand; because they are in a calling ordayned by God: but they that are in a vow, who either enter rashly, or are thrust in against their wills, and contrary to Gods Commandement, not being able to abstaine, but proudly presume vpon their owne strength, how can they hope for Gods blessing vpon them, to streng­then them against the temptations of the flesh? And thus this example, together with the distinction it selfe, maketh no whit to the iustifying of their doctrine; but that it still remayneth in plaine contrariety and opposition to the Gos­pell of Iesus Christ.

41. The Gospell teacheth, that there is one true and solide8. [Page 315] foundation, vpon which the Church of God is built, [...] to wit,1. Cor. 3. 11. Act. 4. 11. 12. our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ. But the Romish congre­gation cryeth out, that Peter, and the ordinary succession of Popes, and the Church of Rome, is the foundation of the whole Church, and that the Church is built vpon them, and not vpon Christ alone.

42. Bellarmine distinguisheth of foundations, and saith, that Christ is the primary and principall foundation of the Church: but that doth not hinder, but that there may be se­cundary foundations: and for proofe thereof he alledgeth, Ephes. 2. 20. where it is said, that we are built the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles: and, Apoc. 11. 14. where the twelue Apostles are made the twelue foundations of the Church.

43. To which I answere three things: First, that though it be true [...], that the Apostles bee the secundary foundations of the Church, layd vpon Christ the true Rocke and foundati­on, as twelue goodly stones, and that vpon them the Church is built, to wit, vpon Christ primarily and principally, and vp­on them secundarily: yet it doth not take away the Antithe­sis of their doctrine to the Gospell: for they say, that Peter is the onely secundary foundation, and that hee, as the chiefest stone, is layd next vnto Christ; and the rest of the Apostles built immediately vpon him, and mediately by him vpon Christ. But those Scriptures say, that the twelue Apo­stles are twelue precious stones, laid one by one vpon Christ, and not one vpon another: and twelue foundations equally proportioned to each other, and not one placed vpon the top of another: and so it is true, that as the prerogatiue of the onely singular foundation belongeth to Christ, so the honour of being secundary foundations, is equally deuided among the twelue Apostles: and so Peter in this respect hath no greater prerogatiue then the rest. And therefore this distin­ction deliuers them not from the snare, seeing that it maketh all the twelue Apostles altogether ioynt-foundations of the Church: and they would haue Peter to bee the onely foun­dation next vnto Christ, vpon whom both the Church of [Page 316] God, and the Apostles themselues are built.

44. Secondly, I answere, that when the Apostles are saidAug. de verb. Dom. ser. 13. Greg. Nyssen. in testim. ex veter. testam. de trinit. contra Iudaeos. Cyril. de trin. l. 4. Chrys. in Mat. hom. 55. Ambr. in Ephes. cap. 2. Hilar. de trinit. lib. 2. Bell. praefat. con­trouers. de sum. Pont. Esay 28. 16. 1. Pet. 2. 6. 8. to be foundations of the Church, it is not meant of their per­sons, but of their doctrine, as witnesse almost all the Fathers: for concerning person, it is true which Saint Paul saith, No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is layd, Iesus Christ, 1. Cor. 3. 11. But the Romanists would not haue the doctrine of Peter, but the person of Peter to be this foundation: and for proofe thereof Bellarmine fetcheth this argument from the Prophet Esay, saying, Behold, I will lay in Sion a stone, a sure foundation: which is a playne and mani­fest Prophecie of Christ, and not of Peter, as the Apostle Pe­ter himselfe expoundeth it: where, by the way, we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God, and the God of truth, whilst, to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter, they wrest and peruert the Scriptures, and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God, to his seruant Peter, and so make Peter him­selfe, nay, the holy Ghost, a Lyar. It were not credible, that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart, and issue out of the mouth of any, but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs, that in the time of Antichrist, because men would not receiue the loue of the truth, that they 2. Thes. 2. 10. 11 might be saued: therefore God would send them strong delusions, that they should beleeue lyes, &c. But to the point: If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church, in whom all the building, being coupled together, groweth vnto anEphes. 2. 21. holy Temple in the Lord: and that not the persons, but the doctrine, and faith of the Apostles, are those secundary foun­dations which the Scripture speaketh of, as hath beene pro­ued out of the Fathers: then the opposition is vndefeasible, namely, that there is but one person the foundation of our Church, which is our Lord and Sauiour, the Sonne of God, Christ Iesus; and yet that Peters person should be the foun­dation of the Church also together with Christ.

45. Thirdly, I answere, that both in truth, and also in proprietie of speech, there can bee but one foundation of [Page 317] one building: those stones that are layd next to the founda­tion, are not properly a secundary foundation, but the begin­ning of the building vpon the foundation: and for that cause, when Peter, and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations, it cannot bee vnderstood, that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church, either first or se­cond: but that our Sauiour, who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine, is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church, and that there is none other besides him: for if, when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Pro­phets and Apostles, is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, as must needes bee, because the Prophets are cou­pled together with the Apostles, which liued not in the Chri­stian Church, and therefore could not be personall foundati­ons of it, and Christ crucified is the substance of their do­ctrine: then it must needes follow, that the Apostles mea­ning is nothing else, but that we are built vpon Christ, whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in. And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it, and Saint Ambrose, and Ansel­mus, Hilar. de Trin. lib. 6. & lib. 2. Ambrose. Anselmus. who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter, ex­poundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ, and sometimes of Christ himselfe, in whom he beleeued. And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite, and Cardinall Caietane in their com­mentariesSalmeron. Caietane. vpon that place, and Peter Lumbard, together with the glosse vpon the place, interpret. And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation, hath no foundation in the word of God.

46. The Gospell teacheth, that no Apostle or Bishop, or o­ther9. Luk. 22. 26. Ioh. 20. 22, 23. Mat. 18. 18. 1. Cor. 3. 4. 5. Minister of the Gospell, is superiour to another of the same ranke, or hath greater power and authority then ano­ther, in respect of their ministerie; but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees, haue equall power of preaching the Gospell, administring the Sacraments, binding, and loosing: But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops, and ouer the whole Church, and braggeth that he hath by right, a title to both the swords, both spirituall and temporall, and that both iurisdictions doe [Page 318] originally pertaine to him, and from him are conueyed to o­thers, &c.

47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth, and secondly distin­guisheth: hee confesseth, that the Bishop of Rome hath a su­preme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church: and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted, or any o­ther doe prooue the contrary.

48. To which I answere: first, that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity, and an in­equality: I answere, that no man denyeth it; and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow: hee should prooue not a bare superiority, which wee confesse, but a superiority in the same degree; as of one Bishop to another, and that in power, not in execution, wherein standeth the point of opposition.

49. Secondly, whereas he saith, that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes, and binding and loosing, was communicated to all the Apostles, yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all; because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone, Feede my sheepe: and, To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen: I answere, that in this hee crosseth both himselfe, the Fathers, and the truth: himselfe, for elsewhere hee confesseth, that the keyes, both of OrderBell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 22. and Iurisdiction, were giuen to all the Apostles indifferent­ly: and therefore it must needes follow, that Tibi dabo claues, was not spoken singularly, to Peter, but generally, to them all: for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all, as he confesseth, then without doubt he promised them to them all, or else his word and his deede should not accord together. And againe, hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ, when (Mat. 28.) he bade them all, Goe, teach and baptize: and they all did put that commission in execution: therefore it must needes fol­low, that no singular power was giuen to Peter, when as Christ said vnto him, Feede my sheepe, vnlesse we will say, that the rest had not the same commission.

50. The Fathers: for Saint Cyprian saith plainely, that all Cyprian. de sim­plicit. praelat. the Apostles were the same with Peter, indued with equall fellow­ship [Page 319] both of honour and power, and that a primary was giuen vnto Hilar de Trin. lib. 6. Peter, that the Church might appeare to be one. Saint Hilary is of the same minde, You, O holy and blessed men (saith he) for the merit of your faith, haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth. Saint Augustine saith, that if when Christ said, To thee Aug. in Iohan. tract. 50. will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen, he spake onely to Peter, then the Church hath not the power of the keyes: but if the Church hath it, then Peter receiuing the keyes, represen­ted the Church. And lastly, Leo, one of their owne Popes, con­fessethLeo ser. 3. de vni­uers. assump suae. asmuch, when hee affirmeth, that the strength of this power of the keyes, passed vnto all the Apostles, and the consti­tution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church.

51. Lastly, the truth: for when the Apostles stroue for su­periority, Christ, who is truth it selfe, and would not haue con­cealed so necessary a trueth, if it had bene a truth, vpon so fit an occasion, neuer preferred Peter, but exhorteth all, and so Peter also, to equality and humility: yea, not onely so, but ex­pressely forbad all king-like and monarchicall superiority a­mongst them; and not onely tyrannicall, as Bellarmine would haue it, as may euidently appeare by comparing Luk. 22. 26. with 1. Pet. 5. 3.

52. Thus hee confesseth their doctrine: next he commeth to distinguish of it, namely, that their Apostolicall power was equall in respect of the people, but yet not equall betweene themselues; in which respect Peter was not onely a common Pastour with his fellow Apostles, but extraordinarily pastor pastorū, a Pastour of the Pastours, that is, of the Apostles thē ­selues: this is his distinction: but it is idle and vaine, as may appeare by this reason: because, if he were the chiefe Pastour of the Apostles, then he either ordained them to their offices, or fed them with his doctrine, or gouerned them by his au­thority, or did some part of the office of a Pastour vnto them: but hee neither ordained them; for Christ himselfe did that:Ioh. 20. 21. Act. 2. 3. nor [...]ed them with doctrine; for they were all taught of God, and equally receiued the holy Ghost, which did lead them in­to all truth: nor gouerned them; for they sent him, hee did not [Page 320] send them, and called him to an account, he did not call them; and therefore was no wayes to be esteemed their Pastour and super-intendent, but their equall, and Co-Apostle.

53. And whereas hee defendeth the extrauagant of Pope Boniface (which is so rightly termed, for containing a most extrauagant doctrine from the truth) hee must needs defend this double iurisdiction by the speech of Peter to our Sauior, Ecce duo gladii, behold, heere are two swords, and his answere to the same, It is enough: with how absurd a collection it is, let his owne fellowes bee Iudges. Franciscus de Victoria, Stel­la, Maldonate, Arias Montanus, and Suares the Iesuite: All which, with many others, reiect this collection of theirs, as most absurd, and impertinent: I conclude, if Pope Boniface did extrauagate in that extrauagant, in the application of this place, why doe they hold, that the Pope cannot erre iudicial­ly? If hee did not, whydoe so many learned men of his owne side contradict him? Either sure the Popes two swords are ru­ [...]ie, and cannot bee vnsheathed, or els hee would neuer suffer his authority to bee thus diminished, not onely by his ene­mies, but euen by those that fight vnder his owne banner. And thus this Antithesis also stands vnblemished, for all that is yet said to the contrary.

54. The Gospell teacheth, that there is but one Mediator10 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. 1. Ioh. 2. 1. Ioh. 14. 13. Ioh. 14. 6. Heb. 9. 15. betwixt God and man, euen the God-man Iesus Christ, and that hee beeing the onely Propitiatour, is also the onely Me­diatour. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that as many Saints as are in Heauen, so many Mediatours and Intercessours wee haue to God; and among the rest, the blessed Virgin, the mother of our Lord, whom they call their Aduocatresse, Deliueresse, Mediatresse, Sauiouresse, and Comfortresse.

55. Bellarmine seeketh to escape from this Contradiction,Bell. de Sanctor. beatit. l. 1. c. 20. by a threefold distinction: first hee sayth, that Christ indeed is the onely Mediatour of redemption, because hee onely made reconciliation betwixt God and vs, by paying the ran­some for our sinnes; but neuerthelesse the Saints are Media­tours of intercession, by praying for vs. This he barely affir­meth, without any proofe; and therefore it seemeth he would haue vs take it vpon his word for current coyne, without any [Page 321] tryall: but wee haue learned out of Gods word, to try the spi­rits, and to weigh all such ware in the balance of the Sanctua­ry: and therefore finding by the Scripture, that Christ did not onely pay the ransome for our sinnes, but also, that hee ma­keth request for vs. and not finding in all the booke of God, that the Saints in Heauen either doe present our prayers vnto God, or make request for our particular necessities, wee haue iust cause to reiect this distinction, as too light ware, and as counterfeit coyne.

56. I but (sayth hee) the Saints triumphant pray for the Saints militant, therefore they are their Mediators. I answere, Though it be granted that they do pray for them in generall, which indeed is not denyed: and in particular, which can ne­uer be proued; yet the argument hath no good consequence, that therefore they should bee our Mediatours: for (as Bellar­mine Ball. de Christ [...] Mediat. l. 5. c. 5. himselfe confesseth) A Mediatour must bee a middle­man, differing from each party at variance, after some sort: but the Saints triumphant are not medi [...], betwixt God and vs, both because in presence they are alwayes with God, and neuer with vs, and also in semblance more like to God, then vnto vs, for they are perfectly happy, holy, and righteous, we beeing miserable, sinfull, and wicked: and in knowledge they are satisfied with heauenly obiects, and haue no partici­pation with humane affaires: being therefore thus far remoo­ued from vs, and so neere knit vnto God in all these, by his owne rule, they cannot any wayes bee our Mediatours, nei­ther of redemption, nor intercession.

57. His second distinction is that Christ is called the one­ly Mediatour, because hee is the Mediatour, not onely in re­gard of his office, but also of his nature, for that hee is in the middest betwixt God and man, hee himselfe beeing God and man. To which I answere, that it is most true which hee sayth, but yet it is both contrary to that which hee himselfe hath deliuered elsewhere, and also ouerthroweth that which hee holdeth heere: for the first, he laboureth to proue in ano­ther place, that Christ is the Mediatour onely in respect of his humane nature, and here hee sayth, in respect of both natures: [Page 322] how can these bee reconciled? mary, by another distinction: It is one thing (sayth hee) to bee a Mediatour in respect of per­son, Bell. de Christo Mediat. l. 1. cap. 1. 3. 4. and another thing in respect of operation: in the first, Christ is the Mediatour by both natures in the second, by his humane na­ture onely. As if hee did not operate and worke the Mediati­on in the same respect that hee is Mediatour. I, but hee will say, the chiefe worke of our redemption was the death of Christ, but the God-head cannot dye: therfore, &c. I answere, Though Christ died as he was man, yet the person that died, was God and man: for (as Tolet his fellow Iesuite and Cardi­nallTolet. comment. in Iob. 10. obserueth) Christ dyed not as other men, in whose pow­er it is not, either to hold the soule in the body, or to recall it backe againe, being expelled: but Christ ioyned his soule and body together at his pleasure: as hee that holding a sword in one hand, and a scabbard in another, puls it out, or thrusts it in at his pleasure. By which it is plaine, that though Christ dyed in respect of his man-hood, yet the author of his death was his God-head, & so he is our Mediatour in both natures. Secondly, he ouerthroweth his own positiō, by this distinctiō: for first, if Christ bee the only Mediatour in respect of office and of nature; then the Saints are no wayes our Mediatours: for if they bee, they must bee one of these two wayes, vnlesse wee will say, that they doe that which belongs not vnto them, but like busy-bodies, are pragmaticall in anothers charge: which, farre bee it from vs to thinke of those blessed creatures; but both these wayes (he sayth) Christ is the one­ly Mediatour; therefore the Saints, by his owne conclusion, are no Mediatours at all.

58. His third distinction is, that therefore Christ is called the onely Mediatour, because hee prayeth for all, and none for him: but the Saints are such Mediatours, that they them­selues stand in need of a Mediatour. I answere, that therefore they are no Mediatours at all: for if the Saints in Heauen stand in need of a Mediatour themselues, then it must necessarily follow, that they are not Mediatours at all: for they that are parties, cannot bee vmpiers. And this is that whichAug. contra [...]ar. l. 2. cap. 8. Saint Augustine plainely affirmeth (though Bellarmine la­boureth [Page 323] to distort his words to another sense) when he sayth, He, for whom none intreateth, but hee intreateth for all, is the onely true Mediatour. And thus it is cleare, that the doctrine of the Church of Rome, touching the mediation of Saints, is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell.

59. The Gospell teacheth, that Christ Iesus hath made aII 1. Ioh. 1. 7. 1. Ioh. 2. 2. Esay. 53. 45. full and perfect satisfaction for all our debts, and so is our full and perfect Redeemer: But the Church of Rome teacheth, that Christ hath satisfied but in part for our debts, to wit, nei­ther for all our sinne, nor for all the punishment due vnto all our sinne, and so that he is not our full and perfect Redeemer.

60. This doctrine of the Gospell is so euidently propoun­ded in holy Scripture, that our aduersaries themselues ac­knowledge it in generall to bee true: for Aquinas, where the Apostle sayth, I suffer all things for the Elects sake, that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus, askethAqui in 2. Tim. 2. lect. 2. this question, What, was not the passion of Christ sufficient? and answereth to the same, Yes; as touching the working of saluation. And Bayus sayth, that there is but one satisfaction onely vnto God, and that of Christ: yea, Bellarmine himselfeBayus de Indulg. cap. vlt. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 9. cap. 10. acknowledgeth asmuch in generall; for hee affirmeth, that the merit of Christ is sufficient to take away all sinne and pu­nishment: neither dare any of the rest for shame in plaine words deny the same: because, if they did, many manifest texts of Scripture would conuince them of impiety and he­resie.

61. And that the other is the doctrine of the Church ofConcil. Trident. Sess. 4. sub Iuli [...] cap. [...]. Catechism. Rom. tract. de satis­fact. Tapper. explicat. art. Lovan. art. 6 Vega lib. 13. cap. 36. Rome, the Councill of Trent will witnesse, which thus defi­neth: When God forgiueth a sinner, hee forgiueth not all the pu­nishment, but leaneth the party by his owne workes to satisfie, till it bee washed away. Yea, they affirme not onely, that wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment, but also for the relikes of sinne, and for the fault it selfe; yea, for that pu­nishment that should bee suffered in hell, excepting the eter­nity: yea, so impious and shamelesse are some of them, whose bookes are notwithstanding authorized by the Church of Rome, that they affirme, that Christ dyed onely for originall [Page 324] sinne, and that the satisfaction of Christ deserueth not theAquin. tom. 17. Opus 58. Sacra. Altar. cap. 1. fol. 41. Col. 2. Tapper. tom. 1. art. 6. pag. 154. Biel. 3. Dist. 18. & 19. Scot. Durand. Biel. in Suares tom. 1. disp. 4. sect. 11. name of a satisfaction for our sinnes. Let the world iudge now, whether these positions of the Church of Rome bee not flat contrary of the Gospell of Iesus Christ: for the Gospell attributeth to Christ all sufficiencie of meriting and satisfa­ction: but these fellowes make him a Satisfier party parpale for the sinne, but not the punishment, & yet not for all our sinnes neither, but for a part of them: as for originall, & not actuall; or iffor actuall, yet for mortall onely, and not for ve­niall. And this is the Romish Religion, though palliated with the name of Catholicke, and hidden from the sight of the common people, vnder the vaile of an implicite faith: which, if they should but see, they could not chuse but ab­horre.

62. For the healing of this wound, Bellarmine applyeth his wonted playster of a distinction. Christs satisfaction (saithBell. de Purgat. [...]. 1. cap. 10. he) is in vertue sufficient, but not in act efficient, except it bee ap­plyed by our satisfaction: and therefore that there is but one onely actuall satisfaction, which is ours; which by the grace and efficacy of Christs satisfaction, taketh away the punish­ment of our sinne, and maketh a iust recompence to God for the same.

63. But this distinction first vndermineth it selfe: for if Christs bee a satisfaction, then it is an actuall satisfaction: if it bee not an actuall one, then it is none at all. Did not he actu­ally dye, and rise againe? Did not hee actually by that death of his, satisfy Gods iustice for all the Elect? Doth not the strength and efficacy ofhis death stretch it selfe backward to Adam, and forward to the last beleeuing child of Adam vpon earth? If all this bee true, then it must needs bee intolerable blasphemy, to say, that actually there is no satisfaction, but our owne, and that Christs satisfaction which hee made for our sinnes, is indeed no satisfaction, except it bee by the meanes of ours, which must apply it, and as it were, giue effi­cacy vnto it.

64. Againe, the ground of his distinction is absurd: for where doth the Scripture make our satisfaction a meanes to [Page 325] apply Christs satisfaction vnto vs? It telleth vs of otherRom. 10. 17. 1. Cor. 10. 16. Gal. 2. 27. Ephes. 3. 17. meanes of application, to wit, outward, the Word and Sacra­ments: inward, faith in respect of vs, and the Spirit, in respect of God: but no where of this new-deuised meanes, which they talke of: and besides, how can our satisfactions apply Christs vnto vs, whereas they are both satisfaction, and that to God, and that for our sinnes? Nay, when as hee sayth, that our satisfaction doth include the satisfaction of Christ in it, and so both together make but one compound satisfaction: if they be of one natur [...] how can one apply the other? If they bee one in mixture, and composition, how is the one seue­red from the other? These bee absurd inconsequences, and ir­reconciliable.

65. Lastly, if the strength & power of satisfying, which is in our sufferings, is wholly from the grace of God, & the ver­tueScot. Durand. Biel. in Suares [...]om. 1. diss. 4. sect. 11. Bell. de Purgat. lib. 1. cap. 10. of Christs satisfaction, why doe some of them hold, that a man by power of nature, without grace, may bee able to sa­tify for Veniall sinnes, and expell them? nay, why doth Bellar­mine say, that a righteous man hath right to Heauen, by a two­fold title; one of the merits of Christ, by grace communicated vn­to him; and another of his owne merits? By which, he plainely diuideth our merits from Christ, and ascribeth a satisfactory power to them, equall to the death of Christ it selfe, and that without the helpe of grace. Nay, why do they not say plain­ly, that Christ hath satisfied for vs, without any intermixing of our owne; but that their wisedome perceiued, that then Purgatory, Masses, Penance, Romish pardons, yea, and the Popes Kitchin it selfe, and the very mar­row of all their Pompe, shall fall to the ground? And this indeed is the very ground of this blasphemous do­ctrine.

66. Doctour Bishop, misliking this distinction, as itBishops an­swere to Ma­ster Perkins re­formed Catho­like. seemeth, flyeth to another. In sinne (sayth hee) there are two things, the one is the turning away from God, whom wee offend: The other is, the turning to the thing, for the loue of which wee offend. Now, the turning away from GOD, both the sinne, and the eternall paine, [Page 326] due vnto it, are freely through Christ pardoned: but for the plea­sure we tooke in sinne, wee our selues are to satisfie, and according to the greatnesse thereof, to doe penance. Thus dreameth Doctor Bishop: but let his owne fellow Doctor waken him, and he of greater credit then himselfe: Aquinas it is, who reiecteth thisAquin. suplem. q. 13. art. 1. distinction, as nothing worth, and giueth this reason of his reiecting, because satisfaction answereth not to sinne, but accor­ding as it is an offence to God, which it hath not of conuerting to other things, but of auerting and turning from God. And surely his reason is passing good: for to v [...] the Creatures, and to loue the Creatures, is not sinne: but to vse them disorderly, and to loue them immoderately: which disordered vse, & im­moderate loue, is the very turning, and auersion from God: and therefore, to say, that wee satisfy not for our auersion from God, but for our conuersion to the creatures, is to say, either that wee satisfy for that which is no sinne, or els, that some part of sinne is not an auersion from God: both which, are e­qually absurd, and Doctor Bishop cannot giue a third: and therefore his distinction is a meere foppish dreame, without head or foote.

67. The Gospell teacheth, that there is giuen no other12 Act. [...] ▪ 12. name vnder Heauen, whereby wee must bee saued, but the name Iesus. But the Church of Rome propoundeth vnto vs other names to bee saued by, as, the Virgin Mary, the Saints, and Martyrs, yea, Francis, and Dominick, &c. For they make them Mediatours of intercession to God for vs: which office belongeth only vnto Christ, as hath been shew­ed; and they teach, that we are saued by their merits, aswell as by the merits of Christ; and that as there are diuers mansi­ons in Heauen, so among the Saints there are diuers offices; some haue power ouer one thing, some ouer another, as Saint Peter against infidelity. Saint Agnes for Chastity. Saint Leo­nard for Horses. Saint Nicholas against ship-wracke. Saint Iames for Spaine. Saint Denis for France. Saint Marke for Venice, &c. Yea, they would make men beleeue, if a man, be­ing otherwise a vyler sinner, dye in the habit of Saint Francis, or Saint Dominick, &c. must needes goe straight to heauen, [Page 327] without any more adoe: and that, as it may seeme, though he hath neyther faith nor repentance.

68. Lastly, they are not ashamed to say, that the death and passion of Christ, and of the holy Virgine together, wasGalat. de arcan. Catholic. verita [...]. Briget. Reuel. pag. 21. for the redemption of mankinde: and as Adam and Eue sold the world for one Apple; so Mary and her Sonne redeemed the world with one heart: and therefore as they called him Sauiour, so her Sauiouresse: as him Mediator, so her Me­diatresse: as him the King of the Church, so her, the Queene. If this be not to repose the confidence of our saluation vpon o­ther names, besides the Name of Iesus, let the world be iudge.

69. Yet for all this, they thinke to couer this their fil­thinesse by a distinction: for they say that they doe not flyeBell. de Sanct. beatit. l. 1. c. 17. to the Saints, as authors and giuers of good things; but as Impetrators and Intercessors. To which I answere▪ that to o­mit their doctrine which hath at large beene discouered be­fore, the very forme of their prayers doth extinguish this di­stinction: for when they cry and say, O Saint Peter, haue mercy on me, Saue mee, Open mee the gate of heauen, Giue mee patience, Giue mee fortitude, &c. And to the bles­sed Virgine, O Mediatrix of God and men: ô Fountaine of mercy, Mother of grace, Hope of the desolate, Comforter of the desperate, &c. receiue this my humble petition, and giue me life euerlasting: And to Saint Paul, Vouchsafe to bring vs, whom thou hast caused to know the light of truth, after the end of this mortality, thither, where thou thy selfe art: Doe they not make them authors and giuers of these things? Yes, in word, (saith Bellarmine) but not in sense: for the meaning of theseBell. Ibid. petitions is, that by their prayers and merites they would obtaine of God these good things. But, alas, how should the common people vnderstand their meaning, seeing the sound of their words are so playne to the contrary? Againe, why doe they not propound their sense in playner termes, but leaue it thus inuolued vnder darke riddles, to the great of­fence of thousands? And lastly, how harsh an interpretation must this needs be in the eares of all men, Giue me euerlasting life, that is, Pray to God that he would giue mee it? If a man [Page 328] should speake so in his common talke, no man would vnder­stand him otherwise then his words sound: how much lesse can these spirituall matters be otherwise vnderstood then they are spoken? Surely this shift is so filly, that if it might stand good, what might not a man speake, and yet excuse it suffici­ently after this manner? And though the Councill of Trent seeme to graunt to the Saints the power onely of intercessi­on, as Bellarmine also doth: yet the Romane Catechisme, setCatechis. Rom. foorth by the commandement of the Pope, and decree of the same Councill, doth cleerely and expressely attribute vnto the Saints the power of Mercy, Grace, and Donation of be­nefits. Whereby it appeareth, that this is not the opinion of some priuate men, but the receiued and approoued doctrine of the Church. And thus this distinction vanisheth before the truth, as snow against the Sunne.

70. The Gospell teacheth, that euery soule bee subiect to 13 Rom. 12. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. the higher powers: and that we submit our selues vnto all maner of ordinance for the Lords sake, whether vnto King or vnto Gouernours, &c. And our Sauiour himselfe confesseth, thatIoh. 19. 11. Pilate had power euer him from God, when he faith, Thou couldest haue no power at all against me, except it were giuen thee from aboue. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that neyther the Pope himselfe, nor any of his Clergie, are subiect to the temporall power of Princes, eyther to be iudged of them, or punished by them, no not in cases of fact, when they are guilty of haynous crimes; as of Treason, Murther, Theft, &c.

71. This doctrine, though it bee contradicted by many learned Doctors of their owne side: as, Occham, Marsilius, Pataninus, Barclay a late French Lawyer, and others, yet is maintayned by their Popes and Cardinalls, Iesuites, and Ca­non Lawes, which are the very synewes of Popery, as not onely true, but necessary to saluation: and therefore we may well call it, The doctrine of their Church. For Popes: Iohn August. Triump. de potest. eccles. 4. 4. art. 1. the two and twentieth commaunded Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona, to write a Booke, wherein he maintaineth this position, That all the power of Emperours and Kings is sub­deligate, in respect of the power of the Pope. And againe, that all secular power is to be restrayned, enlarged, and exe­cuted [Page 329] at the commaundement ofthe Pope. This is the asser­tion of that man, who was authorised first to write by Pope Iohn the two and twentieth, and after, his Booke was set foorth, by the priuiledge of Gregory the thirteenth. So that here we haue two Popes maintayning this doctrine. Clement the first was of the same minde, who affirmeth, that hee, andClement. lib. 2. de sentent. & re iudicat. can. 2. the rest of the Popes, had a soueraignity and superiority ouer the Empire: and vpon that ground he dissanulled all the Sen­tences and Processes made by Henry the seuenth Emperour. And so also was Boniface the eighth, who in that famous Ca­non,Extrauag. Com. lib. 1. de maior. & obedient. c. vnam Sanctam. Vnam sanctam, &c. directly affirmeth, that the Tempo­rall authority must be subiect to the Spirituall: and that it is necessary to saluation, to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome. Now the rest of the Popes must needes be of the same minde, or else they should con­demne these of error, and that speaking definitiuely, which is contrary to their Religion. And so indeede that they are, Bellarmine their Champion, in his late Booke against Barclay the Lawyer, doth manifestly declare, who most impudently maintayneth this position with all his wit against that learned man: as also in his last doting Apologie against our King, wherein, without doubt, he is authorised, and as it were tap­ped on the backe, and called, A good childe, by the Popes Holinesse himselfe.

72. Thus we see this doctrine maintayned by the Popes and their Lawes. Let vs see also what the Cardinalls and the Iesuites say vnto it. Cardinall Baronius, a notable clawer ofBaronius. the Popes, holdeth, that the Pope hath power directly ouer Princes, agreeing with Bozius and Triumphus: but Cardinall Bellarmine, with others on his side, quallifieth the matter, andBell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. cap. 4 & 5. saith, that the Popes power ouer Princes in temporall mat­ters, is not direct, but indirect, as depending vpon his spiritu­all power, and in order & relation vnto that. Let vs leaue theseGreg. de Ʋalen. tom. 3. Com. Tollet. in Ioh. cap. 21. two Cardinalls fighting about direct & indirect, and come to the other Iesuites. Gregory de Valentia saith, that the Pope is subiect to none; but that by a certaine hereditary right he is exempted from all humane jurisdiction. Tollet affirmeth, that there may bee in the Church many holier and learneder then [Page 390] the Pope, but none superior or equall vnto him in dignitie. Turrian the Iesuite saith, that Christ hath translated all hisTurrian. de Eccles. l. 1. c. 3. Kingdome on earth vpon the Pope, who beareth his person, and carryeth his Image. And lastly, all of them, like lines in a circle, meeting in a Center, ioyne in this, that the Pope hath power to depose Kings, to translate Kingdomes, and to con­ferre them vpon others, if it seeme to him necessary for the good of mens soules.

73. Thus we haue their doctrine concerning their Head, the Pope. Now let vs heare what they say touching the bo­dy that hangs vpon his head, their Clergie: Kings are not now any more Soueraignes ouer Clerks (faith Bellarmine,) and Bell. de Cleric. cap. 28. therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods law or mans, except it be in respect of directiue lawes. And Emanuel Sa. af­firmeth,Emanuel. Sa. Aphoris. confes. verb. Cler. that a Clergie man cannot be a Traytor, though hee re­bell, because he is no subiect. And it was long agoe the doctrine of the Fryers; continued by the Iesuites, that the King was not Lord ouer the Clergie; but that the Pope was their Lord: and therefore though a Clergie man had committed theft, mur­ther, or treason, yet hee ought not to bee called in question, much lesse punished for it by a temporall Magistrate: butHoueden. Hen. 2 ought to be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges, & in the Eccle­siasticall Court: and if hee were conuict, hee should lose his Orders, and so being excluded from Office & Benefice Eccle­fiasticall: if after this he incurred the like fault, then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King: yea, they goe so farre,Maynard de Priuiledg. eccles. art. 17. nu. 10. that if any offence were committed by diuers persons, a­mongst whom there were one Clergie man, none of the of­fenders were subiect to temporall iurisdiction. And thus we see, that neyther the Pope nor his Clergie will bee subiect to these higher Powers, to which the Gospell commaundeth all men to submit themselues.

74. How will they distinguish here? Mary, they haue two distinctions to helpe this doctrine out of the myre, and yet all too weake. First, they say, that when the Apostles, Paul and Peter, commanded euery soule to bee subiect, &c. they meane generally, that all subiects should obey their su­periors, [Page 391] whether Spirituall or Temporall: and not that eueryBell. de Rom. Pontif. l. 2. c. 29. one should particularly bee subiect to the King or secular power: which interpretation is first flat contrary to the text: for both Paul and Peter mention expressely Kings and Prin­ces, and such as haue the right of the sword: which they would neuer haue done, if Kings should haue beene subiect to Popes, and not Popes to Kings: for then they would haue instanced in Popes, and not in Kings: and though Christians were falsely accused of treason and rebellion to Princes, yet this could not be a sufficient reason to mooue the Apostles to conceale so necessary a truth, especially seeing they write to Christians and not to Infidels.

75. Secondly, it is contrary to reason: for if Peter, and so the Pope, his pretended successor, had beene in their iudgement superiors to Kings, then surely Peter himselfe, writing not onely to the people, but also to the Elders of the Church, as appeareth, 1. Pet. 5. 1. would neuer haue en­ioyned them all to the obedience of the Ciuill Magistrate, but would haue reserued some to his owne iurisdiction, and bidden them all, both Magistrate and people, to submit them­selues vnto him, as the head of the Church: or if he for mo­destie might forbeare this imperiall iniunction; yet, without question, Paul (had he beene of that minde) would not haue sent euery soule to bee subiect to Kings, but would haue told them, that Kings and all should be subiect to Peter: but see­ing that neither of them both doth it, neither here nor else­where; and it is, as they thinke, so necessary a thing to be be­leeued of all men, it is most euident that they neuer meant it.

76. Thirdly, and lastly, whereas the Apostle Paul com­maundeth euery soule to be subiect, wee may conclude, that if the Pope be a soule, or haue a soule (for some of them haue thought that a man had no more a soule then a beast) then he must be subiect. And this conclusion a learned man, that wasAeneas Siluius in gest. Concil. Basiliens. Chrysost. & Oecumen. in Rom. 13. 1. afterward a Pope himselfe, made, when he plainly confessed, that the Apostle did not except animam Papae, the Popes soule from this subiection. I omit heere S. Chrysostomes and Oecu­menius exposition of the same place; both which affirme, that [Page 392] by euery soule, the Apostle included both Priests, Monks, and Apostles, and that this subiection was not contrary vn­toAug. Confes. lib. 3. cap. [...]. Nazianz. in orat. ad subdit. & Imper. Gregor. lib. 2. indict. 11. c. 100. Bell. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 2. ca. 29. piety. And to this exposition subscribe most of the Fa­thers.

77. Secondly, they distinguish vpon that place of Iohn, where our Sauiour confesseth himselfe to be vnder the power of Pilate, to be iudged by him, and say, that eyther it is to bee vnderstood of a permissiue power graunted by God, without the which, no not sinnes can be committed: with Cyrill and Chrysostome: or, if of the power of iurisdiction, with Augustins and Bernard, that then Pilate had power ouer Christ, not simply, but by accident: to wit, as he was repu­ted to bee a priuate Iew, and so no more then a meere man: by which ignorance of the person, his power was iustified to be lawfull: as if a Ciuill Magistrate should condemne a Clerke in the habite of a Lay man, not knowing him to be a Clerke, he should be free from blame. To which I answere: First, that the power of the Emperour, though a heathen, was lawfull, and ordayned by God, as they themselues confesse▪ and as the Scriptures in many places prooue: but Pilates Mat. 22. power was from the Emperour, therefore it was a lawfull, & not a lawlesse power; and so not only by permission, but also by ordination. Secondly, if it were onely a power by permission, then Pilate had sinned in executing that power vpon Christ: but because of the mistaking of the person, therefore hee saith, he was free from fault: as a Ciuill Magi­strate, that should iudge a Clerke, taking him for a Lay man. And so one part of his answere crosseth the other. Lastly, I answere, that though Pilate might erre in the person of Christ, yet Christ could not erre in the power of Pilate, who affirmeth of it plainely, that it was of God; and so it was indeede, in respect of the power it selfe, though the abuse of it, in the condemning of an Innocent, was a sinne: and so from the Diuell, and not from God.

78. The Gospell teacheth, that before regeneration wee14. Ephes. 2. 1. Rom. 6. 13. Luk. 15. 31. & 9. 60. are dead in sinne, and haue no more power to mooue in any worke of grace, then a dead carkasse hath in the works of [Page 333] nature: and therefore can neither will nor doe that which is good. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that a man vnre­generateConcil. Trident. Sess. 6. cap. 1. can. 6. Bell. de grat. & lib. arbit. cap. 10. Salmer. tom. 13. pag. 32. & 38. Coster. Enchirid. pag. 204. Ecchius, Enchir. Molyn. disp. 12. is not spiritually dead, but wounded, like the man that fell among theeues betwixt Ierico and Ierusalem: or, like a Prisoner with setters on his heeles: or, like a Bird entang­led in a lime-bush: and therefore that there is remayning in him so much power, both in his will and vnderstanding, that being but helped a little by grace, hee can begin his conuersi­on, and so deserue a more plentifull grace of iustification. All this they affirme: then which, what can bee more contrary to the Gospell of Iesus Christ, which saith, that wee are starke dead in sinne, and are not able to thinke a good thought of our selues: but that all our sufficiency is in God, and that he worketh in vs both the will and the deed, &c?

79. Bellarmine heere likewise endeuoureth to escape byBell. de grat. & lib. arbit. l. 6. c. 13. a double distinction: First, he saith, that a sinner, because he is spiritually dead, cannot of himselfe, or by his owne power, recouer life, or prepare himselfe thereunto: but yet being preuented and helped by grace, he may cooperate with God that quickneth him: for that he doth not, as being dead, but as hauing a vitall vertue inspired into him by God.

80. For answere whereunto, let me propound vnto him this question, namely, Whether this spirituall life, which is the first degree of a sinners conuersion, bee inspired into him altogether by the Spirit of God, without the helpe of his owne will? or whether it ariseth partly from grace, and part­ly from his will. If he saith, Altogether from the Spirit, with­out the helpe of his will: then how doth the sinner coope­rate with God in his first conuersion? If he say, Partly from grace, and partly from free-will: then how is the sinner dead, when yet he doth worke towards the obtayning of his owne life? Can a dead man cooperate at all, much more towards his owne life? I, but hee is preuented and excited to grace, and so doth worke: but then I would know, whether in that first exciting and stirring vp, hee doth worke with Gods Spi­rit? whether he be actiue in that first motion, or passiue one­ly? If actiue, then hee is not dead: if passiue, then the first [Page 334] degree of his conuersion and spirituall life is only from grace, without the coadiution of this free-will: for this excitation and stirring vp of his will, is the first sparke of spirituall life in a sinner; and this is that which S. Augustine affirmeth, saying,Aug. de grat. & lib. arbiter. c. 17. that God without vs worketh in vs to will, (that is the first sparke of life:) then worketh with vs, and helpeth vs when we doe will, (this is the second.) And againe, The will is first changed from Idem. cap. 20. Idem. Enchirid. cap. 32. euill to good, and helped when it is good. And againe, He prepa­reth the good will that is to be helped; and helpeth it when it is prepared. In all which passages, the first conuersion of a sin­ner is ascribed to God alone, and mans will is a dead thing that mooueth not: but the succeeding works are attributed ioyntly to God and vs. And this is the very doctrine of the Gospell: which Bellarmine plainely crosseth by his distin­ction, though subtilly hee seemeth to doe nothing lesse: for he saith plainely in another place, that in the act of our conuer­sion, Bell. de grat. & lib. arbit. lib. 6. cap. 15. & lib. 4. cap. 16. Alex. part. 3. m. 1. art. 2. ad. 1. will is truely free, and determineth it selfe, though God moue and apply it to the worke. And another compareth the will to an eye in a darkeplace, which though it see not, yet can see as soone as light commeth, because in it selfe it hath the faculty of seeing: then which, what can bee more contrary to the Gospell? the one affirming, that a sinner is dead before his regeneration: the other, that he is but halfe dead, and woun­ded, and hath some power, and therefore life in himselfe to grace and rghteousnes.

81. Bellarmine perceiuing the weaknes of this distincti­on, flyeth for succour to another: and that is, though a sin­ner be dead to grace, yet hee is aliue to nature; and so is not altogether dead: and that by the power of that naturall life, hee being helped by grace, can cooperate with God in his conuersion: and therefore that the similitude of a dead man doth not in euery respect agree vnto the vnregenerate; be­cause a dead man hath no life in him at all; but a man vnre­generate hath notwithstanding the life of nature in him. But this is more absurd then the former: for, first it is plaine, that the vnregenerate are as dead in respect of grace, as a dead carkasse is in respect of nature: for they haue no more ability [Page 335] to the workes of grace, then a dead man to the workes of nature. A dead man hath no appetite or desire to naturall things: no more hath the vnregenerate to spirituall things. A dead man hath no vnderstanding of the things of this world: no more hath the vnregenerate of the things that are of God. A dead man cannot moue the members of the body, nor vse the naturall saculties of the soule: no more can the vnregene­rate mooue one haire bredth to Heauen-ward, nor vse any graces of the Spirit. A dead man hath no sense, nor feeling, though hee bee neuer so sharply handled, seeth not, though the Sunne shineth neuer so bright, heareth not, though a trumpet be sounded in his eare: no more can the vnregenerat feele the wounds of Gods Lawes, heare the sound of the Go­spell, nor see the cleare light of truth that shinethround about him. Lastly, in a dead man, there is a separation of the soule frō the body: so, in the vnregenerate, there is a separation of Gods Spirit from the soule, which is the soule of the soule. For this cause S. Aug. likened the vnregenerate man, to the Shuna­mitesAug. de verbis Apostol. ser. 11. sonne, beeing dead, whom the Prophet Elizeus raised from death, to life; and others, to Lazarus stinking in the graue, or, to the widowes sonne of Nai [...], lying dead; vpon the beare; or, to Iairus daughter, that was dead in the house: noting three degrees of sinnes, one more notorious then the other, yet all in the state of death, vntill Christ by his Spirit shall inspire life into them: and this is the perfect analogy and proportion, betwixt a dead man, and a sinner: and there­fore Bellarmines exception is false, that they doe not agree in all things: for there is nothing, wherein they doe agree, not, if the comparison bee rightly proportioned.

82. Secondly, if they did disagree in other things, yet in this, wherein lyeth the life of the similitude, they must needs agree, that as a dead man hath nothing, whereby he can helpe himselfe, for the recouery of his life: so man spiritually dead, hath nothing in him, no faculty, or power of the soule, where­by he can any way further the obtaining of his cōuersiō. And this was Saint Augustines opinion, agreeable to the Gospell:Aug. de grat. & lib. arbit. cap. 5. for his words are plaine, concerning Pauls conuersion, that he [Page 336] was called from Heauen, and by that mighty and effectuall calling conuerted. Gratia Deisolaerat: It was onely the grace of God. And no otherwise did Iustine Martyr conceiueIustin. Martyr. Apolog. 2. thereof, when hee sayth, That as to haue beeing at the first, when wee are created, was not of our selues: so to choose and fol­low that which is pleasing to God, is (not by vs) but by his per­swading, and mouing vs to the faith. In this therefore, which is the point of the question, the similitude holds most strong­ly, and so Bellarmines exception is nothing to the purpose.

83. Thirdly, and lastly, it is most absurd of all, which hee sayth, that because a sinner liueth naturally, therefore he mo­ueth towards grace, more then a dead carkas to nature, which hath no life at all: for in respect of grace, it is all one to haue no life at all; and to haue no life of the Spirit. For nothing can worke aboue the compasse of it owne beeing. Naturall life cannot tranicend the Spheare of nature, nor any way moue to the Spheare of grace. For as Plants that liue the ve­getatiue life, cannot arise to the sensitiue life, which is in beasts, nor they to the rationall, which is in men: So neither can these arise vp any whit to the life of the Spirit, which is in Gods Saints, till a new life bee inspired in­to them: which new life, as it is the conuersion of the soule to God, so it is the foundation of all spirituall actions, seeing life in euery kinde is the foundation of all the actions in that kind. For vntill there bee life in a plant, it doth not grow, vn­till it bee in a beast, it doth not moue nor feele, vntill in a man, hee doth not thinke, speake, or remember; and so vntill this life of the Spirit bee in the soule, it cannot will, nor worke a­ny thing that is good. Therefore I conclude, that though a sinner liue naturally, yet beeing dead to grace, that that life doth no more helpe to his conuersion, then the sensitiue life of a beast doth to the obtaining of reason, or the vegetatiue15 Ioh. 5. 39. Col. 3. 16. 1. Pet. 3. 15. 1. Ioh. 2. 12. 13. 14. Luk. 16. 19. life of a Plant to the obtaining of sense.

84. The Gospell teacheth, that all should read the Scrip­tures, for so our Sauiour chargeth; and his Apostles Paul and Peter, and Iohn, charge not Priests onely, but all others. And Abraham sendeth the rich Gluttons brethren to Moses, and [Page 337] the Prophets. And the Eunuch is not rebuked, but approuedActs. 8 28. Acts 17. 11. by Philip, for reading the Prophesie of Esay. And the Bereans are commended for examining Pauls doctrine by the Scrip­ture: which should neuer haue beene, if it had not beene law­full for them to doe it. This is the doctrine of the Gospell,Bell. de verbo Det. lib. 2. cap. 15 Azorius Instit. moral. l. 8. c. 26. Concil. Trident. Regul. 4. Iud. librer. Coster. Enchirid. most plaine and euident. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that all men must not read the Scripture, to wit, Laymen, ex­cept they bee permitted by their Ordinary, because pearles are not to bee cast amongst swine: nor a sword, or a knife put into a childes hand; nor occasion of errour offered to the ignorant, nor matter of offence to the weake: as also, because they are more obscure then can bee vnderstood of the Laicks, and common sort of people. Thus they paint ouer the foule wrinkled face of Iezabel, with false colours: but yet the con­trariety is plaine. All ought to read the Scriptures: and some ought not to read the Scriptures. The one is the doctrine of Iesus Christ: The other, of the Pope and his Church.

85. But Bellarmine distinguisheth two wayes. First, that there is a double way of knowing the Scriptures; one by hearing, and another by reading. The first is commanded to all, and therefore necessary to be vsed of all. But this last is not com­manded to any, but to the Clergie, and those whom they shall thinke fit to read them with profit, and without danger. But who seeth not, that when our Sauiour willeth to search the Scriptures, hee speaketh of reading? And when the Bereans examined Pauls sermon by the Scriptures, they did it by rea­ding. And when Abraham remitteth Diues brethren to Moses, and the Prophets, hee sendeth them to reading. For Moses, and the Prophets were dead in their persons, and liued onely in their writings. And lastly, when the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the seuerall Churches, they wrote them to this end, that they might bee read of all. For so Saint Paul chargeth the Colossians, after they had read the Epistle, that they themselues would cause it also to bee read in the Church of the Laodiceans. Besides, if it bee a dangerous thing for the ignorant to read the Scriptures, for feare they should peruert the sense, & so fal into heresie, or impiety; then [Page 338] much more dangerous is the hearing of it, seeing there is no preaching so pure as the word it selfe; man euer mixing some dregs of his own corruption, with the pure wine of the word; nor any preacher so sincere, but he doth often erre: and so the hearer being debarred from trying his doctrine by the touch­stone of the Scripture, must needs irrecouerably fall into errour.

86. Secondly, hee sayth that there are two kindes of Rea­ders.Bell. quo supra. One that read with fruit and profit; others that read without fruit, yea rather with hurt. Now the Scripture may bee read of the first, but not of the second. But I would know of him againe, who hath that power to discerne betwixt these two. Doe they know the heart of a man? Or, can they pro­phecy of that which is to come? If they cannot doe these things, then they ought not to locke vp the Scriptures from any, vpon this surmise; but permit the vse of that which is good to all, and leaue the successe to God. Againe, because some peruert the Scripture to their damnation, shall therefore all bee forbidden to reape comfort by it? Because the theefe robs, and kils with his sword, shall not therefore an honest man vse one for his owne defence? Because the Spider sucks vp poyson out of the flowre, therefore shall not the Bee suck honey? This is to take away the vse of all good things. For as the Poet sayth, Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem: No­thingOuid. de trist. lib. 2. so profitable in the vse, but in the abuse may be hurt­full and nuisant.

87. Lastly, are the ignorant common people more subiectEspe.s. us com. in tit. c. 1. & 2. to erring and heresie, then the learned? Let Espensaeus, a lear­ned Bishop of their owne, informe him to the contrary. I re­member (sayth hee) that an Italian Bishop told me, that his coun­trey-men were scarred from reading the Scriptures, lest they should become heretikes: as if heresies did spring from the study of the Scriptures, and not rather from the neglect and igno­rance of them. And if he will not beleeue him, let anotherAlphous. de cast. haeres. l. 1. cap. 13 Maldon. in E­uangel. learned Roman si step out & tel him, that very few ignorāt per­sons were the authors of heresie: & another, that learned men, & indued with great wits, fall by their pride into heresie: so that he [Page 339] need not so much feare, lest heresie should build her nest in the bosome of the poore ignorant man, as lest like the Eagle shee should flye aloft, and set her selfe in the top of the high Cedars of the Church.

88. But what doe I stand to ouerthrow this vaine excep­tion, since it is no better then a meere deception, confuted by the practice of their owne Church? for without difference, any that will pay for it, beeing neuer so ignorant, might haue a licence to read the Scriptures. And we had heere in England in Queene Maries dayes, a Romish indulgence, that hee thatCartwrights an­swere to the Preface of the Rhemes Te­stament. could dispend a certaine reuenue by the yeere, might read the Bible in English, as is reported by Master Cartwright, in his answere to the Preface of the Rhemes Testament. So that is as cleare as the day, that it is not the fruit and benefit that should come to the Reader, that they regarded, but the profit and gaine that should accrue to their owne purses: neither was the feare of erring the cause of their prohibition: but ra­ther the feare of too much knowledge, lest thereby the grosse and foule abominations of their Church should bee discoue­red and so come to bee abhorred and detested.

89. The Gospell teacheth, that none can forgiue sins, but16 Esay 43. 25. luk. 5. 21. God: because sinne is a preuarication of Gods Law; and therefore none can remit it, but hee against whom it is com­mitted. Vpon which ground venerable Bede writing vponBeda in Luk. 5. these words of the fift of Luke, Who can forgiue sinnes, but God? sayth, that the Pharises said truely therein: because no man can forgiue sinnes, saue God alone: who also forgiueth by them to whom hee hath committed the power of the keyes: and therefore Christ is proued to bee truely God by this, that hee can forgiue sinnes, as God: and it may be proued further to bee true, because our Sauiour himselfe approoueth of that speech of theirs, not shewing any manner of dislike thereun­to. And therefore Saint Ambrose affirmeth plainely, that to Ambros. epist. 16. forgiue sinnes, is not common to any man with Christ. This is (sayth he) the onely office of Christ, who tooke away the sinne of the world. And Cyprian as directly; Onely the Lord can take Cyprian ser. de lapsis. pitty, and grant pardon to sinnes which are committed against him. [Page 340] But the Synagogue of Rome teacheth, that though this powerGregor. de Va­lent tom. 4. pag. 1876. Eman. S [...]. in A­phoris. T [...]et▪ lib. 6. [...] ▪ 21 bee originally and fundamentally in Christ, yet he hath com­mitted the same to his Vicar the Pope; and from him it is de­riued to Cardinals, Bishops, and infetiou [...] Priests, vnder the commission and authority of the keyes: and that not ministe­rially, and by way of declaration onely, which wee confesse: but absolutely, and iudicially, and as Christ himselfe; and that not onely to the liuing, but to the dead also, that are in Purgatory. For it is a rule without exception amongst them,Bell. de Purgat. l [...]. 2. cap. 16. Suarez▪ [...]om. 4. disp. 50. sect. 3. that all satisfactory punishments may bee released by a par­don. And it is as sure that a pardon for any manner of sinne may bee obtained for a price. And therefore there is a cer­taine rate set downe for all kinde of sinnes, as Murther, In­cests,Aquin. Su [...]lem. in 3. part. q. 25. [...]rt. 1. Sodomy, Sacriledge, &c. And Aquinas thus reasoneth, If Christ might release the fault, without any satisfaction, then so may it be that the Pope. By which wee see, that according to their doctrine, the Pope hath asmuch power to forgiue sins, as Christ himselfe hath: which is the Scribes and Pharises li­ued and heard, they would cry out, O blasphemie. This is the expresse doctrine of the Church of Rome.

90. For the making good of this doctrine, they haue a dou­ble distinction, answerable to the double manner of remitting sin, vsed in their Church; one touching the absolution of a sin­ner, by the Priest, in their Sacrament of penance. The other, touching the Popes indulgence, out of the Sacramēt, groūded vpon the treasure of supererogatory works, which they say, is in the Church, and consequently, in the Popes dispensation. Concerning the first (they say) that Christ absolueth a sin­ner by his owne power; but the Priest, by the power of Christ, committed vnto him in that famous Legacy, Whose sinnes yee remit on earth, they are remitted in Heauen.

91. To which I answere two things. First, that heerein they [...]a [...]d [...] 4. [...]. 1 [...]. [...] ▪ cōtradict their ancient schoole. For Peter Lumbard, one of the masters of the schoole, doth plainly affirme, that such only are worthily absolued by the Church, who are absolued in Hea­uen: because by the error of man, it may so happen, that hee that seemeth to bee cast out of Gods family▪ bee still within; [Page 341] and he who may be thoght to remaine within, is notwithstan­ding cast ou [...]. And that therefore God absolueth differently from the Church; God by remitting the sinne, & purging the soule from the blemish thereof, and freeing it from eternall punishment; the Church by declaring who are absolued by God. By which not onely his opinion is manifest, that the Priest hath no absolute power of absoluing a sinner, but one­ly of declaring that hee is absolued, which is our doctrine: but also his reason is inuincible, that because the Priest may erre in his absolution; therefore hee hath no such absolute power committed vnto him. And that wee may not thinke that this Master of theirs is without schollers, the glosse of their decrees doth set down asmuch, when it sayth, Dimi [...]tan­tur, Distinct 23. cap. 2. gloss. id est, dimissa ostendantur: Let them bee forgiuen, that is, let them bee declared to bee forgiuen. Which, because it speakes too boldly; therefore their iudicious Censurers haue caused it either to bee blotted out, or compelled it to speakeIndex. expurg. Belg. edit. Greg. otherwise.

92. Secondly, I answere, that this doctrine is crossed by it selfe. For they do not professe any other absolution, but such as may be hindered by the party to by absolued, to wit, if by want of faith, or repentance, he put an inuisible bar to stop the power thereof. Now, if the sinner may hinder his own absolu­tiō, then the Priest hath no power to absolue him, except he be fitly disposed for the receiuing of it; & this disposition is meer­ly from God: and therefore in God is the onely power to ab­solue; and in the Priest, onely to declare who is absolued, and that conditionally, if h [...] be thus qualified, and haue no barre to hinder. For if the power of absoluing, or not absoluing, depend vpon the putting in, or taking away the barre of im­penitency; then he onely can iudicially absolue a sinner, that can giue him repentance: but neyther the Pope, nor any mortall man is able to doe this, as the Scripture testifieth in many places: and therefore neyther Pope nor Priest can ab­solue a sinner any further then by a declaratiue sentence.

93. Lastly, it crosseth their owne practice: for they teach, that dead m [...]n, dying in excommunication, may be absolued: [Page 342] and they practise the same, to wit, as Bellarmine saith, whenBell▪ de Indulg. lib. 1. cap. 14. Toll [...]t. Instruct. sacerdot. l. 1. c. 16 it is discouered, that the partie was erroniously excommuni­cate: and, as Tollet saith, when he shewed manifest signes of contrition before his death: in which case their absolution can bee no more then a declaration that hee did repent, and that he is absolued before the tribunall [...] at of God.

94. And thus this first distinction wi [...]l hold no water. Let vs heare the second. Touching the Popes power to pardon out of the Sacrament, this it is: They say, that the Pope doth not by his pardon take vpon him, eyther to remit the guilt ofBell. Ibid. lib. 1. cap. 7. sinne, or the eternall punishment due vnto it: but onely the temporall punishment which it ought to sustaine, eyther here in this life, òr in Purgatory. But I answere, that h [...]e which can remit any part of the punishment due vnto sinne, can al­so remit the guilt it s [...]l [...]e: for guilt and punishment are vn­separable companions; insomuch, as in the Hebrew tongue, Sinne and Punishment are notified by one and the same word, to shew, that where the one is, there the other is also: and therefore he that can pardon the ore, may also release the o­ther. Adde hereunto, that to pardon a sinne, is nothing else (as our common phrase of speech, together with reason, tea­cheth vs) but to remit the punishment thereof: as when the King, in the Court of Iustice, pardoneth a Malefactor, he re­leaseth him from the punishment which by the law he should suffer: so in the Court of Conscience, he that doth remit a­ny part of the punishment due by Gods Law vnto a sinner, (as the Pope doth vndertake to doe) by the same labour doth remit so much of the guilt it selfe. And so this distinction filleth to the ground, being as feeble and brittle as the for­mer.

95. Lastly, the Gospell teacheth, that when we haue done all that we can, yet we may say, that we are vnprofitable ser­uants, Luke 17. 10. But the Church of Rome teacheth, that [...]u [...] ▪ 17. 10. a man may doe more then he ought, and then the law requi­reth:Bell. de Monach. lib. 1. c. p. 13. Salmer tom. 7. p [...]g▪ 97. and so may say, and thinke himselfe to be, not onely a profitable, but more then a profitable seruant: for hee m [...]y (say they) supererogate: now hee doeth supererogate, who [Page 343] layeth out more then he receiued: as he that to the precepts of Christ, adioyneth the commaundements of the Church; and to the precepts of the law, the counsels of the Gospell.

96. Bellarmine answereth first out of Saint Ambrose, Bell. de Iust [...]f. lib. 5. cap. 5. that it is to bee vnderstood of vs whilst wee are in the state of na­ture, and not of grace: as if by nature we are vnprofitable, but by grace profitable: but our Sauiour speaketh this to his Di­sciples, who were now in the state of grace, and not of nature. And Saint Ambrose his meaning is nothing else but this, thatAmbros. i [...] Luk. lib. 8. cap. 1 [...]. our naturall imbecillity, though it be sanctified, yet it is not abolished by grace: and therefore that we, in regard thereof, are still bound to remember, that when we doe all we can, yet we are vnprofitable.

97. Secondly, he answereth, that we are vnprofitable in­deede; but to God, not to our selues, which hee saith, is Be­da's interpretation: but hee leaueth out that which follow­eth in Beda: for so farre is hee from building hereupon theBeda in Luc. cap. 17. merite of works, that he saith plainely, that by whose mercy we are preuented, that we may humbly serue him; by his gift wee are crowned to raigne with him. By which it is euident, that if wee b [...] profitable to our selues, it is because God accepteth our seruice, and in mercy rewardeth the same; not because we deserue any thing at his hands. To omit that the word Ser­uants hath relation to Masters, and not to themselues: and therfore in saying they are vnprofitable seruants, it must needs be vnderstood in respect of God, and not of themselues.

98. Thirdly, hee answereth out of Saint Augustine, that we are said to bee vnprofitable in respect of the couenant of the law: but in respct of the free couenant of grace, we may be profita­ble, and more then profitable. But this is Bellarmines fraudu­lent collection, and not Saint Augustines intention: for he saith onely, that we can require no reward for our labour, though Aug. ser. 3. de verb. Dom. we haue kept all the commandements, vnlesse God of his free grace had couenanted with vs to reward vs. He saith not that wee are made profitable by grace, eyther to God our Master, or to our selues. And therefore in another place he disclaimeth vt­terly all profite and merite in our selues, when he saith, Lord, Aug. in Psal. 142. [Page 344] for thy Names sake quicken me, in thy righteousnes, not in mine; not because I haue deserued it, but because thou art mercifull. Thus this generation is not ashamed to wrest and wring the godly Fathers, to make them speake to their purpose.

99. Lastly, hee answereth out of Saint Chrysostome, that our Sauiour saith not, Yee are vnprofitable seruants; but bids them say so of themselues, to teach them humility, and to auoyd pride. But how doe this follow, that because Christ biddeth vs to say so, to auoyd pride, therefore we are not so? yea, ra­ther therefore we are so: for would he bid vs to lye? Chry­sostome himselfe in another place cleereth this doubt, whenChrysost. ad pop. Antioch. hom. 53 he saith, that all that euer wee doe, we doe vpon dutie: for which cause Christ sayd, When yee haue done all, say, yee are vnprofita­ble seruants: So that Chrysostome did not onely thinke it fit for vs to say so for humility sake, but also that wee were so in truth and indeede. Let Saint Bernard, for an vpshot, wipe a­wayBernard. de tripl. custod. this distinction: Wilt thou (saith he) say, that Christ hath taught thee to say so for humility sake? true, indeed it was for humility; but what, against truth? And thus none of these shifts and distinctions can deliuer this doctrine from opposi­tion to the Gospell: for it followeth ineuitably, if the best be no better then vnprofitable seruants, then none can worke such works, whereby hee may not onely merite for himselfe eternall life, but hauing a surplusage of redundant merits, bestow some of them for the supplying of others wants.

100. And thus wee haue a short view of the cleere and manifest oppositions that are betwixt the doctrines of the Gospell, and the doctrines of the Church of Rome. And we see with what subtill and intricate distinctions, they labour to reconcile them together: but truth is naked, and nee­deth no such shiftings. Both the one and the other therefore, namely, their direct opposition to the Gospell on the one side, and their elaborate diflinctions, to make good their cause on the other, doth euidently euince the conclusion of this ninth demonstration, that that Religion, which is built vpon such desperate and dangerous principles, cannot be the truth of Christ, but the doctrine and Religion of Antichrist.

The X. MOTIVE. That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse igno­rance amongst the people, and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian faith, cannot be the truth: but this doth the Romish Religion: ergo, &c.

1. IN the first proposition of this Argument, the RomanistsMaior. hold the Wolfe by the eares, not knowing whether it be better to graunt, or to deny it: for if they graunt it to bee true, it will flye in their faces, because they are guilty of the contents thereof: and if they deny it, it will bite them by the fingers: for all men will condemne them of shamelesse im­pudency, for denying so apparant a truth. Therefore as the beast, which Pliny calleth Amphisbaena, so it stingeth both wayes. But of two euils the lesser: they must of necessitie de­ny it, or else they must condemne their owne practice of im­pietie: which sure they will not doe, though for their labour they gaine to themselues that name, which so frequently and imperiously they impute vnto vs, Shamelesse Heretikes: they speake it of vs in the spirit of malice: but it shall be prooued of them by sound reason, and that in this demonstration en­suing, by Gods assistance.

2. For the confirmation therefore of the first proposition a word or two, though whatsoeuer can be spoken thereof, is but to adde light vnto the Sunne: First therefore the Scrip­ture standeth foorth, and condemneth ignorance so plainely, that nothing can be more euident. Salomon telleth vs, That Pro. 8. 35. they which hate knowledge, loue death. And the Prophet Esay, Esay 5. 13. That the people were carryed into captiuitie, because they had no knowledge. And the Prophet Hosca, That they were destroyed Hosca 4. 6. for lacke of knowledge. Our Sauiour affirmeth, that the cause of erring in the Sadduces, was the ignorance of the Scripture. Mat. 22. 29. And Saint Paul coupleth these two together in the Gentiles, Darkned cogitations through ignorance, and strangers from the Ephes. 4. 18. life of God: where he plainely sheweth, that ignorance and de­struction [Page 346] are inseparable companions, as sanctified know­ledge and saluation are. And (to omit infinite other passages of holy writ) our Sauiour directly concludeth, that he which knoweth his Masters will, and doth it not, shall bee beaten with Ioh. 17. many stripes: and he which knoweth it not, and therefore doth it not, shall be beaten too, but with fewer stripes. By which he gi­ueth vs to know, that though some kinde of ignorance may extenuate and lessen the fault; yet none, especially if it bee of matters which we are bound to know, and may be attayned vnto, doth excuse from all fault, but is blame-worthy and pu­nishable by Gods iustice.

3. Thus speakes the holy Ghost in the Scripture, and doubtles in reason it must needs be so; for wherin doth a man differ from a beast, but in reason and vnderstanding? and wherein doth one man differ from another, but in the en­lightning of reason by diuine knowledge, which is the mat­ter subiect of true Religion? Religion being nothing else but the knowledge and profession of the diuine truth: the want whereof must needs be a subuerter and destroyer there­of. A Physicion that is ignorant of the grounds of his Arte, we account a Mountebanke and Imposter. And what, I pray you, can they be lesse, that professe ignorance, and that in the most difficult Art of all other, the Art of Christianitie? Besides, all confesse that ignorance is a defect and blemish of the soule, and that the more knowledge a man hath, the neerer he is vnto perfection, because hee is the more like vnto God: but the chiefe end of Religion is to purge a­way the blemishes, & to make vp the breaches of the soule, & to renue Gods Image defaced therin, that so we may be made like vnto him, euen perfect, as he is perfect. How can then true Religion teach ignorance, which is such an enemy vnto perfe­ctiō? or how can that be true religion, which nourisheth igno­rance, & inioyneth it vnto most of her professors & followers.

4. Let the fathers bee Iudges of this cause. Saint Augu­stine Aug. Epist. 119. sayth in one place, that Ignorance, as a naughty mother, bringeth forth two wicked daughters, falshood, and doubting. And in another, that the knowledge of God is the engine, by which the [Page 347] structure of charity is built vp. Saint Bernard sayth, that both Bernard. in Cantic. the knowledge of God, and of a mans selfe, is necessary to salua­tion. For as out of the knowledge of a mans selfe, commeth the feare of God, and out of the knowledge of God, the loue of him: so on the contrary, from the ignorance of a mans selfe, commeth Chrysost. in polit. lib. 3. pride, and from the ignorance of God desperation. Saint Chryso­stome sayth, that knowledge goeth before the imbracing of Ver­tue, because no man can faithfully desire that, which hee knoweth not, and euill vnknowne, is not feared. The like song sing all the rest of the Fathers, whose testimonies I thinke needlesse to accumulate, being so wel knowne to all men.

5. And that they may bee vtterly without excuse, heareAquin. 12. q. 76. art 2. what their owne Doctours affirme. Aquinas confesseth, that omnis ignorantia vincibilis est peccatum, si sit eorum, quae aliquis seire tenetur. All vincible ignorance (that is, which may bee auoided) is sinne, if it bee of those things, which a man is bound to know. But such is the ignorance maintained in the Church of Rome, not onely vincible, but affected, wilfull and voluntary. Bellarmine also acknowledgeth, that ignorance is a Bell. de omiss. grat. & statu peccat. lib. 6. cap. 8. & 9. Aug. de lib. ar­bitr. lib. 3. cap. 18. disease and wound of the soule, brought in as a punishment of ori­ginall sinne: And confesseth out of Saint Augustine, that it is the cause of errour. For, Two euils are brought into the world, (sayth Saint Augustine) by originall sinne: ignorance, and dif­ficulty; from which, two other fountaines of euils doe arise, to wit, error, & griefe. For ignorance bringeth forth error; and difficulty, griefe. And our Countrey-man Stapleton telleth vs plainely,Staplet. promp. moral. Dom. 6. post Pasch. text. 5. that Zelus sine scientia, est vehemens cursus in deui [...], in quo quan­tò curris velociùs, tantò a via aberras longiùs, & peccas absur­diùs. Zeale without knowledge, is a violent course in a wrong way, wherein the swifter wee runne, the further woe wander, and sinne the groslier. Thus they themselues write, and therefore I wonder how the same men should dare to allow that which in their own consciences they condemne; or nou­rish that in the people, which they confesse to bee a sinne, a wound, and disease of the soule, and the way to perdition. I know not how they will distinguish and shift off that sayingRom. 14. 32. of Saint Paul: Blessed is he that condemneth not himselfe, in [Page 348] that which hee alloweth: vnlesse it bee either by saying, that they condemne not ignorance in all, but onely in the Lay people: as if Lay people had not souls to saue aswel as Priests: Or that they allow of it, not simply in regard of it selfe, but in respect to a further good, to wit, the increase of deuotion: as if euill were to be done, that good might come thereof; which Saint Paul giueth a God forbid vnto, and sayth, that theirRom. 3. 8. damnation is iust, that are of that minde. I leaue therefore this first proposition, confirmed by Scripture, reason, Fathers, and their owne Doctours, and come to the second, wherein out of their owne grounds, they shall bee conuinced of this grosse impiety.

6. That the Romish Religion doth nourish and maintaineMinor. most grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people, and take from them the key of knowledge: First, their owne confessions: Secondly, their doctrines: And thirdly, the fruits and effects of both in the whole rabble of their multitude, Priests, and people shall euince. For their confession. The Rhemists doe plainely confesse, that knowledge in things wee Rhem. Annotat. in 1. Cor. 14. & Luk. 12. 11. pray for, is not required of Christians, but that ignorance is to bee preferred before it: and that ability to professe the particulars of our faith, is not necessary, no; when possibly we are to dye in the de­fence of the same faith. How contrary is this to that which Saint Peter teacheth, that eueryman be ready to giue an answere of the hope that is in him? Hosius saith, that to know nothing, is to know all things, and ignorance of most things, is best of all. Ioh. 17. 3. How contrary to that which our Sauiour teacheth, This is e­ternall life, to know thee, and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ? Hos. contra pro­legom. Brent. l. 3 page 116. St [...]piyl. Apolog. part. 1. pag. 53. Pigh. Hierarch. lib. 1. cap. 5. Iacob de Graph. decis. part. 1. l. 1. cap. 26. nu. 34. Antonm. part. 1. tit. 5. cap. 2. § 1. The same Hosius, with Stephylus, and others, commends the Colliers faith to be the onely faith, whereby euery vnlearned man may trye the spirits, resist the Deuill, iudge of the right sense of Scriptures, and discerne true doctrine from false, &c. And what was the Colliers faith? Mary, being at the point of death, and tempted of the Deuill, answered, I beleeue and dye in the faith of Christs Church. Being againe demanded, what the faith of Christs Church was, answered, that faith that I hold. And thus hee beleeued as the Church beleeued, and the [Page 349] Church as he, and yet he neither knew what the Church, nor himselfe beleeued. This is a braue faith, and worthy to bee canonized to all posterity, for conquering the Deuill. But what if the Deuill departed from the Collier, not because hee was scarred with his bugbare faith, but because he perceiued him safe enough intangled in his snare, and so needed not to tempt him any more, being already sure enough his owne? Where was his faith then? Sure I am, it is farre vnlike to that faith which the Scripture speaketh of, which is often called by the name of knowledge, and not of ignorance, as Esay 53. 11. Iohn 17. 3.

7. Againe, another affirmeth plainely, to wit, Linwood Linwood in glos. in c. ignor. de sum. trinitat. their Lawyer, that for simpler people it is sufficient to beleeue the articles of the, faith implicuè: that is, confusedly, and infolded­ly, and not distinctly, and plainely: as a bottome of yarne fol­ded together, which lieth in a small compasse, and not raueled out at the length, that it may bee seene and discerned in eue­ry part. And their Angelicall Doctour, Aquinas, compareth Aquin. 2. 2. q. 2. art. 6. Gods children to asses, and their teachers to oxen (because it is said in the first Chapter of Iob, that the oxen did plow, and the asses fed by them) & that it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere vnto their superiours. And in the same place, hee concludeth, that a man is bound to know no more expli­citely, but the Aritcles of the faith. As for all other doctrines of Religion conteined in Scripture, it is enough to beleeue them implicitely. And againe in another place hee sayth, thatIdem 2. 2. q. 82 art. 3 knowledge doth occasionally hinder deuotion, and therfore, that simple men and women, that are voyd of knowledge, are for the most part most inclined to deuotion. But I confesse, he speaketh this of such knowledge as is not sanct fied, but puffeth vp: how be it hee should then haue ascribed the impediment of deuo­tion, vnto the pride that accompanieth knowledge, and not to knowledge. Hence grew that notorious celebrated pro­uerbe of the Romish Synagogue, that Ignorance is the mother of deuotion. And it goeth for currant amongst them all, as yet vncontrolled. But how opposite is the very sound there­of, to that which holy Scripture teacheth, that ignorance is the [Page 350] mother of errour, and of folly, Prou. 7. 7. and of destruction, Mat. 22. 37. Hos. 2. 6. Thus wee haue their open confession: and what should follow, but their open condemnation?

8. But peraduenture the Iury requireth fuller euidence: let them list therefore to their doctrines: diuers whereof ei­ther directly maintaine ignorance, or at least by necessary con­sequence driue thereunto: and they are such, as are not the particular opinions of priuate men, but the approoued do­ctrines of their Church; so that a man cannot bee an entyre Romanist, but he must needes subscribe vnto them; and sub­scribing vnto them, must also needs confesse, that that mon­strous ignorance which is in the Church of Rome, doth issue out of their corrupt fountaine. To come therefore vnto them.

9. The first doctrine that breedeth and nourisheth igno­rance1. amongst them, is their locking vp the Scripture in an vnknowne tongue, that the common people, being ignorant of the learned tongues, may not be able to read them, much lesse to vnderstand them to their comfort: which that is so, hath beene partly declared already, and may further bee de­monstrated: for Bellarmine affirmeth, that it is not necessary Bell. de verbo Dei. lib. 2. cap. 15 for the Scripture to be translated into our Mother tongue. And Azorius, another Iesuite, going a step further, saith, that it is Azor. Instit. moral. l. 8. c. 26. not expedient for the sacred volumes to be translated into Mother tongues, because thereby the vnitie of the faithfull should be de­trimented, and diuers causes of errors and heresies would spring vp. And Salmeron, a third Iesuite, descending yet a stayreSalmer. com. in 1. Cor. 14. lower, saith, that the translation of the Scripture should be onely tillinguis, of three tongues, that is, Hebrew, Greeke, and La­tine, in honour of the Trinitie. Or, as another saith, Because th [...]se three tongues were onely sanctified vpon the Crosse. Here­vpon the Councill of Trent decreeth, the olde vulgar Latine Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. decret. 2. Translation of the Bible to be onely authenticall, and alone to bee vsed in all publike Lectures, Disputations, Preachings, and ex­positions. And though Pope Pius Quartus forbade onely (as Bellarmine saith) such to read the Scripture, as had not licenceBell. de verbo Dei. lib. 2. c. 15. thereunto giuen them by their Priest or Confessor, to wit, such as could receiue no damage, but profit by their reading: [Page 351] yet Pope Clement the eighth, as another Iesuite confesseth,Azor. Instit. moral. l. 8. c. 26. tooke away all faculty of giuing licence to any to read the Scripture, or to retaine with them the common Bibles, or any parts of the Old and New Testament in the Mother tongues: so that (as wofull experience hath taught) it was in times past in this Land, and is now in those places where the blou­die Inquisition is exercised, a sufficient marke of an Heretike, and cause of fire and faggot, to bee found with a translated Bible in their houses or hands.

10. This is their doctrine, which how it ingendreth and nourisheth ignorance, who seeth not? seeing first it locks vp the fountayne of knowledge, that few or none of the com­mon sort can drinke of the waters thereof: cleane contrary to that famous saying of learned Origene, who comparethOrig. in Mat. 4. contra Celsum. the Scripture to Iacobs Well: where not onely Iacob and his Sonnes, that is, the Learned; but also the Cattell and the Sheepe, that is, the rude and the ignorant doe drinke and refresh them­selues: but these men barre out the poore sheepe, and driue them away from the waters of life, to no other end, as it may be thought, but that they should pine away with thirst, and liue and dye in blindnesse and ignorance. For if all sound and true knowledge is to be found in holy Scripture, and therein is the whole counsell and will of God reuealed vnto vs, so farre foorth as it concerneth our saluation, it being the Epistle Greg. Epist. 84. of the great Iehouah to his poore Subiects, to enforme them of his will and pleasure, how should they possibly clime to this true and sauing knowledge, who are debarred from the place and meanes where it is to found and had, and not permitted to reade this Letter, or heare it read vnto them? contrary to that doctrine of Nazianzene, who saith, that all Christians Nazianz. hom. 4. Dom. Epiphan. ought to come to Church, and there read themselues, or if they be not able, heare others read vnto them the word of God.

11. If they reply, and say, that it is enough for them to know the Traditions of the Church: I answere, that if there were as certaine ground for their Traditions, to prooue them the word of God, as there is of the Scripture, then this allega­tion might carry some shew of reason: but the vncertainty, nouelty, [Page 352] mutability, and absurdity of many of them, doe plainely shew, that it is no safe course to repose the strength of our saluation vpon them, but rather to flye to that founda­tion which is immooueable. If they say, that the people must be content for their knowledge to depend vpon their Priests, and to draw it from their lippes, and so by that meanes may attayne a sufficient measure of instruction: I answere, that the Priests are for the most part as ignorant as the people, as shall be shewed afterward: and if any be furnished with gifts, yet they seldome teach the people; and when they doe, they preach, in stead of Gods word, their owne inuentions, idle tales, and meere tales, and fables: witnesse Cornelius Agrippa, Agrip. de vanit. cap. Theolog. Dante. canto. 29. and Dante their Poet, two no great enemies, but fast friends to Popish Religion. Now if a man should bee constrained to sup vp whatsoeuer euery sottish Priest, or idle Fryer, or craf­tie Iesuite doth belch foorth, without examining, doubtlesse hee should sucke downe much poyson, in stead of wholsome iuyce. If they say, that there is multiplicity of good Bookes written to this end, to instruct the people in the grounds of Religion, and to stirre them vp vnto godlines and deuotion: I answere, there is indeede a great number of such Bookes, which are so farre from gendring sound knowledge, that they are no better then baits of Antichrist, seruing to allure men, vnder shew of deuotion, vnto Idolatry, and Apostacie from God: for if they were sound and true, why should Gods Booke, which without all question is most sound, bee prohi­bited, and they admitted? Why is it not lawfull to examine them by that rule? and why should all Bookes else, which any thing make against their Religion, be suppressed? and by great penalties forbidden? Surely this sheweth, that all their Bookes of deuotion are but rotten stuffe, and meere hypo­criticall deuices to deceiue the simple.

12. Lastly, if they say, that all our translations are false and erronious; and therefore that our Bibles are not the word of God: I answere, that indeede it is impossible to haue a Translation so exact & perfect, that no fault nor imperfection shuld be found therin: neuertheles, the chief faults in our tran­slations [Page 353] are, for the most part, in respect of proprietie of words and phrases, which are nothing repugnant to holy doctrine or good life, and not in any materiall or substantiall poynt of faith: and those also are not frequent▪ but heere and there dispersed, which can no waies hinder the profite to be gathe­red by the rest of the Scripture: and if for some corruption in translations the Bible should not bee read, then none but the originall Hebrew and Greeke should bee in vse; for all translations are imperfect: yea, their so much extolled vul­gar, authorized by the Councill of Trent, wherein the Di­uinesFran. Luc. prae­fat. in annot. in bibl. Amand. Polan. in Didascal. pag. 4. of Louane obserued many errors: and Isidorus Clarius, a Spanish Monke, professed that hee found eight thousand fau'ts, though for his plaine dealing hee was plagued by the Inquisitors: and after that it was decreed authenticall by the Councill, (a thing worth the noting) yet it was corrected and castigated, by the authority and commaundement of sixe Popes successiuely. Nay, the Hebrew and Greeke copies themselues should not bee permitted; for euen they, if wee will beleeue the Romanists, are full of corruptions: but asBell▪ de verb [...] Dei. lib. 2. cap. 2. & 7. Greg. de Valent. analys. l. 18. c. 1. Pintus. com. in Dan. 7. & 13. Sacrab [...]s. Ies. in defen. decret. Con. T [...]i [...]. p. 1. c. 3▪ R [...]emens. annot▪ in praefat, in nou▪ testam. Bellarmine saith of the corruptions in the Hebrew text, so wee may truely of the imperfections in our translations, Non sunt tanti momenti, vt inijs qu [...] ad fidem & bonos mores pertinent, sa­crae Scripturae integritas desideretur: that is, they are not of such moment, that they can hinder the integrity of the Scrip­ture in those things which pertaine to faith & good manners.

13. Moreouer, besides all this, it is no maruell if they con­tend for their vulgar Latine Bible, that it should be onely au­thenticall, seeing many Romish errors are thereby maintai­ned, which in the truth of y^e [...] originall haue no colour of defence. And so this doctrine doth not onely vphold igno­rance in the simple, but also herefie among the learned. As for example, to prooue the intercession and patronage of the Virgine Mary, they alledge that text of Genesis, falsely tran­slated,Gen. 3. 15. Ipsa conteret caput Serpentis: She shall bruise the Ser­pents head: whereas the Hebrew truth hath most euidently, He, or It, meaning the Seede of the woman, and not Shee. Againe, to prooue their Masse Sacrifice, they alledge that of [Page 354] Gen. 14. 18. Melchizedek obtulit panem & vinum: erat enim Gen. 14. 18. Obtulit. Protulit. sacerdos: whereas in the Hebrew text is no word that signi­fieth, to offer: but to bring foorth; and the coniunction cau­sall is also wanting. They extenuate originall sinne by the corrupt translation of that text, Gen. 8. 21. For whereas in theGen. 8. 21. originall it is, Figmentum cordis est tantum malum: The frame of the heart is onely euill: their translation hath, The cogi­tation of mans heart is prore vnto euill. To prooue their inuocation of Saints, they obiect that of Iobs, thus translated, Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuertere: which in the Hebrew isIob. 5. 1. not an affirmatiue proposition, but an Ironical Interrogation: thus: To which of the Saint▪ wilt thou turne? To proue that no man can be sure of the remission of his sinnes and saluati­on, they alledge that corrupted text, Eccles. 9. 1. Nescit ho­mo Eccles. 9. 1. vtrum amore vel odio dignus sit: whereas in the originall, it is nothing but thus, No man knoweth loue or hatred, all things are before him. That their Church cannot erre, they labour to prooue by the promise of our Sauiour, Ioh. 14. 26. whereIoh. 14. 26. their translation thus speaketh, Spiritus sanctus suggeret vo­bis omnia quae [...]un (que) dixer [...] vobis: but in the originall it is, [...], quaecun (que) dixi vobis: Whatsoeuer I haue told you. That Matrimony is a Sacrament, they prooue by that place, Ephes. 5. 32. where their translation hath, a Sacrament, forEphes. 5. 32. a Mysterie. So for their Merite of works, they produce, Heb. 13. where, in their translation, the word Merite is vsed, whichHeb. 13. is not extant in the Greeke. So to prooue, that after Baptisme there remaine no Relikes of sinne, they vse that text, Heb. 9.Heb. 9. 28. 28. Christus semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda pec­cata: now where all is drawne out, there nothing remaineth: and yet in the originall there is no such word. Lastly, the Councill of Trent it selfe, to prooue that the Church may di­spense with the Sacraments, contrary to Christs institution, and alter them, abuseth that text, 1. Cor. 4. 1. where the [...]. Cor. 4. 1. Ministers are called, Dispensatores mysteriorum Dei: whereas the Greeke word, [...] importeth no such matter. Thus wee [...]ee great cause why they should stand vpon this vulgar Latine onely, because it affoords vnto them such pregnant [Page 355] proofes for the defence of their grosse errors. It defends them and their errors, therefore they haue reason to defend it. And thus by forbidding the Scriptures to bee read of the people, they multiply ignorance; and by allowing onely their Latine translation for authenticall, they hatch heresie.

14. Secondly, their doctrine which commandeth Prayers2. to be made publikely and priuately in an vnknowne tongue, tendeth to the same end: for though, touching priuate prayers, they agree not amongst themselues; some affirming, that the people ought not to say their Pater noster, A [...]e Ma­ria, Ledes. Ies. lib. de qua lingua. scrip. leg. cap. 3. Rhem. in 1. Cor. 14. pag. 461. Salmer. com. in 1. Cor. 16. dis. 30. Azor. insti [...]. mo­ral. l. 8. c. 26. Coster. Enchirid. cap. 19. and Mattens in any tongue but the Latine, because this hath beene the ancient custome of the Church, as they pre­tend. Others, that it is lawfull to pray in our natiue tongues: but yet if we doe pray in Latine, it is not vnfruitfull. Not­withstanding, their continuall practice sheweth their most ap­prooued opinion: for among them all, you shall hardly finde one in an age that vseth any other but Latine prayers: but as for publike prayers in the Church, it is the doctrine of the Councill of Trent, armed with a curse, that no part of the Diuine Seruice and publike Leiturgie bee celebrated in aConcil. Trident. Sess. 22. c. 8. & 9. Bell. de verb. De [...]. lib. 2. cap. 16 knowne tongue. Now how can this but noozle the people in ignorance, when they are taught to babble out in their de­uotions, like Parrats, without vnderstanding what they say? Surely this must needes bee a blinde deuotion, and an igno­rantzeale, when the tongue shall pray, or rather prate, and the heart not vnderstand what it vttereth: for if true deuo­tion be a religious offering vp of the whole man, both body and soule, and euery facultie and part of both to God, by way of spirituall sacrifice; then certainely that cannot bee true deuotion, but blinde delusion, when the affection and the tongue shall bee lifted vp in prayer, and in the meane while the vnderstanding shall be idle, not knowing what the affection and tongue doth: seeing the proper worke of the intellectiue part of the soule is to know and vnderstand, which by this meanes it is depriued of. And this is that which both Aquinas, their Angelicall Doctor, purposely confesseth, and Rabbi Bellarmine also himselfe, though vnawares: for the [Page 356] one saith, that he which vnderstandeth not what he prayeth, is de­priued Aquin. com. in 1. Cor. 14. Bell. de verb. Dei. lib. 2. cap. 16 of the fruit of his deuotion: and the other, that except the prayer be vnderstood, no consolation at all can be reaped there­by. Ignorance therefore must needes bee cherished by this doctrine, seeing the vnderstanding, which is the seat of knowledge, is muffled, and the best fruit that can arise hence­from, is blinde zeale, and ignorant deuotion: by which theAct. 3. 17. Rom. 11. 2. Ioh. 16. 2. Iewes crucified Christ, & the Gentiles persecuted the Church of Christ, and taught, that in so doing, they did God good seruice: for deuotion without zeale, is like an Arrow shot out of a childs Bow, which falleth to the ground without do­ing hurt or good: and zeale without knowledge, is like a Shippe carryed with full winde and displayed Sailes, without a Pilot to sterne and guide it in the right course.

15. Thus for the maine doctrine. Now the accessarie at­tending vpon it, is more dangerous then the maine it selfe: for they are taught, not onely thus to pray, but that these prayers are meritorious of saluation; and that hee which saith a cer­taine number of them, shall haue thus many dayes, and thus many yeeres pardon: as 3000. dayes, for saying a short pray­er in the Primer: ten thousand dayes for saying fiue Pater nosters before the Vernacle: twenty thousand dayes, for say­ingNicol. Salic. An­tidot. animae. Salisbur. pri­mer. horae bea­tae Maria. Euang. Roman. a short prayer at the Leuation: yea, a hundred yeeres, for saying our Ladyes Psalter euery Saturday: yea, fiue hundred yeeres for saying a short prayer which Saint Gregory made; and a number such like, as hath beene before sufficiently dis­couered. Now if pardon of sinnes and saluation may be me­rited by mumbling vp euery day on their Beades these short and vncouth prayers, what need any seeke for further know­ledge in the word of God? If these bee sufficient (as they make the people beleeue) then all further instruction must needs be thought vnnecessary: and so it cannot choose but follow, that a deluge of blindnesse and ignorance must needs ouerflow the world, as wofull experience hath taught to bee true in those places where the Romish Religion preuaileth.

16. Thirdly, they teach, that Images and Pictures are Lay mens Bookes, wherein they must read, and with the which [Page 357] they must content themselues, without searching at all into the Booke of God. This doctrine taught Gulielmus Peral­dus Perald. Sum vir­tut. & vit. tom. 1. cap. 3. three hundred yeeres since, saue that hee ioyned the Scripture and Images together; for thus he writeth, As the Scriptures be the Bookes of the Clergie: so Images and the Scrip­ture are the Bookes of Lay men: where hee equalleth a dumbe and dead Picture, to the speaking and liuely Scriptures: the worke of man, to the Word of God. But Loelius Zechius, aLoel. Zecchius Sum. mor. Theol. & cas. consc. t. 2. c. 90. art. 18. Feuardent. lib. hom. pag. 16. 17. hom. 2. learned and famous Diuine of latter time, goeth further, and saith, that Images are the onely Bookes for them that bee vnlearned, to draw them to faith and knowledge, and imitation of diuine matters. Yea, another Fryer, that liueth in Paris at this day, or at least, was aliue very lately, goeth yet a degree further, and affirmeth, that Lay men may more easily learne di­uine mysteries by contemplation of Images, then out of the Booke of God: and all these are (as they stile them) most Catholike and holy Bookes. But what should I search further into these petty Disciples? whereas the grand Doctor himselfe hath this proposition in expresse words, Meliùs interdum docet pi­ctura, Bell. de Imag. lib. 2. cap. 10. quàm scriptura: A Picture doth better instruct some­times, then the Scripture.

16. This is their Doctrine. Now what fruits doth it bring foorth? Surely the best fruit is ignorance, a worse then that error, and the worst of all superstition and and idolatry: for howsoeuer, we deny not that there may be an historicall and ciuill vse of Pictures, either to put vs in minde of our absent friends, or to represent some obseruable history and notable deede done, or to stirre vs vp to the imitation of the vertues of Godly men and women: yet we constantly affirme, that to make them the Bookes of Lay men, either to be instructed by them alone, without the Booke of God, or to finde better and more perfect instruction in them then in it, is to inwrap the people in a cloude of foggie and mistie ignorance, and to hood-winke their eyes, that they should not see the bright shining light of truth: for where is all sound & sauing know­ledge to bee found, but in the holy Scripture? whither doth our Sauiour Christ send his Disciples, but vnto them? he doth [Page 358] not say vnto them, Gaze vpon Pictures, for they be they that testifie of me: and, In them yee shall finde eternall life: but, Search the Scriptures, for, &c. And the Prophet Dauid, that it is the Law of God that giueth wisedome vnto the simple; and Psal. 19. 7. 8. that conuerteth the soule, and giueth light vnto the eyes: and not the Pictures of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, or of any of the Prophets. And therefore though a man may be instructed by a Picture, touching a thing done; yet most certaine it is, that more excellent, and more perfect instruction is gotten by the Scripture: for let an vnskilfull man returne neuer so often to the beholding of his Picture, it will alwaies represent the same thing vnto him; and if any scruple or doubt remaine in his minde, it can answere nothing for the explication there­of: whereas in holy Scripture, that which is obscure in one place, is explained in another; and that which in one Chapter we cannot conceiue, in the next following it may be is so cleerely set downe, that a childe may discerne it with­out erring: so that as a man may discouer his meaning by signes and becks, yet it is not so effectuall as if he vtter it by word of mouth: so Pictures may teach, but yet Scripture teacheth more fully and effectually. And therefore to tye the people to these dumbe Bookes, and discharge them from searching into the Booke of God, is to depriue them of the chiefest meanes of knowledge, and so to foster them in igno­rance.

17. But yet this is not all. For besides that it occasioneth ignorance, an Image also is a teacher of lyes, as the ProphetHabak. 2. 18. Habakuk calleth it, and a mother, and a nurse of superstition, and Idolatry. For first, how many Pictures are there in their Churches, of Monsters, and miracles that neuer were? As of Saint George, killing the Dragon. Saint Christopher, carrying Christ vpon his shoulder, ouer the Ford. Saint Catherine tor­mented vpon the wheele, and disputing with the Philoso­pher. Saint Dunstane holding the Diuell by the nose, or lip, with a paire of Pincers. Saint Denis carrying his owne head in his hands, being strooke off. Saint Dominick burning the De­uils fingers with a Candle, which hee made him to hold, will [Page 359] he, nill hee. And an infinite number such like, which either neuer were extant in the world, or were not such, neither euer did worke such feates as are represented by their Pictures. Two Pictures I cannot passe ouer in silence, which I haue seen and obserued with my owne eyes: the one at the Church of Ramsey, in Huntington-shire, neere adioyning vnto that, quondam a famous and rich Abbay. In this Church, in the lowest window, in the right Ile, is a picture of a paire of Bal­lance, in one skole whereof is the Deuill, and in the other, a woman, and the woman is more sinfull then the Deuill, ouer­weighing him euen to the ground. Behold, a Lay mans book, whereat wise men may wonder, fooles may laugh, and wo­men may bee inraged, and euery one may read the folly and prophanenes of those times. Sure I am, heere is little instructi­on for the soules health. The other is in the Cloister window of the cathedrall Church of Peterborough, where is painted out at large the history of Christs passion. In one place where­of, our Sauiour Christ sitteth with his twelue Apostles, eating his last Passeouer: which because it was vpon the Thursday night before Easter, commonly called Maundey Thursday: therefore they picture before him in a dish, not a Lambe as the truth was, but because it was Lent, (O miserable blind­nesse) three pickerels: so that now the Paschall Lambe is tur­ned into a Paschall pickerell, and all forsooth, to nourish in the people, the superstition of the Lent fast. For if they should see Christ eating flesh in Lent, what an incouragement would this be (thought they) for the people to doe the like?

18. And thus Images may wel be called Laymens bookes. But what bookes, you see, euen such as teach lyes, and super­stition, & no sound and true instruction. I could heere relate how that Saint Dunstane put life (by a trunke forsooth) into the Image of the Virgin Mary, and made her speake against the marriage of Priests, when that controuersie could no o­therwise bee decided. And how the Image of the CrucifixeBez. de sig. lib. 14 cap 3. vsed to speake to Saint Francis, to the end, to giue authority to the order of his fraternity: and that vpon two Images in a Church at Venice, the one of Saint Dominick, the other of [Page 360] Saint Paul, were written these words: On Pauls: By this man Antonin. part. 3. tit. 23. c. 1. §. 1. you may come to Christ. On Dominicks: But by this man you may doe it easilier: because Pauls doctrine led but to faith, and the obseruation of the Commandements: but Dominicks taught the obseruation of Councils, which is the easier way. All this, and asmuch more might be produced to this purpose. But I con­clude the point with the censure and confession of their owneGuliel. Miniat. Episcop. Ration. Diuin. Cassand. consult. pag. 176. Cassander, who out of the writings of William Bishop of Mini­atum, concludeth with him, that as if officious lyes should bee added to the holy Scriptures, there would remaine no authority nor weight in them. So, no errour nor falshood should be tolerated in Images and Pictures in the Church, seeing that an errour not resisted, is receiued for a trueth. And in the same place, the same Cassander doth bewaile the abuse of Images in the Church of Rome, affirming that superstition was too much pam­pered thereby, & that Christians were nothing behind the Heathō, in the extreme vanity of framing, adorning, and worshipping of I­mages. Thus farre Cassander: out of which we may perceiue the chiefe lessons that are learned out of these Lay bookes, to wit, ignorance, superstition, and Idolatry. And therefore▪ no maruaile if all these vices raigne in the midst of their Church, as plentifully, as amongst the Heathen themselues.

19. Fourthly, they deliuer for sound doctrine, that where­as Saint Iohn sayth, that they which haue the anointing of the ho­ly Ghost, know all things: Hee meaneth not, that euery one should haue all knowledge in himselfe personally, but that e­uery one that is of that happy society, to which Christ pro­misedRhemist. in Ioh. [...]. 20. and gaue the holy Ghost, is partaker of all other mens graces and gifts in the same holy Spirit to saluation. And thus whereas Saint Iohn meaneth, that euery true Christian, both by the outward preaching of the word, and by the inward vnction of the Spirit, hath a distinct knowledge of all things necessary to saluation: They say, that it is sufficient, if he be partaker of another mans knowledge, though he be empty & voyde himselfe. Then which, what can be a greater nourisher of ignorance, and quencher of knowledge? For if I may bee saued by anothers mans knowledge and faith; And if it bee not required that I should know al things necessary to salua­tion [Page 361] in my owne person, but may haue a share of another mans knowledge, what need I greatly seeke for knowledge my selfe? And why may I not repose the hope of my saluati­on vpon other men? And heereby wee may obserue their grosse absurdity, In the case of iustification they teach, that wee are not made righteous by the righteousnesse of Christ, imputed vnto vs, though hee bee the head of the body of the Church, and the Spirit that animateth it, proceedeth from him; and yet heere they say, that a man may be made wise and knowing, by the knowledge of other their fellow members in the same body, abiding in the vnity of Christs Church. What is this, but to aduance the members aboue the head, or at least, to forget themselues, not caring what they say, so that they maintaine the cause they haue in hand?

20. I, but Saint Augustine sayth, If thou loue vnity: for thee August. tract. in Ioh. 32. Idem in Psal. 130. also hath he, whosoeuer hath any thing in it: it is thine which I haue: it is mine which thou hast. And againe in another place hee sayth: When Peter wrought miracles, he wrought them for me, because I am in that body, in which Peter wrought them. In which body, though the eye seeth, and not the eare: and the eare heareth, and not the eye: yet the eye heareth in the eare, and the eare seeth in the eye, &c. Therefore, all the grace and know­ledge that is in any other of Gods Saints, either liuing, or dead, is ours by participation: And so, that which was suffi­cient in them, for their saluation, is also enough for vs, for ours, though wee haue little, or none of our owne. Thus rea­son our Rhemists, in the place before quoted. But I answere first, with our reuerend, learned countrey-man, Doctor Fulk, that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth that place of Saint Iohn, of an actuall, and personall knowledge, inspired by the holy Ghost, concurring with the outward ministery of the Church, and not of any generall knowledge infused into the Church, to bee transfused, and dispersed among the members, by an imputatiue participation. Secondly, if a man may know by a­nother mans knowledge, why may not a man bee righteous by anothers righteousnesse? And if the knowledge of our fel­low members may bee imputed to vs, that wee thereby may bee saide to know, why may not the iustice of our head bee so [Page 362] imputed vnto vs, that thereby wee may bee made iust? These things are so paralell, that the one being granted, the other needs must follow. Thirdly, and lastly, that communion which is betwixt the members of a body, either naturall or mysticall, is not an actuall translation of gifts from one to another: but either a participation in the fruit of those gifts, or a genera­ting of the like in others, by doctrine, example, exhortation, prayers, and such like meanes. And so wee may truely say, that euery one that is in the body of Christ, reapeth fruit and benefit, by all the graces and gifts that euer haue, or shall be­long to any member thereof, though not for merit, yet for comfort, instruction, edification, and increase of grace. And a­gaine, as one candle lighteth another, and one steele sharpe­neth, and whetteth another: So wisedome and grace is deri­ued from one to another; either by naturall commerce of speech, or patterne of example. Thus much did Saint Augu­stine intend, and no more: and therefore, it neuer came into his minde to thinke, (as these idle braines would make him) that the knowledge which resided in the Saints of God, is actually in all Gods Children, or that they are partakers of their gifts and graces, to their saluation. For he that will be saued, must beleeue for himselfe, and know for himselfe, and liue godly for himselfe. If hee doe all these things by a proxy, hee must also goe to Heauen by a proxy, and not by himselfe. This do­ctrine therefore is a manifest breeder and maintainer of such grosse ignorance, as both Saint Augustine and all other ho­ly men haue alwayes condemned for a sinne.

21. A fift doctrine from whence ignorance springeth and ariseth, is their prohibiting of Lay men to dispute, touch­ing matters of faith, and that vnder paine of excommunicati­on. This Nauarre propoundeth as the doctrine of theirNauar. Enchir. in 1. praecept. cap. 11. Aquin. 2. 2 q. 10 art. 7. [...]ell. de verb Dei Interpret l. 3. c 8 Church, neither is it contradicted by any other. Aquinas go­eth further, and sayth, that it is vnlawfull to dispute of matters of faith, in the presence of those that are ignorant and simple. And Bellarmine taketh away from the people, all power of iudging of their Pastours doctrine, saying, that they must be­leeue whatsoeuer they teach, except they broach some new doctrin, [Page 363] which hath not beene heard of in the Church before. And if they doe so, yet they must iudge of them no otherwise, then by re­ferring them to their ordinary Pastour, which is the Pope, to whose definitiue sentence they must yeeld full consent, with­outIdem de Cleri. l. 1. cap. 7. further examination. Nay, he most shamefully affirmeth, that if their ordinary Pastour teach a falshood, and another that is not their Pastour, teach the contrary truth: yet the peo­ple ought to follow their Pastour erring, rather then the o­ther telling the truth. And thus the poore people must rely al their knowledge vpon their Pastours, and may not in any case examine and try their Spirits, whether they be of God, or no, cleane contrary to the Precept of our Sauior, Ioh. 5. 39. Search Ioh. 5. 39 Act. 17 the Scriptures: And to the practice of the Bereans, who exa­mined Pauls doctrine by the Scriptures: And to the counsell of Saint Iohn to all, To try the Spirits. Now, who seeth not thatIoh. 5. 1 this confirmeth, and cherisheth the people in ignorance? For if they may not dispute about any matter of faith themselues, nor heare others that are learned so to doe, nor examine the doctrine of their ordinary Pastours, but beleeue whatsoeuer they teach, bee it true, or false: what remaineth, but that they should lye, and tumble in ignorance, and superstition, seeing the ordinary meanes of getting knowledge, and fin­ding out the truth, is taken from them? For when they are bound to swallow downe all the doctrines on the one side, and may not so much as heare, or read the reasons of the o­ther, nor weigh them together in the Ballance of iudge­ment, how is it possible that they should euer finde out the truth?

22. Wee confesse with Saint Paul, that the weake are not to bee admitted to controuersies of disputation. But what dispu­tations?Rom. 14. 1 Mary, about needlesse questions, touching matters in­different, as meat and drinke, and difference of dayes, as the Apostle explaineth himselfe in the same Chapter: Or foolish, and vnlearned questions that ingender strife, and are not profita­ble 2. Tim. 2. 23 1. Tim. 1. 4 to edification. But if the disputation bee concerning mat­ters of saluation, and disquisition of a necessary truth, then are none to bee excluded either from reasoning, or hearing. For [Page 364] Saint Peter requireth of euery man, that hee be able to giue an 1. Pet. 3. 15. answere to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in him. And therefore to dispute: for what is to dispute, but to giue a reason? And our Sauiour disputed with the Pharises and Sadduces, in the audience of the people, touching the re­surrection, and the greatest Commandement of the Law, and his humane, and diuine nature. And so likewise did Saint Paul with the Grecians and with the Iewes, conuincingMat. 22. 23. Act. 9. 29. Act. 17. 17. Act. 19. 8. 9. them by arguments out of the Scripture, That Iesus was the Christ, and that there was no way to saluation, but by saith in his Name. From such disputations as these, none was debar­red; but euery one was, and is bound to seeke a firme resolu­tion, that hee bee not carried about with euery winde of do­ctrine. True it is, euery simple man and woman ought not presently to rush out into arguments of disputation, nor too peremptorily to talke of deep mysteries in Religion: for then it may bee said vnto them, as Saint Basill is reported to haueTheodoret. bis [...]o. l. 4. c. 17. answered the Emperors Cook, Tuum est de pulmentis cogitare, non diuina dogmata concoquere: It is thy part to looke to thy sauces, and dainty dishes, and not to boyle (in thy shallow wit) heauenly mysteries. And therefore, they must, as Saint Ierome speaketh, not lacerare Scripturam, teare in pieces theHierom. in epist. ad Paulin. Scriptures, by their ignorant interpretations, and applications of it: Nor docere antequam didicerunt: Teach others, before they haue learned themselues: But like Pythagoras schollers, keepe silence long, till they be wel grounded in knowledge: neuer­thelesse, all this while, they must not be barred from hearing others discourse of these high matters; nor from reading their arguments, pro & contra: nor at length also, when they are come to some perfection, from arguing, and reasoning with the aduersary: For this is the high way to knowledge and vnderstanding, the Lord hauing promised to all those that pray vnto him, and doe his will, whether they bee Priests, or people, the illumination of his Spirit, and power to discerne of doctrines. They that deny therefore this liberty vnto the people, doe barre them out from all sound knowledge, andIoh. 7. 17. & 16. 13. imprison them in a gaole of ignorance, blindnesse, and super­stition.

[Page 365]23. Lastly, their braue doctrine, touching Implicite faith, doth tend to the same end, and bring forth the fame effect, and that more effectually then any of the rest. For thus they teach, that it is not necessary for a Layman, to know anymore, by Molan. tract. 3. c. 27. ant. 15. Bonauent. Durand. a distinct knowledge, saue some few capitall heads of Religion, as, that there is one God, and three persons. That Christ is come in the flesh, and redeemed vs from our sinnes, and shall com againe to iudge the quicke and the dead, &c. As for the rest, it is suffici­ent to giue assent vnto the Church, and beleeue as it belee­ueth, though they know not what it beleeueth; yea, that they are not bound expresly to beleeue all the Articles of the A­postles Creed, which is notwithstanding nothing els but a briefe summe and Epitome of Christian Religion, and one of the principall grounds of the Catechisme. And this is the Colliers faith spoken of before, so much commended by ma­ny of their greatest Clarks. Now how can this but nourish most groffe ignorance? For when the people are perswaded that such a short scantling of knowledge is sufficient, and that it is enough for their saluatiō, if in a reuerence to the Church, they beleeue as it beleeueth: what reason haue they either to labour to get any further knowledge, or to increase and grow vp in that which they haue attained vnto? Surely, in matters of Religion, so great is the auersenesse of our nature, that wee are all so farre from endeuouring to get more then is needfull; that few seeke for so much. And therefore they that bound our knowledge within so narrow limits, cherish this corruption, and by speaking pleasing things vnto it, lull it asleepe in the bed of ignorance. But in the meane time, how contrary is this to the word of God, let the world indge, seeing the Apostle prayeth for the Colossians, that they might bee ful­filled Col. 1. 10. 11. with the knowledge of Gods will, in all wisedome, and spiri­tuall vnderstanding: and that they might increase in the know­ledge of God: Whereas these fellowes would haue Gods peo­ple to bee empty of knowledge, and in stead of growing, to stand at a stay, resting vpon the supposed knowledge of the Church. And whereas the same Apostle saith vnto the Thes­salonians, I would not haue you ignorant, brethren, speaking in1. Thess. [...]. 13▪ [Page 366] the same place, of very high and deepe mysteries: as the state of the dead, the resurrection and ast iudgement: they on the contrary say to their people, W [...]e would haue you ignorant, brethren. These things are so grosse and shamefull, that if the Church of Rome were not the whore of Babylon, she would blush, that any such imputation should iustly be laid vnto her charge.

24. These bee the Romish doctrines, which directly, and naturally ingender, and maintaine ignorance: and therefore no maruaile, if a flood of ignorance doth ouer-flow the field of their Church, seeing it bursteth forth by so many spowts. Let vs take a view therefore a little of the effects and fruits of these doctrines, both in the Clergie, and the people. Touching the ignorance of the Romish Clergie, what it hath beene in former ages, and is yet at this day, though the Iesuites bragge neuer so much of their new learning, and labour to wipe a­way that staine from their faces, let their owne writers speake. Platina the Popes Secretary thus complaineth of the horriblePlatin. in vit. Marcelli. corruption and ignorance of the Priests in his dayes: Quanta sit auaritia Sacerdotum, &c. How great is the couetousnesse of Priests (sayth he) and especially of those that bee in chiefest au­thority! how great leachery, how great ambition and pompe, how great pride and idlenesse, how great ignorance both of themselues and Christian doctrine, how little Religion, &c! I need not de­clare, when they themselues doe so openly proclaime it, as though they sought praise thereby. This complaint hee maketh in the life of Marcellus the first, and the like in Denis the first: Boniface the fift: Stephen the third, and Gregory the fourth. The like complaint or worse, maketh one Bre­denbachius, Deane of the Church of Mentz, in Germany, inBredenbach. in suae peregrin. hist. the time of Charles the fourth, and yeere of our Lord, 1370. The Law (saith he) is departed from Priests, Counsell from the Elders, Charity from Prelates, Religion from Monks, Discipline from Clerks, Learning from teachers, Study from Schollers, &c. and in the end he bursteth foorth into this ex­clamation, O times! ô manners! most trouble some and misera­ble times! reprobate and wicked manners both of Clergie and [Page 367] people! Mathew Paris saith, that in the time of William theMath. Paris. in Guliel. Conquest. Conqueror, Clerks were so vnlearned in England, that such that vnderstood their Grammar, were a wonderment to their fel­lowes. And for Italy, Espensaeus▪ a learned Bishop, faith, that Espens. com. in Tit. c. 1. & 2. it was told him by an Italian Bishop, that his Countrymen did not studie the Scriptures, but the Ciuill and Canon Lawes, be­cause that was the shortest [...]ut to Bishopricks, Cardinalships, and highest dignities on earth. Touching Spaine, thus complai­nethAluar. Pelag. de planct. Eccles. lib. 2. art. 20. Aluarus Pelagius, that the Bishops there committed thou­sands of soules to some young Nephewes of theirs, to whom a man would bee loth to commit two peares to be kept. And for Germa­nie, let vs heare their owne complaint, that most vsually Bishops Centū grauam. gra. 47. aduanced to the Order of Priesthood, vnlearned Idiots, vnfit, vile, and ridiculous persons. The like might bee showne in all other Countries: but this is sufficient for a taste of the mise­rable ignorance of the Romish Clergie, deriued from their owne confession.