GOD blesse you Father Remigius, I hope you will this day yeeld great comfort to my distressed heart; for I haue often heard, that you are both pro [...]undly learned, and charitably affected to all your Christian neighbours; so as for your great learning you are very able, and for your rare charitie euer ready, to giue good counsell to such, as stand in neede of you: I therefore for Christs sake beseech you, to shew me the ready way to heauen.

To beleeue rightly and liue christianly, isMa [...]. v 14 [...]. Luc 13. v. 24. your very path-way to Heauen: but it is a straight and narrow gate, and few do finde the same.

Alas, my good father, then shall more be damned then saued, God forbid, it should be so.

That which God hath decreed, man cannotMat. 20. [...] ▪ 17. Luc. [...]. v. 24. withstand. Many (saith Christ,) are called, but few are chosen. Striue to enter in at the straight gate; for many will séeke to enter in, and shall not be able. Yet our most mercifull and iust God, will condemne none to eternall death; but for their notorious sinnes, and iust deserts.

We may exclaime with holy Polycar [...]e, ô God, to what a world hast thou reserued vs? &c. Now e­uery [Page 2] one can giue good words, both in the Pulpit and else where; but badder life and wickeder dealing, was neuer more frequent in any towne or City. The Catholi­ques, for good life and meritorious actes, are the mirror of the Christian world.

Whom doe you call Catholikes? I am a Ca­tholique my selfe.

The Pope, his Cardinals, his Monkes, his Fryers, his holy Nunnes, and all such as agree in faith and doctrine with the Church of Rome.

If you speake of Pope Formosus, Pope Iohn degraded him, and brought him to laicall state againe, after he had béene the Bishop of Portua. Hée further tooke him sworne, that hée neither should be Bishop again, not euer returne to the Citie of Rome. Howbeit, Pope Mar­tin absolued him from his oath, and after a few yéeres, he did notonely come to Rome, but there was made the Pope.Pope Ste­phanus a cruell Ty­ [...]nt. If you speake of Pope Stephanus y^• sixt▪ he persecuted Pope Formosus euen after his death. He called a Councell, and disanulled all the decrées of Pope Formosus his predeces­sour. He caused his body to be brought into his Cōsistory, the papall induments to be taken away, a laicall habite to be put on she dead corps, two fingers of his right hand to be cut off; and that done, forsooth, his body to be put againe into the graue. Meane you Pope Sergius the third? he caused Pope Formosus (who now had béen dead almost ten whole yéeres) to be taken out of his tombe, and to be set in a chaire with pontificall attire vpon his backe; that done, he commanded his head to be cut off, and to be cast into their [...]iuer Tyber. Meane you Pope Iohn y^• twelfth? his father Albericus being a man of great power and might, enforced the Nobles to take an oath, that after the death of Pope Ag [...]pitus, they would promote hisPope Iohn a notorious who▪ [...] ▪ mun­ger. sonne Octauianus to the Popedome: The oath was accom­plished, and he was named Iohn. He was a great hunter, [Page 3] and a man of licencious life: he kept women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church, insomuch, that some of the Cardinals wrote to O [...]to then King of the Saxons, to come and besiege Rome, and so to afflict him for his sins. Which the Pope perceiuing, commanded the Cardinals nose to be cut off, that gaue that counsell; and his hand, that wrote the letters Speake you of Pope Boniface the seuenth? he was made Pope by the Romans after theyPope Boni­facea Church rob [...]. had thr [...]t [...]ed Benedictus the sixt: who afterward not able to tarrie in the City, robbed S. Peters Church of all the [...]asure in it, and fled to Constantinople. Means you Pope Benedict the eight? he was seene after his death, as it were corporally riding vpon a blacke horse (the Diuell.) he confessed that he was in great torment, & therefore de­siredPope Ben [...] an extortio­ne [...]. some money to be giuen to the poore, because all that he had giuen the poore aforetime, was gotten by robbery and extortion. Meane you Pope Iohn the woman? shePope Iohn with child. belying her sexe, and clad in mans attire, was with great admiration of her sharpe wit and singular learning, chosen to be the Pope of Rome. But shortly after by the familiar helpe of her beloued companion, she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedome. Meane you Pope Bo­niface the eight? he made a constitution, in which he calledPope Boni­face entred as a Fox, li­ [...]ed as a Wolfe, and died as a Dogge. himselfe both Lord spirituall & Lord temporal of the whole world: whereupon he required Philip the French King, to acknowledg that he held his Kingdom of him: which when the King scorned to doe, he gaue his Kingdome to him thatcouldget it. This Pope entred as a Foxe, reigned as aPope [...]ylu [...] ­ster promi­sed [...]omag [...] to the Deuil. Wolf, and died as Dog. What shal I say of your Monks or Fryers? Pope Siluester the second was first a Monke, a Frēchman borne, Gilbe [...]us by name: he promised homage to the Diuell, so long as he should accompli [...]h his desires: who being very ambitious, did so often expresse his desire to the Diuell, as he made homage to him. He was first made Archbishop of Rhemes; then of Rauennes, at the [Page 4] last Pope of Rome: for the Diuell knowing his ambi­tious minde, brought him to honour by degrées. All this to be most true, these Popish writers of high estéeme e­uen in the Church of Rome (viz. Geniblacensis, Marianus Scotus, Ba [...]holemeus Carranza, Martinus Polonus, Philip­pus, Bergomensis, Bapt. Platina, & Palmerius,) haue pub­lishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world, which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done, if the truth it selfe had not enforced their pennes thereunte. For the holy life of your Iesuites and Iesuited br [...]d, I will say nothing; their deare bréethren the secular Priests, ha [...] related that matter sufficiently, in many bookes late extant in print against them: they charge them with pride, ambition, couetousnesse, cozenage, theft, cruelty, murther, treason, and what not? yea, of Frier Par­sons, they giue this testimony in particular, viz. by Par­sons platformes, secular Priests must depend vpon Blac­wel, Robert par­sons an holy Fryer. and Blackwel vpon Garnet, and Garnet vpon Par­sons, & Parsons the Priests bastard vpon the Diuel. ReadIf th [...] shalt read [...]hi [...] A­natomy▪ thou canst not but ab­ho [...]e [...]a [...]e [...]p­ [...]a [...] Popery. the Anatomy of Popish tiranny, and there then shalt find this truth, with great variety of like matter. I let passe, what Polidorus Virgilius, Abbas, Panormitanus. & Pope Pius himselfe, before called Aeneas Syluius, haue written of the filthy life of Popish Priests, Monkes, Friers, and Nunnes. Peruse the suruey of popery, and the triall ofAug. Epist. 119. the new religion; and that done, the truth will shew it selfe herein: For, if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of humane superstitions, with the seruile bur­dens whereof men were so pressed, as the Iewes estate vnder their legall ceremonies was more tollerable, then the state of Christians: Truely may we say much more,A [...]st▪ contra Epist [...]dam. of the last and worst daies.

S. Peter & S. Paul deliuered the Catholique saith to the Church of Rome; and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul, kept S. Augustine in the vnity of the Church. [Page 5] So writeth S. Austen of himselfe.

True it is first,1 that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome, and for the testimony of Christs Gospell were there put to death, both on one day, not both in one yeare; the one beheaded, the other crucified: none well studied in the auncient fathers, & histories of the Church, will or can this deny: true it is secondly,2 that many Bishops of Rome were holy men, who constan­ly yéelded vp their liues (as become holy martyrs,) for the testification of the truth of Christs Gospell: true it is [...]irdly,3 that S. Austen saith of himselfe, that the succes­sion of Priests from S. Peter, was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church: true it is fourthly,4 that the mai [...]sty of the Roman Empire, together with the great liberality, which the Romans exhibited to the Mar­tyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted, yéelded no small ho­nour to the City and Church of Rome: and hereupon (I will it not deny) it came to passe, that the auncient coun­cels had euer great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities, in the distribution of Episcopall and Patriarchall seates: hereupon it likewise came, that the West and Occidentall Churches (not so the East-churches) did greatly reuerence the Church of Rome; and many times to appease controu [...]sies and dissentions, had recourse vn­to it, as to the Mother-church and auncient nurse of the faith: which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession, (not barely of place or persons, but) of Bishops, in faith, [...]ctrine, and holy conuersation, was confirmed in the vnity of the Church: for so as then, so now, nothing doth or can yéeld greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart, then to behold the lines ofS. Aus [...] res­pected [...]uc­cession, w [...]ch was [...]oy [...] with holy [...]f [...] and pure [...]o­ct [...]i [...], the euill life of Ministe [...]s doth much hurt to the truth. Gods ministers to be agreable to their doctrine, and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God: for, what man would not rather in any difficulty, haue recourse to that Minister and Preacher, whose life is agréeable to his [Page 6] doctrine, then vnto him, who though he preach plea­santly, yet liueth not accordingly? None doubtlesse. For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans, that through their euill life, the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles: and for this respect likewise, are the Bere [...]ms highly commended in holy writ, in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the liue and rule of Gods word: yea, for this respect doth the holy vessell ofRom. 2 v. 14. Act. 27 v. 10 11 [...]. Hebr. 31. v. 7. our Lord Iesus, very grauely admonish the Hebrwes, to consider the end of their conuersation who, haue preached Gods word vnto them: but for all this, no auncient councell, no holy father, no history Ecclesiasticall, did e­uerNote that the Bishop of Rome did neuer aledge for himselfe that he could not erre be­cause hee kn [...]we no such prero­gatiue in ve­ry deede. ascribe this supereminent prerogatiue to the Bishop of Rome, that he could no erre in his iudiciall and defi­nitiue resolutions: neither euer was the Bishop of that Sea acknowledged, for the sole and onely iudge in con­trouersies of religion: this is to be so, one onely testimony of S. Cyprian will or at least may suffice: for S. Cyprian a very auncient father, a great learned Bishop, and amost blessed martyr, although he highly reuerenced the Church of Rome, for respects now related, and consequently theCyp [...] Epist ad Pompeum. Bishops thereof, yet was he so farre from acknowledging, the falssy now vsurped prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome, that his faith could not faile, that he flatly reie­cted his opinion, contemned his definitiue sentence, and de­cided his iudiciall decrées, calling him blind buzzard, and arrogāt Prelat. The like I might alledge cut of many famous papists; Adrianus, Panormit: nus Alphon [...]us, Ger­sonus, Ockamus and others: but this [...]onu [...]ceth, that nei­ther S. Austin nor any aunciēt father in their time, nor the Bishop of Rome, did obiect against S. Cyprian, that the said Bishop could not erre.

This is a wonderment to me, that our Popes, Monkes, and Iesuites, haue beene so licentious and wick­ed liuers: but seeing so many famous Popish writers and the [Page 7] late secular. Romish Priests, haue in printed bookes publi­shed to the whole world, testified so much of and against them, it maketh me to stagger, and to doubt of the Romith religion, although informer times, I haue high reuerenced the same: for if the Bishop of Rome had beene priuiledged not to erre, not onely the Bishop of Rome, but the holy fa­thers also of that age, would haue obiected the same against S. Cyprian, vndoubtedly it cannot be denied.

You neither are nor euer were, a more earnest & zealous papist, then my selfe haue béene: but I heartily thanke God for it, I now behold as clearely as the noone day, the absurdities and abhominations of late vpstart popery, the case is so cleare, as euery child of God may with all facility perceiue the same.

Why doe you call it (late vpstart popery,) it hath continued from S. Peter, and euery Pope is his suc­cessor.

This is one mighty point, which hath not one­ly seduced and be witched you, but both many others, and myne owne selfe, aswell as you. I truely cald it. (late vpstart popery,) because of ten parts it, scarscely retainethThe Iesuites are a now & young [...]ecte of Fiyers. two parts of the old Roman religion, which S. Peter and S Paul by their preaching, deliuered to the Church of Rome: yea since the Iesuites began, (which was about the yeare 1537.) popish religion is ten times more absurd, then it was afore.

The Catholikes hold constantly, that the true faith and religion which S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome, hath euer continued at Rome vntill this present day; and that no other Church in the Christian world, is able to shew a perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of their Bishops and priests, saue onely the Church of Rome.

This is my answere. First, that the word (Ca­tholike) is an holy and auncient name, giuen in the be­ginning to all Christians and faithfull people in the world, [Page 8] and therefore is it this day highly reuerenced, and con­tinually rehearsed in the publicke prayers of our English Church: but there be two sortes of Catholikes, the one deformed, the other reformed, which reformed Catho­likes,The papists are the de­ [...]med Ca­tholique, we the refor­med. are all the true members of our English Church, and all such as consesse and embrace the same faith and doctrine with them: Secondly, that the faith and do­ctrine, which S. Peter and S. Paul preached to the oldRom▪ 1. v. 8 Romans, remaineth at Rome indéede: but how? no o­therwise, doubtlesse, then an old beggars cloake remai­neth still to the beggar, though it haue an hundred clouts of diuerse colours, added and fastened one to another: Thirdly, that our English Church is able to shew a bet­ter and sounder perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of her Bishops and Priests, then the late vpstact Church of Rome.

What, are you English-men Catholikes? you are (say we at Rome) flat heretikes and apostataes, as whom, many late Popes of Rome, haue accursed to the deepe pit of hell.

You know there is a sort of Fryers at Rome, commonly called the Franciscans, (which sect was hat­chedThe sect of Franciscans. and borne in the yéere 1206.) who haue by little and little swarued from their first institution, and become so licentious and dissolute, that another sect of Fryers com­monlyTheophilus a Citisen of Rome. called Capuchéenes, (which thing, you béeing a Ci­tizen of Rome, knowe aswell as my selfe.) haue ac­cused them to haue depraued and fowly peruerted the rules of their auncient order, sect, and profession, in so much, as they cannot this day with safe consciences em­brace the same, and therefore haue they reformed their said sect, and doe terme themselues the reformed true Franciscans indéede: this (if it be duely considered,) is doubtlesse this day our case, in our Church of noble En­gland, as also of many other reformed Churches, within [Page 9] the Christian world: for as the Capuchéenes hold fast,Let this be well remem­bred. our Church reuerenceth antiquity & onely reiect­eth nouelties. kéepe still, and constantly defend, all the auncient rules of the old and true Franciscans, and duely reiect and a­bandon that, which by little & little crept into their sect, (supertition abuses, neglect of discipline, and dissolute life,) euen so is it this day in our Church of England. she holdeth fast, kéepeth still, and most constantly deserd [...]th,The late ro­mish [...]aith is the new reli­gion. all and euery rite of the old Roman religion, highly reue­rencing the same, as Catholike and Apostolike doctrine. Shee onely reiecteth and abandoneth, heresies, errors, su­perstitions, and intollerable abuses, by little and little brought into the Church, (the enemy the dinel hauing so­wenMa [...]. 13. ver. 25. tares, while the carelesse pastors were a sléepe:) For neither did most noble Quéene Elizabeth in her time, nei­ther doth our most pious & religious Soueraigne Kingwe are the true refor­med Catho­likes. IAMES, (who most happily raigneth ouer vs,) set vp or bringe into the Church any new religion, but he, as Quéene Elizabeth before, onely reformeth & purgeth the [...]. reg. 2. ver 27. 35. [...]. par. 1 [...]. 4. reg. 8. 2. 2. pat. 29. par. 2 [...]. 30. 31. 34. Church, after the holy examples of King Dauid, King Salomon, King Iosaphat, King Ezechias, King Iosias, and other godly and zealous Kings in their daies, and carefully reduceth it to the primitiue order, and to the pu­rity of the old Roman religion. This to be so, none can in conscience deny, that will with a single eye this day be­hold thegodly setled Canons of this Church of England.

If you were able to proue vnto me, that the Church of Rome did any time swarne or reuolt from the old Roman religion, I would doubtlesse forsake the late romish doctrine (as you terme it,) and ioyfully yeelde vnto the truth.

I shall proue it by the power of God, and assi­stance of his holy spirit, before the end of this our confe­rence, if you like to stay to the end thereof, and be not wearied with my discourse.

God reward you for your Christian kindnesse [Page 10] and this paineful trauaile for my sake, your talke is so com­fortable to myne heart, that I shall not be weary thereof, though I should stay an whole yeare in your company: but I feare me I shall be too chargeable to you, if I tarry long with you.

I liue (as you sée) like a scholler, and kéepe but a sparing diet: if you can content your selfe therewith, I shall ioy thereat: For I know assuredly, that our mer­cifull God, who, fréely without my deserts, sendeth me al things necessary for my bodily sustenance and who hathMat. 10. [...]. 12 also fréely promised, not to suffer a cuppe of cold water gi­uen in his name, to passe at any time without reward, will neuer sée or suffer me to want things necessary to my selfe, for bestowing Christian hospitality, vpon my neigh­bour for his sake: yéeld therefore your serious attention, and ye shall behold these thrées things as cleare as the noo [...]e day: viz.1 the false and erroneous faith of your Bishops of Rome, 2 their most brttish and de [...]estable liues, 3 and their interrupted and most uncerta [...] ▪ succession as which is so mingled and mangled, or rather so defaced and vt­terly extinguished, that no man can tell, what indéede to make thereof. Of which thrée points, while I shall di­stinctly discourse, I would haue you to put forth plainly and at large, all such doubts as any way doe trouble you: for that I hold the best course, for your full satisfaction and confirmation in the truth, of the true, auncient Ca­thalike, and orthodore faith.

VVE at Rome hold it constantly for an article ofLuc. 12. [...]. 3 [...]. the Chatholike faith, that our Popes and Bi­shops are the successors of S. Peter, and therefore can they not erre in faith or doctrine, no more then S. Peter could; for whose faith Christ prayed, that it should neuer faile.

How the late Bishops of Rome are S. Peters successors, it shall be shewed (God willing) in the chap­ter of succession. Let vs now vnfold, and sincerely exa­mine, the faith and doctrine of some speciall Popes in particular, for the view and consideration of a few will be a sufficient tryall for all the rest.

I must needes yeeld thereunto, for we hold it a part of the Catholike faith, that Christs prayer was ef­fectuall for all S. Peters successors alike, so as if any one of them can be conuinced to haue erred, we cannot safely relie and ground our faith vpon the rest.

That the Bishops or Popes of Rome (as ye call them,) may become heretikes, yea, that they haue béene heretikes de facto, it is a thing so cleare, as I shall not neede to stand long vpon the same: for, many popish decrées and Papall constitutions tell vs, that Popes may be deposed, when and so often as they swarue from the true faith, and become heretikes indéede: which decrées and constitutions must perforce presuppose, that the Popes may be heretikes indéede: for otherwise, theyGrat dist. 4 [...]. chap. [...] Pap [...]. should be frustrate and to none end at all: one popish Ca­non and decrée hath these expresse words, the Pope iud­geth all, and must be iudged of none, vnlesse he swarue [Page 12] from the faith, and be an heretike: another Canon hath these words, sheepe which are committed to their pastor, may neither rebuke him, nor in any wise accuse him, vulesse he depart and forsake the faith: these are theAns. 2. q. 7. Cap. [...]u [...]. words of the Popes owne Canons. I doe alledge them truely, as I meane to do all the reste, whatsoeuer I shallThe Author takes it vpon his saluation, th [...] hee dealeth truely. speake of the Popes themselues, or of any popish wri­ter, which I proteste vnto you once for all, as I will an­swere the saine at the dreadfull day of generall doome. Now we sée by these Canons, that the Popes may be he­retikes, and in the case of heresie be censured, controlled, and condemned.

I heartily thanke you for this your Christian protestation, it fully perswadeth me that I may safely giue credit to all your allegations and asseuerations, whatsoe­uer you say of our Popes, Popish writers, and their Faith and Doctrine: But can yee name any Pope indeede, that hath been an Heretique or an Apostate from the Faith? our honorable and learned Cardinall, the Iesuite Bellarmine, statly denieth it.

Pope Anastasius, Pope Honorius, Pope Iohn, and others haue beene Heretickes. Vignerius. Melchier, Canus, Alphonsus, and Adrianus▪ all foure famous and [...] dela [...]i [...] vigner d [...] ver [...]. fides. learned Papists, and one of them (Adrianils) sometime Pope himselfe, doe affirme it and defend it for a constant and vndoubted truth. Nicholaus de Lyra, a famous Po­pish Frier, so learned a man, that Sir Thomas Moore called him a great Clearke, (as he was indéede) preueth e­uidently that the Church doth not consist in men, by rea­son of power or dignity either Ecclesiasticall or Secular: and this is the ground and foundation, vpon which hée [...]ra, in 16. cap. Mat. buildeth his assertion: because (saith Fryer Lyra) many Princes and Popes, and others of the inferiour sort, are sound to haue swarued from the faith, and to haue béene flat Apostataes. Yea Iosephus Angles, a famous Popish [Page 13] Bishop, and religious Fryer, in that very booke which hée [...]ose A [...] [...] ▪ [...]. s. p. 2. q. de exco [...]. ar. 4. d [...]f. 1. deliuered to the Pope himselfe, behold the force of truth) confirmeth this mine assertion in these expressed words; Papa hereticus aut Apostata, &c. The Pope being an Heretique or Apostata, may bee deposed by a generall Councel, and the reason is, because as none can be a Pre­late of any religion, which is not professed in that religion; so neither can he be Pope that holdeth not the faith o [...] the Church. Thus you see it▪ cléere euen by Popish famous Doctors, & the Popes owne decrées (such [...] none can be better) that the Bishope of Rome may forsake the Christian faith, teach false Doctrine, and become flat Apo­stataes: Yea, that, de facto, the same hath béene verified, of sundry Popes in very déede.

Our Cardinall Bellarmine, and other learned Catholiques tell vs, that our Pope is a double person; priuate and publique: that as he is a priuate person, hee may thinke, speake, write and hold erroneous opinions,The Popes double per­son. false doctrine, and whatsoeuer else; yet this notwithstan­ding, that the Pope as he is Pope, and a publique person can neuer erre in any matter of faith, nor iudicially define any thing against the truth. This our famous Dominican Fryer Dominicus de Soto, setteth downe in these expresse words; quamuis Papa vt Papa &c. Albeit the Pope, asSoto. in 4 s d. 2. 4. 2. [...]. [...]. Pope, cannot erre, that is to say, cannot set downe any er­rour as an article of our faith, because the holy Ghost will not that permit; neuerthelesse, as hee is a priuate person, he may erre euen in faith, as he may do in other sinnes.

This indéede is the ground and foundationo? all Popish faith and doctrine; that the Pope may erre as a priuate man, but not as Pope and publique person: forQu [...]dl. [...]. [...]. 10. this cause doth M. Watson tell vs, in the name of all the secular Priests, in their conflict against the traiterous Ie­suits; that as the prudent Gréeke appealed from Alexan­der furious, to Alexander sober; and Bishop Crostrate [Page 14] from Pope Adrian priuate, to Pope Adrian publique, and as sumus pontifex in cathedra Petri; so may the secular Priests, the Popes deuoted vassals, notwithstanding any decrée set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary, by wrong information giuen, appeale euen from the Pope; as Clemens vnto his holines, as Peter for this cause doth, the Iesuite Parsons, or S. R. in his pretended answere toS. R. pag. 417. the downe [...]all of Popery, proclaime it lustily to the work, that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope [...]inereth i [...]ditially out of S. Peters chaire, as suprethe pastor of Gods Church; but onely that, where­in he vttereth his owne priuate opinion. For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs, that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power. So then; on the one side,Lib. 6. de ha­ [...]t. cap qui con (que) caus 17 [...]. 4. cap. si [...]u [...]. the Pope may be deposed, if he speake, write, or hold he­reticall opinions as a priuate man; but on the other side, whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée, as Pope and publike person, that we must receiue, reuerence, and constantly beléeue; otherwise, we must be adiudged He­retiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake. What a religion eat yee this? the Pope may decrée thingsPopery is a most mesera­rable religi­on▪ at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man, or as a publique person; the one way he cannot erre, as Papists doe and must beléeue; but the otherway, hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede: it therefore standeth with all reason, piety and good conscience, that the Papists shall examine his decrées, whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man, le [...]t they receiue errors for faith, falshood for truth, & poy­son for wholesome medicine. Howbeit, they must be­léeue all things resolutely; they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously, lest they be accused of sacriled [...] or he­resie. For, if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome, (an old rotten and worme-eaten thing, which the silly people adore, reuerence, and kisse, [Page 15] as my selfe sometimes haue done, and Saint Peter per­haps neuer saw or knew the same) then the case is cléere, the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel, and pro­céedeth from the holy Ghost.

All this is very true, and we are taught to be­leeue, that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede, and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day, insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire, which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child, and doe vse them: neither did I euer heare to this day, that any Pope taught false Doctrine, or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire.

Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not, it is not much materiall; this one thing is cer­taine, that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire, cannot preserue him that sitteth in it, from false doctrine or erroneous faith, whereof more at large hereafter, as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion; that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes, is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors. Now will I likewise proue vnto you (God willing) euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers; that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine, and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire, as they call it, and that done. I will answere to all your obiections against the same. M. Gerson, sometimeGers▪ in Serp [...]. de Pasck. [...]. pa [...]t. Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris, and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance, writeth plainely, and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth, that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name, taught publiquely, that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome, as also, that his false doctrine was pub­liquely [Page 16] condemned with the sound of trumpets, euen be­fore Philip, then King of France. Yea Adrianus (who was Bishop of Rome himselfe) doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer, in these expresse wordes; Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod &c. Last of all, it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publi­quely taught, declared, and commaunded all to holdThe Pope [...]rr [...]d. as a publique person, ie cannot be denied. the same, that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall, haue not the stole, which is the cleare and faciall vision of God: and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this, that none should take degrée of Theology in the same, but those that did first sweare to defend this error, and to adhere to it for euer: Thus writeth Adrian, who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome: And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists, after he had rekoned vp fiue he­resies, setteth downe this for the [...]i [...]th heresie: (viz thatAlphon. [...] Castrolib. [...]. ad vers. h [...]re ses, [...]rop [...] [...] [...]. the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome) ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the au­thors thereof, and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn, as the patrons and defenders of the same. So then it is cleare as the noone day, that the Bishops of Rome both may erre, and, de facto, haue erred, not onely as pri­uate men, but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées. Bellarmine your romishBellarm. de [...]um Ponti­fice lib 4. c. 14 Iesuits and Cardinal, séeing the force of this testimony, and ma [...]king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery, doth bestir [...]e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith: he would glad­ly perswade his reader, that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man, and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome: [...] [...]te pope [...]y i [...] not the old but the new religion. which is a subtile distinction, but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith, lest they should forsake the Pope & his new religion: I proue it many wayes, first, [Page 17] 1 because Pope Adrian himselfe saith, (docuit hee taught) 2 Secondly, because he saith (Publicé publiquely) 3 Thirdly, because he saith (Mandauit, hée commanded all to hold it.) 4 Fourthly, because none could bee made Gradu­ates in the Uniuersity, which held not this opinion. 5 Fiftly, because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it, and to hold it for euer. So then, the Pope erred de facto, euen in his publike decrée of faith, and that euen by theDi [...]it Adri­anus, A. D. 1171. consent of Adrian, who sometime was Pope himselfe; yea, who for learning and knowledge, was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome. What say you to this testimony, M. Theophilus? doe ye not sée it euident­ly proued, euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers, that the Pope both may erre, and, de facto, hath erred; and that not onely as a priuate man, but also as a publique person.

Your reasons are so strong, so pithy, and so plaine indeed, that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them, they make me to stagger in my old Ro­mish faith, and to doubt of that, whereof I neuer doubted all my life before: for, we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith, that the Pope as Pope and publique person cannot erre: and therefore that they are to bee censured for Heretiques, whosoeuer will not receiue and beleeue, as articles of the Christian faith, whatsoeuer the Pope defineth iudicially and pub­liquely, as sitting in Peters chaire.

This lately coyned diabolicall distinction of the Popes double person, with the circumstances where­with it is adorned, may fitly be tearmed a trick of Legier­demaine,A tricke of Legierde­maine. wherewith many haue béene seduced a long time. For, when the Pope is charged and plainely con­uicted to haue decréed false and erroneous doctrine to bée holden for articles of the faith; then the Pope and his Ie­suites, with their Iesuited broode, tell vs peremptorily, [Page 18] and as it were violently enforce vs to beléeue it, that such decrées procéede from the Popes Holinesse, as a priuate man, but not as a publique person. What a thing is this? if the Pope decrée any thing, how absurd soeuer it be, andA most blasphe­mous do­ctrine. affirme the same to be his iudiciall sentence out of Peters chaire, then the same must be holden and be beléeued for an article of faith, and to be as true as the Gospell of Ie­sus Christ; and he that will not so hold, and so beléeue, must be burnt for an Heretique: & for all this, no Scrip­ture, no generall Councell, no holy Father, no learned Popish Writer, for y^• space of 1400. yeares after Christs sacred incarnation, (my life and saluation I gage for theMarke this well. tryall) can be truely produced or alleaged for the confir­mation and clearing of such Popish dotage, or rather of such diabolical heresie, and neuer-inough detested vil­lany.

Your words doe penetrate, and touch the ve­ry bottome of my heart: but is it possible, that you can prooue and iustifie this your assertion? if you can this per­forme, popery is confounded and striken dead. I there­fore pray you for Christs sake, to proue this point so soundly and cleerely as I may be assured of the truth thereof.

M. Doctor Gerson, Chauncellor of the vni­uersity of Paris, a famous papist, and one of the princi­pall deuines in the general Councell of Constance, deliue­reth the truth to the view of the christian world, in these expresse words: concluditur ex hac radice duplex veritas: prima, quod determinatio solius Papae in his quae sunt fi­dei, non obligat vt precise est talis ad credendum; alio­quin staret in casu, quod quis obligaretur ad contradicto­ria, vel ad falsum contra fidem. Out of this roote, is conclu­dedGers. prim. art. de e­ [...]am. doct. consid. 2. a double truth: first, y^• the resolution or determination of the Pope alone in things belonging to faith) as it is precis [...]ly such (not confirmed by a generall councell, doth [Page 19] not tie or bind a man to beléeue it, for otherwise, the case might so fal out, that one should be bound either to beléeue contradictories, or else falshood against his faith. Againe, in another place, the same doctor and great learned man hath these expresse words: in causis fidei, non habetur inGers in pri­part de ap­pellat. a Papa, in prop [...]sit.terra iudex infallibi is, vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de le­ge communi, praeter ipsam Ecclesiam vniuersalem, vel con­cilium generale eam sufficienter repraesentans: in causes of faith, there is no infallible iudge vpon earth, or which cannot swar [...]e from the faith, by the common course of Gods procéeding, sauing the vniuersall Church, or a ge­nerall councell. Many like testimonies this learned wri­ter hath, which I let passe in regard of breuity, for that I déeme these twaine so cleare and so sufficient, as they will perswade euery indifferent reader: for first, we séeThis my selfe admit and be­leeue. plainely by M. Gersons resolution, that no Christian is bound to beleue the decrée, definition, determination, or resolution of the Pope, as he is barely and precisely Pope or Bishop of Rome▪ without y^• assistance of a general coun­cell. Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publickely in the resolutions of faith, aswell as their Bi­shops and ministers of the Church. Thirdly, that there are but two infallible iudges vpon earth concerning matters of faith, that is to say, the whole Congregation of the faith­full, and a generall Councell lawfully and sufficiently re­presenting the same: which resolution of this learned man, I admit with heart and voyce, as most Christian, sound, orthodoxe, and consonant to the holy scriptures, generall Councels, holy fathers, and best learned papists: M. do­ctor Fisher late Bishop of Rochester, and a popish canoni­zed martyr, deliuereth his opiniō in these expresse words, nec Angustini, nec Hieronymi, necalterius cui [...]s [...]bet au­ctoris doctrinae sic Ecclesia subscripsit, quin ipsilocis ali­quotab ijs liceat dis [...]entire: nā in nōnullis ipsis locis se pla­ne monstrarunt homines esse, atque nonnun quam aberras­se: [Page 20] the Church hath not se subscribed either to the do­ctrine of Austen or of Hierome, or of any other author or writer, but that she may sometime dissent from their opi­nions: for themselues haue plainely shewed themselues to be men and that they wanted not their errors. The Iesuite Bella [...]mine, so deare to the Pope for his writing, that he gaue him a Cardinals hat, wrote in this manner, sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare pos [...]unt, & aliquando errant, & inter se quandoque dissentiunt, vt nesciamusBeliarm▪ de concil, libri. 2. Cap. 2.quinam eorum sequendus sit: without doubt all Bishops seuerally may erre, & doe sometime erre indéede, & doe also▪ sometime so dissent one from another, that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow. By the verdit of these famous & learned papists we sée M. Gersons doctrine plainely confirmed: for albeit they name not the Pope, yet must they confesse, perforce, that he is implyed in their words, or else that he is no Bishop at all, which is a thing not impossible by popish faith, though I affirme it not: Iacobus Almaynus, Gulielmus Ockamus, ThomasThe coun­cell of Cō ­stance de­posed Pope Iohn.Waldensis, Iosephus Angles, with many others I might alledge, but I déeme these sufficient. Two things I will adde for your better satisfaction herein: the one, that this weightie point of doctrine, was most soundly handled, and throughly debated in the councell of Constance, where it was concluded, that a generall councell is aboue the Pope: that a generall counsell may depose the Pope: that the same councell, de facto, deposed Pope Iohn the 23. of that name, and that the Pope as a publike person may both be an heretike, and decrée hereticall doctrine: The o­ther that the councell of Constance was holden and cele­brated, in the yéere of our Lord God, 1415. and that M Gerson was a famous diuine of the same councell, both beholding with his eyes, and hearing with his eares, (him selfe not being mute in the interim,) thrée Popes Iohn the 23. Gregory the 12., and Benedict the 13.) deposed by [Page 21] the same councell, and the constant resolution of the coun­cell against the Popes fasly challenged priuiledges: as namely, that the Pope as Pope and as he is a publike person, neither is nor can be an infallible iudge in matters of faith.

These things are wonderfull, which you seeme truely and sincerely to relate. I will thinke vpon them▪ they enforce me to stagger, and to doubt of the Catholike saith.

I deale sincerely with the papists, I protest vpon my saluation, for I hold it a great sinne to bely the diuell of hell: but God forbid that ye should doubt of the Catho­like faith.

I remember well your distinction, of deformed and reformed Catholikes: I meane the deformed Catho­like faith, which I now suspect to be the romish faith of our late Popes, I am not able to gainesay or withstand the truth, your reasons are so strong, your testimonies so plaine, your applications so euident, & your grounds so inuincible, that I cannot doe withall, but needes I must giue great credit to the same.

You shall yet heare stranger matters of your Popes, hearken to them attentiuely. Pope Celestine theAlphons. lib 1. Cap. 4. aduers. haeres. third of that name▪ erred as Pope and publike person, in his iudiciall and publike decrée: this to be so, Alphonsus aboue named, that famous and religious papist, is a con­stant witnesse in these words, Celestinum Papa crasse circa matrimonium fidelium, quorum al [...]er labitur in haere­sim, res est omnibus manifesta: neque hic Celestini error talis fuit, qui soli negligentiae imputari debuit, ita vt illum errasse dicamus velut priuatam personam, & non vt Pa­pam, qui in qualibet re seria definienda consulere debet viros doctos, quoniam hui [...]smodi Celistini definitio ha­bebatur in antiquis decretalibus, in capite, laudabilem, titulo de conuersione infidelium, quam ego ipse vidi, & [Page 22] legi: That Pope Celestine erred about matrimony of the faithfull, whereof the one is fallen into heresie, it is a thing so manifest, as all men know the same: neither was this error of Pope Celestine such, as may be imputed to sole negligence, so as we may thinke he erred as a priuateCelestine erred as Pope and publike person. man, and not as Pope, who ought in euery serious de­crée to aske councell of the learned, for that decrée of Ce­lestine was in the old decretall epistles, in the chapter Lau­dabilem, which I my selfe haue séene and read, out of these word of Alphonsus, who was a man highly renowned among the papists, I obserue many worthy, and memo­rable points. First that Pope Celestine erred, and that, not as a priuate man, but euen as Pope and publike per­son. Secondly, that he erred in a very serious matter, e­uen in a matter of faith, to wit, that matrimony was so dissolued, by reason of heresie, that the faithfull man or wo­man might marry again, the hereticall party liuing: which thing saith Alphonsus, (a great learned man, and a zealous papist,) was manifest to euery man to be an he­resie: and the popish late councell of Trent, hath defined so to be. Thirdly, that this decrée and definition of Pope Celestine, was in those daies enrolled in the Popes de­cretalls. Fourthly, that Alphonsus both saw and read the same decrée. Fiftly, that the said decrée cannot this day be found among the Popes decretall epistles: so then, the Popes vse to change, not onely their faith, but also their decrées.

I see well, that simple people are shamfully abused, and that the late Popes haue egregiously seduced them: for this is a case so cleare, as euery child may per­ceiue the same: that which the Pope and his Iesuits tell vs of his double person, is but atrick of Legerdemarie. For Alphonsus saith plainely and resolutely (I see it cannot bee denied) that Pope Celestine erred as Pope and publique person, and not as a priuate man.

Let this testimony neuer bee forgotten: for, it ouerthroweth and beateth flat to the ground, the chiefest bulwarke, and strongest sort of all popish faith. It con­denmeth the Pope and his doctrine, both affirmatiuely & negatiuely. Affirmatiuely, because it a [...]outheth the Pope to haue erred as Pope and publique person. Negatiuely, because it flatly denieth him to haue erred as a priuate person. But there is another point in this testi­mony, and that of great importance, which may not bée forgotten: I know not if you haue marked the same.

What is the point, I beseech you?

It is a kind of Iugling and Legierdemaine, where with the Popes and their denoted vassals, haue se­duced the world a long time: they alter and change their Romish faith and doctrine at their owne good will and pleasure, and to hide and couer the nakednesse of their Popes publike errors, & hereticall decrées; they cashéere and make away such former decrées of former Popes, as they cannot for shame approue, or by any honest meanes defend the same. For (as Alphonsus here telleth vs) this hereticall decrée and definition, which Celestine made, as Pope, and not as a priuate person, was in y^• old decretall epistles, but this day cannot be found.

This point indeed I did not obserue, because Alphonsus saith he saw and read the same, but not that it is not this day to be found.

Alphonsus saith he saw the decrée, and read it in the old decretals: and nameth the chapt eit [...] where it was: whereby he giueth vs to vnderstand, that in the latter de­cretals he could not finde the same. He further insinua­teth to vs, that albeit we cannot finde the same iudiciall sentence in the decretals nowadaies: yet may we assure our selues of the truth thereof, for that himselfe both had séene and read the same in the old decretals: for if hee had found the same in the later printed decretals, he would [Page 24] not haue giuen the reader this cau [...]at, viz. that it was set downe in the old decretals, in the Chapter Laudabi­lem, and consequently, that the deniall thereof, would not serue to excuse the Pope. Nay, I will yet shew you a cléerer case, if any cléerer can be.

I know not doubtlesse, how a cleerer case can be found: yet for the better confirmation of the truth, I pray you withdraw not your paine.

Saint Cyprian was an ancient Father, alear­ned Writer, and a glorious Martyr of our Lord Iesus: and for all that, he both beléeued, and publiquely declared that the Bishops of Rome might erre as well as other Bishops their brethren, not onely in their priuate opini­ons, but also in their definitiue sentences, & iudiciall de­crées. For first,1 though Cornelius, then Bishop of Rome, together with the whole national Synode of all the Bi­shopps of Italy had made a slat decrée touching rebapti­zation; and 2 secondly, though Pope Stephanus had confir­med the same decrée, and stricktly commanded it to be ob­serued: and 3 thirdly, though our Papists too much Iesu­ited and Italianized, doe of late daies obstinately affirme, (as appeareth by the notes of the Rhemists vpon the new Testament) that their Pope cannot erre, when hee defi­neth iudicially: yet this notwithstanding, S. Cyprian, both practically and iudicially giueth vs to vnderstand, that in his time the Bishop of Rome had no such priui­ledge, as he this day arrogantly & Antichristianly taketh vpon him: for we▪ Cyprian stoutly and resolutely with­stood the decrée of▪ Pope tephanus, who at that time was the Bishop of Rome: yea, he both sharply reproued him, and scornefully condemned his definitiue sentence and de­crée.

I see not, how this proceeding of Saint Cyprian, can proue that the Pope may erre Iudicially in matters of faith: I beseech you take the paines to explicate the [Page 25] same more at large.

Saint Cyprian was euer reputed a learned man, and an holy Bishop in his life time, as also, a most glorious Martyr being dead. Now, in regard of his great learning, he could not haue béene ignorant of the Popes rare priuiledge in noterring in matters of faith; if either the holy Scriptures had taught it, or the learned Fathers of that age had beléeved or receiued it: and in regard ofThis fact of S. Cypriā, confoun­deth the Pope. his piety and rare vertue, he would reuerently haue yéel­ded to such a singular prerogatiue, and haue giuen the glory to the sonne of God, the author thereof, if any such thing had béene done vnto him. Yea, if the Bishop of Rome had beene Christs Uicar generall, and so priuiled­ged, as our Iesuites and Iesuited crew beare the world in hand he is, that is to say that hée could not erre, in his iudiciall definitions of faith: then doubtlesse, S. Cypri­an must needes haue béen a flat heretique, and so reputed and estéemed in the Church of God: For, if any Chri­stian shall this day do, or affirme as S. Cyprian did, or publickly deny y^• Popes sayd falsly pretéded prerogatiue of faith in any place, Country, territories or dominions, where Popery beareth the sway: then without all perad­uenture, he must be burnt at a stake with fire and fag­got for his paines.

God reward you for your trauaile: I see it nowOther Bi­shops were of Cyprians opinion. as cleerely as the noone day: For, S. Cyprian both knew the Scripture right well, and also what was the publike faith of the Church in his time: & so, if either the Scrip­ture had taught it, or the Church had beleeued it; hee would neuer haue withstood it, but reuerently haue yeel­ded thereunto. But sir, our Doctors haue much to say for themselues, would God it might please you to heare, and answere the same at large.

I will both willingly heare them, and soundly [Page 26] (by the power of God) confute the same: For, I know right well, before I heare them from your mouth, what possibly they are able to say in their owne defence.

NO Church in the vniuersall world is able to shew a perpetuall succession of her Bishops, without inter­ruption, saue onely the Church of Rome: and therefore, seeing God hath appointed & placed in his visible ChurchEphes. 4. v. [...]2. (as the Apostle teacheth vs) a cōrinual successiō of Bishops vnto the worlds end: the Church of Rome, and none but the Church of Rome, is or can bee the true Church of God.

This indéed is a reason so strong in the iudge­ment of Papists, that none liuing can truly answere the same. Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall bée truly examined to the bottome, it will be found of no force at all, but as light as a feather.

Will you deny the Apostles doctrine? wil youEphes. 4. v. [...]2. not grant (as S. Paul telleth vs) that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church, till the worlds end?

I am very willing to grant euery truth: nei­ther will I deny that there haue béene, are, and shall bée Bishops and Priests, or Pastors and teachers, in this visible Church militant on earth, vntill Christs second aduent, and generall doome of the world.

Well, there must be Bishops and Priests, or Pastors and Teachers, (as the Apostle termeth them) euen to the consummation of Saints, and end of the world. Now sir, you are not able (say our Doctors, our Iesuits, our Cardinals, our Popes) to shew or name any Church in the world, but the Church of Rome, which hath alwaies had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christs visible depar­ture to this day.

I answere, that succession is of two sorts, to wit, materiall and formall. Materiall is of the persons and the places: formal of the faith and doctrine. Touching the succession formal (which is the principall, and from whence the denomination must bée deriued) the Church of Rome cannot chalenge it, as it is already proued: for,The Church of Rome wan▪ teth formal succession. (if yée remember) I haue proued both soundly and plain­ly, that many Bishops of Rome, haue taught false do­ctrine, and that not onely as priuate men, but euen as publike persons in their iudiciall definitions and decrées: and consequently that the true, proper, and formall succes­sion, can no way bée truly verified of the Church of Rome.

That is very true, which yee now say: it cannot bee denyed, but still it seemeth true that the materiall succession perteineth onely to the Church of Rome.

Marke well what I shall sincerely deliuer in this behalfe. Saint Clement (whose epistles the PapistsClem▪ ep, 1. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. Epi [...]h her. 27. [...]is seb. lib 3. c. 13. 14. 15. magnifie, when they séeme to make for their purpose) testifieth for himselfe, that Saint Peter appointed him to bée his successor. Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Eusebius, and the canon of the Popish Masse, do all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the sayd Clement. But for all this, Sophronius, Metaphrastes, and the Popish Pontificall▪ which cannot lye, affirme stoutly and peremp­torily, that Saint Peter was liuing after Lynus. This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus, that heNaucler. pa [...] [...] 3 [...] histor. was enforced to coine this new and vntimely hatched di­stinction, viz. that Saint Peter did indéed appoint Cle­ment to be his successor; but the sayd Clement perceiuingS. Peters doing is controlled that it would bee a thing pernicious to the Church, if one Bishop should choose another to bée his successor; yéelded vp his right, and so Linus was elected in his roome. The bare recitall of this imaginary solution, is a sufficient con­futa­tion [Page 68] thereof: for (as you sée) hée taketh vpon him to controll S. Peter.

This variety among Catholicke Writers is strange; and it is more strange, that Clement should alter and change S. Peters constitution. But it surpasses all the rest, that any thing which S. Peter ordeined, could bee pernicious to the Church.

This is an euident demonstration (that Ro­mish succession is as a nose of waxe, and as vncertaine as the winde; but I will shew you greater wonders, and by Gods help so vnfold the truth of Popish mangled materi­all succession, that you wil loath and detest the same for e­uer. The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius recko­neth vp thirty Schismes in the Church of Rome. But I, for the present, content my self with two; whereof theirCarranz. in [...]pit. concil. p. 370. & p. 373. owne déere Fryer Bartholomeus Carranza, can instruct them sufficiently. The former Schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares: during which time their godly Pope­dome was at a vnion in France, & not one day at Rome, albeit (as yée know) your Pope, Cardinals, and Iesui­ted Popelings beare the world in hand, that God placed their holy, s [...] supposed, seate at Rome. In the latter Schisme of the twaine, thrée of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the selfe same time, to wit, Iohn the 24 of that name, Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse▪ two things of great moment are to bée obserued. First, that it is a méere foolery to chalenge any singular prerogatiue, by Saint Peters death at Rome. Againe, that that succession cannot but bée vncertaine; which is deriued from thrée Bishops, striuing and grin­ning for the Popedome, as dogges do for a bone.

The Popes or Bishops of Rome, chalenge S. Peters priuiledges, because he died at Rome.

What? must Bishops liuing 64. yeares in France, be priuiledged at Rome, because S. Peter dyed [Page 69] there? better reason it were, to grant the chéekest prero­gatiueThe cheef­est Bishop dyed at Hi­erusalem. to the Bishops of Hierusalem, because Christ our Lord and maister dyed there.

Although three did striue at once for the Pope­dome, yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time.

Two no small absurdities doe perforce arise from hence. The one, that the succession of the Popes of Rome (whereof they glory somuch) is very doubtfull and vncertaine. The other, that the Church of Rome, was many yeares without a head; and so by popish do­ctrine, without an infalible iudge in matters of their faith. But I will tell you a greater mystery. A woman is not1 Tim. 2. 1 [...] [...]. capable of holy orders, (as Christs Apostle assureth vs,) nor of any Ecclesiasticall function in the Church; and con­sequently the Popish succession which is deriued from our holy mistresse Pope Iohn, cannot possibly bée of force. Here the Church of Rome hath vtterly forsaken her suc­cession, and is not comparable to our Church of England, in that behalfe.

If it were possible for a woman, to bee inthro­nized into Peters chaire at Rome: then as you say, popish succession were ouerthrowne indeede, it cannot be gain­said. But such a thing neither hath beene, neither is, neither euer can be till the worlds end.

What? doe you thinke it a thing impossible to be done? an huge number of famous popish writers, doe resolutelie contest it for a constant truth.

If you be able, this to proue indeede, hence­forth popish succession, shall neuer come with in my creed.

Sigebertus Geniblasēsis, Marianus Scotus, Matthae­us Palmerius, Martinus Polonus, Philippus Bergomensis, Baptista Platina, Bartholomaeus Carranza, & Iohānes Nau­clerus, are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point [Page 70] of Popery, viz that Pope Iohn was a woman, who by the familiar help of her beloued companion, brought forth publikely the homely fruits of her Popedome.

These writers which you name, were indeede Papists of high esteeme in the Church of Rome, but they liued long after Pope Iohn, and therefore knew nothing of that matter, but by report of others.

I answere: 1 first, that these eight Historiogra­phers, liued longer one after another, then Sigebertus Ge­niblasensis and Marianus Scotus liued after Pope Iohn. 2 Secondly, that all Historiographers, write for the most part, by the report of others. 3 Thirdly, that so many wri­ters, Pope Iohn was a wo­man. otherwise of good credit with your Pope, may well be credited of vs in a matter against your Pope; especial­ly since sundry of them be your owne holy popish Fryers.4 Fourthly, that this story of Pope Iohn, is publikely pain­ted, and is this day to bée séene in your Cathedrall Church of Syenna: which painting, our politike newly hatched Iesuites, sought earnestly to haue had it defaced, in the late repairing of that Church; but the Bishop of y^e place,Exod 8, 19. (digitus Dei est hic) would not suffer them to preuaile. Digitus Dei est hic. The truth must preuaile in time. 5 Fifthly, that these eight writers, who were all the Popes owne vassals, and liued long one after another, would neuer for shame haue published one and the selfe same sto­ry to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the centrary to be the truth.

They say onely and barely (vt ferunt) as the report and fame goes: and other graue writers that liued before them all, and neerer the time of Pope Iohn, make no mention thereof at all.

I answere: 1 first, that an argument, ab autho­ritate, negatiué, is not holden good in your Schooles; and yourselues do roundly condemne in others that manner of dispute. 2 Secondly, that if these famous writers had not béene fully perswaded of the truth of the story, they [Page 71] would neuer haue published it to the world: and hereof this double reason may be yéelded. First, for that the Popes déere friends, were, no doubt, very loathto reueale the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers, saue onely then and so much, when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do. Againe, because they being very learned, could not be ignorant, that it was a great damnable sinne to defame so great a man. 3 Thirdly, that the sayd Authors write of this matter, euen as they do of other things. Palmerius and Sigibertus, both haue thesePalmer. & Sigeber. in Chron. expresse words: Fama est, hunc Iohannem faeminam fuis [...]e, & vnisoli familiari tantum cognitam, qui eam complexus est, & grauis facta, peperit Papa, existens: quare, eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam: The fame goes, that this Iohn was a woman, and not knowne but to her fa­miliar friend; by whose familiarity she became with child,Obraue succession of women Popes. and was deliuered euen whiles she was Pope: for which respect, some do not reckon her among the Popes. Ma­rianus, Polonus, Bergomensis, Platina, and Carranza, (whom I haue already named) teach flatly and plainely the selfe same doctrine, writing vpon the same woman Pope: and here must I put you in minde of this macke­able poynt, viz. that Marianus Scotus, affirmeth the sto­ry constantly, flatly, and simply, without all ands or iffs.The Popes of Rome 4. can beare chil­dren but not preach. Yea, Martinus Polonus, the Popes owne Penitentiary, singeth the selfe same song. Fourthly, that some Histo­riographers, fauouring the Pope more then the truth, haue of purpose (so to couer the Popes shame) concealed the truth of the story. To these I may fitly adde that which their famous Abbot saith; the beast (saith my L. Abbot Ber­nardus, Bernard. a [...] Ganfrid. ep. 12. 5. Apoc. 13. v. 5. 7. y^• best Abbot that euer I heard or read of) mentio­ned in the Reuelation, to whom was giuen a mouth spea­king blasphemies, and to make warres with the Saints, fitteth in Peters chaire.

This is wonderfull which you say, and I hope [Page 72] I may giue credit to your reports, your protestation hath assured me thereof: howbeit for my further satisfaction, let me tel you that one of your authors Nauclerus, by name, vtterly denieth the story, as I haue heard.

I make a conscience, (I thanke my Lord God humbly for it) to deale sincerely in all my writings, andThe Au­thors pro­testation for his sin­cere dea­ling. with you in this our Christian conference, wishing heart­ly, that the papists would doe the like: I haue euer dealt so truely and vprightly against the papists in all my writings, as I now in my old and decrepite age, I am ready to take it vpon my saluation, and to seale the truth thereof with my blood. Concerning your report of Naucle­rus, you shall truely heare his owne words and that done, yéeld your censure according to the truth: after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the fauour of our Wo­man-Pope, (so to couer and hide the nakednesse of his holinesse) at the length he resolueth with himselfe, and concludeth the controuersie in these expresse words: Sed etsi fuit verum, nulli tamen, ex hoc, salutis eme [...]sit pericu­lum: quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Chri­stus,Naucler. pag 713. histor.ait Antoninus: nec enim vltimi effectus Sacramento­rum, quae illa conferebat, deficiebant eis qui debite acci­piebant, scilicet gratia, licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis, nec conficere Eucharistiam, etiam de facto ordinata, possit, nec absoluere a peccato, vnde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi: gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus di­gn [...], ignorantia facti inuincibili eos excusante: But although it were true, no man for all that susteined any losse of his saluation: because euen then the Church had still an head which is Christ, as Antoninus witnesseth: neither did they, who deuoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministred, want the l [...]st effects thereof, which is grace, albeit a woman be neither capable of any Cha­racter of order, neither able to celebrate the Eucharist, or [Page 73] to absolue from sinne, whereupon, such as receiued or­ders of her, were to be ordered againe, neuerthelesse, Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that receiued them worthily, inuincible ignorance of the fast excusing them: thus you sée the opinion and verdict of your owne deare Doctor Nauclerus that famous pa­pist, who hath said for the credit of your Pope, what possibly he could deuise: now deliuer your censure in Gods name according to the truth.

I will confesse the truth: I obserue out of this testimony of our reuerend and learned histriographer, these memorable points of doctrine.1 First that Nauclerus hath emploied his whole industry, and all his wits, to de­fend the Pope from shame and dishonour, if it possibly could be done. 2 Secondly, that Antoninus their reuerend Archbishop and canonized Saint, is of his opinion. 3 Thirdly, that Christ is the head of the Church, and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope, if euer there were such a monster in the world. 4 Fourthly, that popish succession is as vncertaine as the weather-cocke, howsoeuer my selfe and others, haue hitherto beene seduced therewith: and I humbly thank my Lord God, that by your most Christian instru­ction, (as by an instrument appointed by him for that end) I nowe at the last behold the same.

Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuoPs. 115 v. 2da gloriam: it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart, that Gods holy spirit doth so mightily worke in you: you haue obserued well the doctrine of Nauclerus, though some thing may fitly be added thereunte. Two further points of great consequence, are implied in the doctrine of Naucle­rus: 1 the one that it is this day doubtfull, which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered, and whether they be meere Lay-men, or Priests: 2 the other, that the Cardinals, popish Priests, and lay people of [Page 74] Rome, did for many yéeres commit flat idolatry.

These points could I neuer haue considered in his doctrine, God reward your paines emploied for his sake▪ but what? are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome, truely and lawfully consecrated in their functions?

I speake not generally and absolutely, of the consecration of the Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests in the Church of Rome, fit occasion will be offered here­after, to speake more precisely of that point of doctrine: the question is now, of those particular Cardinals, Bi­shops and Priests, who were consecrated for such, in the time of the Woman-pope Iohn, for as the Popes owne deare Doctor Nauclerus telleth vs, all such as were orde­red by the Woman-pope, were to be ordered again, as being but méere Lay-men.

I am at my wits end, what to say or thinke of the Church or Pope of Rome.

What? I am sure you remember the old re­ceiued Maxime; (Vbi Papa, ibi Roma; vbi Roma, ibi Ecclesia Catholica) where the Pope is, there is Rome; and where Rome is, there is the Catholike Church. So, as, the Pope is Rome, the Catholike Church, Christ him­selfe and all.

I cannot indeed but remember the same, it is so frequent and vsual in euery learned Papists mouth. But alas alas, the remembrāce thereof, doth this day wound me at the very heart: for hitherto I haue beene taught to hold it for a constant truth, that the Catholike Church, the Church of Rome, and the Popes holinesse, were all as one, that is to say, that the Popes faith, was the faith of the Church of Rome, and the faith of the Church of Rome, the faith of the Catholike Church militant heere on earth.

It is very true which you say, and this appro­ued [Page 75] Romish Maxime confirmeth the same: for when the Pope and his Popelings tell vs, that the Church cannot erre, then do they meane that the Pope cannot erre: and when they speake of the Catholike Church, then they euerMark this. The Church cannot erre, that is the Pope cannot erre. 1489. meane of y^• Church of Rome & of such Churches as iump in faith with the Pope. So then we must iump with the Collier, and say we beléeue as the Church beléeueth, and the Church beléeueth as we beléeue: for, by this learned answere, (if Cardinall Hosius writ truly) we may ouer­come the diuell; but when all is said & done, we must be­léeue, we cannot indéed tell what: for when y^• Pope saith thus and thus you must beléeue, if then he speake as a pri­uate man, my faith is wan, and no faith indéed: for as a priuate man he may erre, and so both deceiue himselfe and me, as we haue séene already: and yet (alas for pitty) these two articles I must hold for an vndoubted truth, which agrée together as Yorke and soule Sutton. First, that the Pope may erre, and become an heretike. Secondly, that I am an Hereticke, vnlesse I beléeue as he teacheth me, if he speake as a publike person. This notwithstanding, I may not, to dye for it, examine the Popes decrées, whether they procéed from him, as hée isVictor. de potest Pap [...], p [...]o [...]os. 16. caus. 17. q▪ 4▪ cap. qui [...]. a priuate man, or as a publike person: for in so doing, I must incurre the crime of sacriledge. What a thing is this? silly Papists are brought into greater thraldome & perplexity▪ then euer was Buridanus himselfe, or the poore beast his Asse.

I haue bin too long seduced with paltry pope­ry; I see it is but flat cozenage, and a meere tricke of Le­gierdemaine. Henceforth I renounce it, and will only ob­iect my difficulties to be better confirmed in the truth. But sir, I do not yet vnderstand the other point of doctrine, which you obserued out of Nauclerus.

It is cléere out of Nauclerus that the Cardinals, popish Bishops, Priests, and Lay-people of Rome, com­mitted [Page 76] flat Idolatry in the time of their Woman-popeFlat Idola­try, euen by Popish [...]a [...]h. Iohn, who for the honour of S. Peter (as you haue heard already) brought forth a child in the altitude of her pope­dome. Thus you shall vnderstand the same Nauclerus telleth vs plainely, that their woman-pope could neither make Priests, nor yet consecrate their Eucharist. To this doctrine, let vs adde these points. 1 First, that all Pa­pists must adore their Bread-god in euery popish Masse. 2 Secondly that by popish faith, none but popish Priests can turne bread into Christs body. 3 Thirdly, y^• all Priests made by their woman-pope were méere Lay-men. This foundation thus firmely layd▪ we may erect without dan­gerThis wo­man-pope, liued A. D. 18. of falling, this high and lofty building, viz that all y^• Cardinals, Bishops, Prists, and Lay-people, who euer heard the Masses of their women-pope, or of the Bishops and Priests made by her, did commit flat Idolatry at e­very one of the sayd Masses: the reason is euident, because such Priests were indéed méere Lay-men, and so could not change the bread and make it God almighty: and conse­quently the spectators and adorers that were present, a­dored bakers bread for the euer-liuing God. All this is sound Popish faith and doctrine.

It is abhomination in Gods sight: but what shall we say to M. Nauclerus? he seemeth to purge & free the worshippers, by reason of inuincible ignorance.

Our Iesuite S. R. in his pretensed answere toS. [...]. pag. 142. the downefall of Popery, iumpeth in opinion with Nau­clerus, he fréely granteth in the place quoted in y^• margent, that there is no consecration (and consequently no God almighty) when the Priest wanteth both actuall and ver­tuall intention, or omitteth any essentiall word of their sayd consecration; but withall hee excuseth the worship­pers of bread for God almighty, because of their inuin­cible ignorance. I returne this answere to them both, viz. that this distinction of ignorance, inuented in Popish [Page 77] Schooles, hath no foundation in Gods word, neither yet, in the pure Cannens of the Popes law. For the former, the Prophet Ezechiel, (or rather God by the meuth of Ezechiel) telleth vs plainely and in flat termes, that though the watch-man giue not y^• people warning, but suffer them to liue in ignorance, yet shall they be guil­ty, and perish in their sinues. Yea, Christ himselfe tel­leth vs, that who knoweth the law and doth it not, shallEzec. 3. 18. & cap. 33. v. 8. Psal. 79. v. 6 Luk. 12. 48. Caus. 17. q. 4 cap. siquis. not be punished alone, but he in like manner shall bée pu­nished for the transgression that knew it not. This mi­tigation onely is alotted to the ignorant, that his punish­ment shall be more tollerable, and hee beaten with fewer stripes. For the latter, the Popes owne Canons teach vs, that neither the ignorance of the law of nature, nor of the law diuine can excuse vs, when we offend against theEsa. 55. v. 8. 9. 3. Reg. 8 39 Rom. 8. 17. 1 Par. 28. 9. [...]. Sam. 16 [...] Psa. 7. v. 10. Mar. 2. 27. same. Yet true it is, that in humane affaires, and ciuill iudgements, inuincible ignorance will excuse, but Gods iudgements and his waies are not like to mans, they are farre different from them: man can but iudge the exter­nall act, but God searcheth the very heart and veines: man is subiect to Gods lawes, but God is aboue both mans lawes and his owne; and hath also full power to dispense with the same. There yet remaineth a mortall and vncureable wound in Popish Succession at Rome; which I hold very necessary for you to know, for your bet­ter confirmation in the truth.

For Christs sake take the paines to vnfold it to me: for nothing is so deare to my soule, as the knowledge of the truth.

The incurable wound, may be reputed the se­cond wonderment of the world: this is it, marke it well. The general Councell of Basil, deposed Pope Eugenius for his contumacie, and chose Amadaeus (who was na­med Foelix the first) and put him in his roome: this, not­withstanding, Eugenius crept againe into the Popedome [Page 78] without any Canonicall election, and continued in the place as Pope.

I do not well conceiue or vnderstand, what you would inferre hereupon. I therefore humbly craue your larger explication thereof.

The Councell of Basil was holden in Anno, 1439. and summoned Eugenius to appeare before it, thenA. D. 1439. and there to yéeld an account of such matters as the Coun­cell had to obiect against him, but he would not appeare:Loe, the Councell deposed the Pope for his diso­bedience. and therefore for his contuinacie, disobedience, & contempt of the Councels summons, he was by the authority of the sayd Councell deposed, and Amadaeus was made the Pope or Bishop of Rome. The Schisme betwéene Ama­daeus and Eugenius continued about nine yeares, vntill Foelix was content to resigne to Nicholas, and then it en­ded. Now sir, all y^• Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, & Dea­cons, who afterward sprong of Eugenius (possessing Pe­ters chaire without Canonicall election) that is, of the Church of Rome, are illegitimate, irregular, schismatikes, vsurpers and not lawfull gouerners of the Church by popish faith and doctrine.

One refuge the Papists would seeme to haue herein, viz. that the counsell could not depose the Pope: which if it once be proued against them, their backs are at the wall, and their Popish Romish succession.

It is without all question, that a general Coun­cell was and is aboue the Pope: no learned papist euer did, or this day doth deny the same, the Popes themselues, the Iesuits, and Iesuited crew onely excepted. Cardina­lis Cameracensis, Abbas Panormitanus, Nicholaus Cusa­nus, Adrianus Papa, Cardinalis Florentinus, Iohannes Gersonus, Iacobus Almaynus, Abulensis, Alphonsus▪ the Deuines of Paris and all others, (except euer before excepted,) doe resolutely and constantly defend as an vndoubted truth grounded vpon the holy scriptures, that [Page 79] a generall Councell is aboue the Pope: the practicall pro­céedings of papists euery where, haue yéelded vs an assu­red argument thereof: for first, the Councell of Basil (as we haue séene) deposed Pope Eugemus, and chose Ama­daeus in his roome. Secondly, the generall Councell of Constance, (which was celebrated about 15. yéeres be­fore the Councell of Basill) did publikely depose thrée Popes (Iohn, 22. Gregory, 12. and Benedict, 13.) and those Martin the fifth, and made him Pope: which things doubtlesse, these Councels hauing many very learned men in them, would neuer haue attempted so publikely and so resolutely as they did, if it had not béene a resolued and knowen case and truth, throughout the Christian world.

The case is cleere and euident to euery indiffe­rent reader: but giue me leaue I pray you, to tell what the papists say to this, the Councell of Basil (say they) was not a lawfull Synode, because it had neither the presence of the Pope, nor of his Legats.

This answere is a new inuention of our lateA Spaniard being but a Souldier, was the au­thor of the sect of the Iesuites, A. D. 1540. strat-vp Iesuits, (who neuer were heard of or known to y^• Church of God, for the space of a thousand, fiue hundred, and forty yéeres after Christs sacred Incarnation, and whose first author was one Ignatius Loyola, a souldier & a Spaniard borne) hauing neither scripture, Coūcel, father, or good reason, whereupon it may be grounded. For first, the Councel was called by Pope Martin the fifth to be hol­den at Papias, from whence by reason of the pest it was re­moued to Senas, afterward it was translated by Al­phonsus the King of Aragon, and continued at Basill, where were present both Sigismundus the Emperour, and Iulianus the Popes owne Legat, and after him Ludoui­cus the Cardinall of Arles supplied his place. Again, not onely the Councell of Basil, but the Councels also of Constance, of Florence, and of Lateran, did all constant­ly [Page 80] and vniformely define for an vndoubted truth, that aA generall Councell is aboue the Pope, by the ver­dict of best learned pa­pists. generall Councell is aboue the Pope, and hath authority to cite him, to controll him, and to depose him: for due proofe and triall whereof, the Councell of Constance depo­sed, de facto, thrée Popes, viz. Iohn 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and chose Martin the first, and made him Pope in his place. Another or two like mortall wounds I could vnfolde vnto you, but these séeme to me suf­ficient.

For Christs sake, take the paines to relate them, it is a thing well worth the labour.

Pope Sergius the third, caused the corps of Pope Formosus (who now had béene dead almost tenne yéeres) to be taken out of his tombe, and to bee set in a chaire, with y^• pontificall attire vpon him (O braue Gal­lant?) and that done, his head to be cut off, and to bée cast into the riuer Tiber. He disanulled the acts and or­dersCarranz [...], [...]ol. 354. & 355. giuen by Pope Formosus, insomuch as all were en­forced to take orders againe, who had béen made Bishops or Priests by Pope Formosus.

Marry sir, the Papists may boast indeed of their Romish succession, and be derided of all wise men for their paines.

Amongst the Popes excommunications the 29. is against the Colledge of Cardinals in the Romish Church, who by Symonie or Symoniacall pacts, pro­cure themselues to bee aduanced to the Popedome. By verture of which excommunication, all such as are made Popes by Symony & Symoniacall pacts, doe, ipso facto, incurre the sentence of excommunication, from which they can neuer be absolued, but by one that is Pope in­déed,Barth fumus A. D 1503. and Canonically elected thereunto. Upon which excommunication, one of the Popes inquisitors, Bartho­lomaeus Fumus, a very learned Dominican Fryer, hath published this commentary, for the true sense & meaning [Page 81] of that extrauagant, which Pope Iulius the second diuul­ged in that behalfe: these are his expresse words: Nota hic & bene, Papa Simoniacé electus non est ve [...]e Papa Note here, and that to good purpose, that the Pope which is elected by Symonie, is not the true Pope indéed. Marke well, and let me sée what you obserue out of this dis­course.

I see euidently by the Popes own constitution, and flat decree, (as by the law of the Medes and Persians) which no papist may withstand or gainsay, that whoso­euer is chosen Pope by Simony, is no Pope indeede.

You haue marked the discourse very well, let vs now proceede, and looke circumspectly into the matter, as which is of so great importance, as nothing can be more: Baptista Platina a man very néere and very deare vnto the Popes, (as who was by office Abbreuiator A­postolicus, and consequently best acquainted with the manners and dealings of Popes) telleth vs roundly and constantly, that the Popes of latter dayes crept into the Popedome, by gifts bribes, and Simony: these are his expresse words: eò enim tum Pontificatus deuenerat, vt qui plus largitione & ambitione, (non dico sanctitate vi­taePlat▪ in [...]i­ta Sylues [...]. 3& doctrinae valere [...]) is tantummodo dignitatis gradum, bonis oppressis & reiectis obtineret, quem morem: vti­nam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora: For to that passe was y^e Popedome now brought, that whoseeuer was able to preuaile most in giuing bribes & in ambition, (I say not in good life and doctrine,) that many onely should haue the degrée of honour, and good men should be reiected, which custome would to God our d [...]y [...] had ne­uer knowne. Again, that same Platina in another place hath these words: Adeo enim inuoluerat hic mos, vt i [...]mPlatin▪ in vita Da [...] ▪cuique ambitioso liceret Petri sedem inuadere: For this custome did so encrease, th [...]t now euery ambitious fellow might inuade Saint Peters chaire. Gregory the fifth was [Page 82] by sedition thrust out of his throne, and Pope Iohn thePlatin in vita Iohn. 18. Carranz. fol. 355. 18. by tyrannie occupied the Popedome: so write both Platina and Carranza, who were the Popes good friends, albeit they could not conceale the truth hereof: yea Plati­na procéedeth further, and saith: qua quidem beatitudine Iohannes carnit, fur certè in Pontificatu & latro. Non enimThe Pope both a theefe and a robber.vt par fuerat, per ostium intraut: which happy life Pope Iohn wanted, as who was a théefe and a robber: for hee entred not in by the doore, as he ought to haue done. To be briefe, Pope Bonifacius the eight, may sound the Trum­pet for all the rest: for, of him thus writeth his deareCarranz. fol. 369. Feyer Carranza: Intrauit vt Vnlpes, regnauit vt Lupus, mortuus est vt Canis: he entred as a Foxe, he reigned as a Woolfe, he died as a Dogge. By this discourse, twoO holy Pope, who would not [...]sl [...] thy foote' things are cleered, which are of so great weight and mo­ment, as they are able to batter downe popery, and to draw it vnder foote. For first, what Bishop soeuer is made Pope, by gifts, bribes, and Simony, that Bishop neither is, nor can be the true Pope indéed. Secondly, the Bi­shops of Rome haue now [...]or a long time béene very wick­ed men, and haue aspired to the Popedome by bribes and Simony. To which two maine points of popery, this third (as a golden corollary) is consectary, and cannot be denied, viz, that the Bishops of Rome for many yeeres, were not true Bishops or Popes in very déede: and con­sequently, by popish doctrine, there are no true popish Bishops in the world.

All the Iesuits and Iesuited papists in the world, are neuer able truly to answere these reasons, for doubtles, they are insoluble.

The 18. excommunication falleth vpon all those which deny the Church of Rome to be the head of all other Churches, and the Pope to be the commaunder of all people: this excommunication was thundred out, for the establishing of the Popes tyranny throughout the [Page 83] Christian world: y^e 21. excōmunication is against all such as shall boldly affirme either that the blessed Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne, or not so conceiued: and shall thereupon condemne them of heresie, or of mortall sinne, that hold, preach, or defend the contrary: this ex­communication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundred out in his Extrauagant, in the yéere 1474. by which practicallA. D. 1474. procéedings and doctrine, we may easily espie the vncer­tainety of the Popes faith and religion, as also his igno­rance, in the high mysteries of popish doctrine: for, though he cannot erre iudicially in matters of doctrine, as the pa­pists must beléeue, yet can he not decide this easie que­stion, whether the Virgin Mary was conceiued in origi­nall sinne, or not: but Aquinas the Popes angelicall do­ctor and canonized Saint, (whose doctrine two Popes, Vrbanus the fourth, and Innocentius the fifth, haue con­firmeth to be sound and true▪) affirmeth resolutely, that she was conceiued in originall sinne: tell me now, what ye thinke of the Popes succession at Rome?

I see flatly and euidently, that by popish do­ctrine, faith, and religion, we cannot this day tell, who are true Bishops of Rome indeed: and consequently, that the succession deriued from them, is of no credit or force at all: but yet by your fauour, I desire your further resolu­tion to such shewes and colours of succession, as they pre­tend for the Church of Rome. Saint Austen saith, (say they)Aug. contr. ep. fund. that the succession of Priests euen from Saint Peter to these daies, kept him in the bosome of the Church: so Optatus, Tertullianus, & others, do often alledge, & stand vpon the succession of Bishops, as an argument of the truth.

It is true, that Saint Austen made a great ac­count of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome, and my selfe (also all learned men I thinke,) doe iumpe with Saint Austen in that his opinion: for the reso­lution of which obiection, sundry obseruations already [Page 84] Proued are to be well remembred. 1 First, that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning, many of them holy Mar­tyre, who gaue their liues for the testimony of our Lord Iesus. 2 Secondly, that they ioyned formall succession with materiall, vntill Saint Austens dayes and long after. 3 Thirdly, that the Church of Rome by little and little swarued from the truth, and declined in many points of doctrine from the auncient receiued faith. 4 Fourthly,Mark [...] well for Christs sake. that the latter Bishops of Rome haue decreed publickely against the knowen faith: in so much, as some of them haue béene condemned with the sound of the Trumpets, other some haue béene conuicted of Arrianisme, others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheisme, others to haue crept into Peters chaire, (as they terme it) by flat Simony, o­thers haue occupied the place by violent intrusion, others by homage done to the diuel of hell. 5 Fifthly, that faith and honest dealing was now decaied in the Church of Rome, and long before the daies of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate, that euery ambitious fellow might inuade Peters seate. 6 Sixthly, that by popish doctrine and vniforme assertions of best approued popish writers, succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtfull, that they cannot proue themselues this day to be true Bishops in­deed: I say (by popish doctrine) because my selfe doe hold them true Bishops, though very wicked and vngodlyThe old Bishops of Rome, ioi­ned formal succession with mate­riall. men: of which point I shall haue occasion, to speake of more at large by and by: my answere therefore in briefe is this: viz, that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austens time, ioyned formall succession with materiall, which if the Bishops of Rome would this day performe, all godly Christians would now ioyne with them, as Saint Austen did in his time: for as Saint frene say, we ought to obeyIrenaeus. lib. [...]. cap. 43. those Priests, that with the succession, kéepe the word of truth.

Saint Paul saith plainely, that there must bee [Page 85] Bishops and Pastors in the church vntill the worlds end: whereupon it followeth (say the Papists, whom now I haue vpon good grounds renounced) that you Protestants haue no Church at all: for before Luther departed from them, all Bishops and Priests for many yeares together, embraced their Romish religion. This obiection (say our Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings) doth so gall the Pro­testants, as they cannot tell in the world, what answere to frame thereunto.

I answere: 1 first, that we are the true reformed Catholikes, as is already proued 2 Secondly, that Pa­storsEphe [...]. 2. [...]. & Doctors (as S. Paul saith) haue euer béene in the Church, are at this present, and shall be to the worlds end. 3 Thirdly, that albeit the visible Church cannot want materiall succession (the continuance whereof Christ hath promised) yet cannot that succession without formall, yéeld any sound argument of true faith and religion. For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra, after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from theLyran in cap. 16. Mat. faith, and become flat Apostataes, concludeth in these ex­presse words: propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis per­sonis, in quibus est notitia vera, et confessio fidei & verita­tis. By reason whereof, the Church consisteth in those persons, in whom there is true knowledge, and confession of the faith and verity. Thus writeth this learned popish Fryer, telling vs resolutely, y^• though there must be euer­moreEphes. 4. ver. 11. a visible Church, w^t visible Pastors & Doctors in it, yet those visible Pastors & Doctors, both may swarue, & haue de facto, swarued, from the true faith & religion: andIoh. 10. v. 4. 1 [...]. 16 26. 27. 8 [...] [...]. [...]5. [...]uc. [...]. [...]. 2. [...] 2 [...]. 1 Ioh. [...]. [...]. that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predesti­nate and elect children of God, whose faith shall neuer faile: this poynt you haue heard so pithely approued, as is able to satisfie euery in different reader.

The Iesuites say that howsoeuer you wrangle about your formal succession, yet it is cleere that you haue [Page 86] no material succession at all, vnlesse you tearme it material succession, when meere Lay-men occupy the roomes of lawful Bishops: for none may take vpon them, or intrude thēselues into the holy ministery, but such as are lawfully called thereunto, as Aaron was: & yet all the world can tellHebr. 5. 4. you, that all your Ministers, Bishops, Priests, and Dea­cons, in the time of King Edward, and Queene Elizabeth, and now of King IAMES, haue no other orders & conse­cration at all, but such as they receiued of our Romish Bi­shops indeede.

Our succession is both materiall and formall, Christian and Apostolicall: as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures, and to the vsuall practise of the primitiue Church. 1 For first, our Bishops can proue their Doctrine by the scriptures, and by the testimonies of best approued popish writers, as we haue séene already. 2 Secondly, our Bishops haue mission and imposition of hands, according to the practise Apostolical▪ and of all approued antiquity. 3 Thirdly, our Bishops are made in such forme and order, as they haue euer béene accustomed, a few popish, supersti­ous, and beggerly ceremonies omitted, which by little & little▪ had of late yeares crept into the Church, that is to say, by frée election of the Chapiter, by consecration of the Arch-bishop, and other his associates, and by the admissi­on of the Prince.

Saint Epiphanius inueigheth bitterly against oneEpiph. lib. 3. pag▪ 3 [...] 5. Zachaeus, who being but a Lay-man (as your Puritaines be) presumed impudently to handle the holy Mysteries. S. Hierome in like manner saith of Hilarius the heretike, thatHier▪ cont. Luciser. he could neither baptize nor administer the Eucharist, be­cause he was but a Deacon whē he went out of the church, and what are you but Deacons? nay what are you but meere Lay-men? for you are neither consecrated after the old manner, nor confirmed by the Pope, as the Iesuits beare the world in hand.

I answere, 1 first, that if méere Lay-men should presume in our Churches, either to preach, teach, or handle the holy mysteries, they could not escape condig [...]e punishment, according to their demerites 2 Secondly,Act. [...] ▪ 24. Act. 6. 6. Act. 4▪ 23. 1 [...]Soan [...] ▪ 2. 2 [...]m▪ 1. 6 l [...]. 1 5. that the want of your greasing and other begge [...]ly Cere­monies, (wherewith the primitiue Church was neuer acquainted, as holy writ teacheth vs,) cannot make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull. 3 Thirdly y^• our Bishops are consecrated, & confirmed according to the an­cient manner of the primitiue Church: for, three things onely are necessary, all which (God be thanked for it,) are this day practised in our Church of England: to wit, election of the whole Congregation, confirmation of the Prince, and consecration with godly praiers, and impo­sition of hands. Of the last of these thrée, that is, of the im­position of hands, with praier mention is made to Ti­mothie, and else where. For the confirmatiō of the Prince, and not of the Pope (which is the second point) this is1 T [...]m. 5 22 2 T [...] 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5. Act 6 6. Act. 14 [...] 3. Pela [...] [...] ▪ Seu [...] ▪ Benediciu [...]. enough for the tryall, viz. that these thrée Popes, Pelagi­us the second, Se [...]erinus, and Benedictus the second, and all other Bishops of Rome till the sayd Benedict, inclusi­uè were euer elected and confirmed by the Emperours commandement: which verity is freely confessed in ex­presse termes▪ by foure famous Popish writers; who therefore are and ought to be of more credit and force a­gainst the Papists, then any other authors whatsoeuer. The names of the popish Doctors are these: Baptista Pla­tina, Bartholomaeus Carranxa, Anastatius Bibliothecarius, and Onuphrius Panuinius. Piatina hath these words, Ni [...]Platin. in vita [...] e [...]. 2. A. D. 579▪enim tum in eligendo Pontifice actū erat▪ nisi eius electio­nem Imperator approbasset: for at that time (which was about the yeere of our Lord God [...]0.) nothing was done effectually concerning the election of the Bishop of Rome, vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same. Touching the creation of Seuerinus, (for the other testimony was [Page 88] of Pelagius) the same Platina writeth in this manner: Va­na enim tunc habebatur Cleri ac populi electio nisi Impe­ratoresPlatin. in vita Seueri. A. D. 637. Platin in vita Bened.aut eorum Exarchi confirmassent: For the election of the Clergie and the people was of no force at all in those dayes, vnlesse the Emperours or their Lieutenants had confirmed the same: this was done, about the yéere, 637. Concerning the creation or making of Benedict, Platina hath these words; ad hunc Constantius Imperator sanctionem misit, vt deinceps quem Clerus, populus, E­xercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegislet, eundem sta­tim verum Christi Vicarium esse omnes crederent, nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis, aut Italiae Exarchi ex­pectat authoritate, vt antea fieri cōsueuerat id enim ratum erat in creando Pontifice, quod Princeps confirmaslet, vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat: The Emperour Con­stantine sent a decrée to this Pope, that whomsoeuer the Clergy, people and Romaine Souldiers should henceforth choose for their Bishop, all people should by and by beléeue him to be the U [...]car of Christ, (scilicet) if they would:A. D. 685. Caaranz. pag▪ 301. apud Onuph. in Chron. This was done in anno 68 [...].

Bartholomaeus Carranza a famous Dominican Frier, hath the very same assertion ad verbum.

Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words. Pontifices qui deinde fuerant, creati & con [...]ecrati sunt si­ne Constantinopolitani Imperatoris iussione: The Popes or Bishops of Rome that liued afterward, were made and consecrated without the Emperour of Constantinople his cōmaund: as if they had said, in the old time and auncient Church, no Bishop of Rome could haue bin admitted at a­ny time, vnles he had brought letters patents frō the Em­perour though now y^• practise be farre otherwise. Now M. Theophilus, tell me what you gather out of this discourse.

Out of this doctrine of this famous papists, I gather to the confusion of the late Bishops of Rome, their Iesuits, and all Iesuited papists, these three euidents, gol­den, [Page 89] and most necessary corollaries. First, that the vul­gar and common sort of people are grosly deceiued, when they terme popery the old religion, and repute them for the auncient Catholikes: for, we are indeede the true andCorollari [...]. 1. auncient Catholikes, (I put my selfe in the number, be­cause God now hath made me a true reformed Catholike,) and the papists are become flat heretiques, in many points of the true faith, though not apostataes from the whole. For, this Benedict the second could not be madeA. D. 684. Bishop of Rome, 684. yeeres after Christs sacred aduent, without the Emperours letters Patents: so then▪ the Empe­roursLo, Popery is the new religion. had the soueraignty ouer the Bishops of Rome, for the space almost of seuen hundren yeeres after Christ, & so long the Popes acknowledged the Emperours for their soueraigne Lords, as without whose letters Patents they could haue no iurisdiction in the Church. I adde as con­sectary hereunto, that as in ciuill causes many are debarred from their lawfull inheritance, through the violent dealing of mighty men, euen so we, the true reformed Catholikes, haue beene many yeeres excluded from the free vse of our owne Church and Sacraments, by the force, violence, and tyrannie, of the blood-thirsty Romish Bishops, and partly by remissenes of sundry Emperours, who vpon a blind zeale not grounded vpon Gods word, yeelded vp their soueraigne rights vnto them: and as temporal men are in time restored to their auncient right, by zealous and godly Magistrates: euen so were we and are we (God make vs thankefull for it) by the goodnesse of God and most Christian Princes, (King Henry the eight, King Ed­ward the sixt, Queene Elizabeth, and King IAMES our most gratious soueraigne now happily regnant ouer vs) restored to the old Christian, Catholike, and Aposto­like religion, and with all Christian freedome placed a­gain in our owne Churches, the spirituall birth-right of our selues and our ancestors. [Page 90] Secondly, thath our Bishops in England are made andCorollary. 2. consecrated, according to the auncient, Christian, Ca­tholike, Apostolike, and old Roman maner, that is to say,Corollary. 3 by the letters Patents of the Prince. Thirdly, that the Em­perours of Constantinople, for the space of 200. yeares and odde after the dissolution of the Empire in the west, had still the soueraignty ouer the Bishop of Rome: for the west Empire was dissolued in Anno 471, and Benedict the second obteined of the Emperour Constantine in Anno 684, that the Bishops of Rome might from thenceforth be chosen, confirmed, and enioy their iurisdiction, without the commandement and letters Patents of the Empe­rour.

You haue marked well the discourse, and for all that, haue not obserued one point of great conse­quence.

What is that I beseech you heartily?

The late Popes or Bishops of Rome, tel vs, that Constantine the great, at his departure from Rome to Constantinople, gaue the Bishop of Rome and his suc­cessors his crowne and all his royall dignitie, both in the Citie of Rome, and in Italie, and in all the west parts:Dist. 96. Canon. Constanti­nus. which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement, we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Pa­pists, to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable: for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors, &Popes were subiects to Emperors, aboue 340. yeeres after the depar­ture of Constan­tine from Rome. receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares, euen vntill Benedict the se­cond: to which I adde, that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables.

This is a point of great consequence, which I should neuer haue espied, but by your relation.

I would wish you likewise to obserue, that the Emperours, Constantinus, Iustinianus, and others, yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of [Page 91] Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge, opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie: for in short time af­ter, the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly, that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters, and to translate them to their pleasures.

It is a memorable obseruation, I shall keep it in remembrance: but let me still reason for the Papists, as if I were one of them; for when all difficulties are answe­red, I shall be the stronger in the truth. The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests, as the Apo­stleEphe. 4. 11. recordeth, and your selfe graunteth: but so it is, that when he first reformed the Church, as you terme it, yee neither had any Bishops, nor any Priests of your owne, neither could ye finde any in any other place, but onely with vs and in our Church, when Martin Luther went out from vs: our Church therefore and none but ours, is the true Church of God; as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall.

I answere first, that our succession in the Church of England, is farre better then theirs of Rome: for theirs of Rome, (as we haue heard and séene) is most doubtfull and vncertain: but ours of England so constant and so assured, as no deniall can be made thereof: I proue it, because in Anno, 596. Gregory the greatA. D. 596. sent Augustine the Monke, with Iustus, Melitus, and o­thers (as our approued Cronicles do relate) to preach the Gospell to the Saxons, who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert: and he conuerted to the Christian faith, gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury: since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetu­all succession of Bishops, without schisme or interrup­tion at all, albeit y^e Church of Rome (as is already proued) is not able to performe hal [...]e so much. Secondly, that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors, supersti­tions, [Page 92] and abuses, at such time as M. Luther began aMarke this well, that our church receiued their Bi­shops from Rome, whē that church was in good case. 596. Christian reformation: yet for all that, the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling, albeit otherwise very wicked men, and consequently, that our Bishops and Priests though des­cended, created, and made of such deformed popish Prelats, are true Bishops and Prists indéede.

If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs, then must either theirs bee good, or ours as bad as theirs: and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all.

Marke well what I say, that yée may vnder­stand the saint. The Philosopher saith, that one may béeAriost in lit. Politic. a good Citizen, though a bad man: Euen so say I, that though the Papists were wicked men, and the Popish Bishops, that created our Bishops, foully polluted both in life and doctrine: yet were they still true Christians & true Bishops, and consequently true members of the vi­sible Church: for they still professed, held, and maintai­ned the chiefe fundamentall points of religion; of God of the blessed Trinity, of Christ and his two natures, of his death & passion: of his resurrection and assention: of the generall doome; & of all the rest comprised in the summe ofThe Po­pish church is stil a true Church, though not a godly Church. religion, which we call the Apostles Créede: and therefore, though they grieuously wounded, and in a manner killed themselues, by their errours, corruptions, superstitions, and abuses: yet in regard of the truth which they kept cō ­stantly, there remained in them some life of Christianity. They wanted legges, and armes, and had their bo­dies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases; but they did still draw breath, and were not wholy dead. We read in the Apostolicall history, that there were some that beléeued, who being of the heresie of the Pharisées, did still hold the ceremonies of the law, and vrged others to be circumcised. The Prophet Dauid was sore woun­ded with adultery and murther; but yet he still continu­ed [Page 93] the child of God: and Peter cursed and sware that héeAct. 15 5. Ioh. 12. v. 42. 2 Sam. 11. & cap. 12. Mat. 26. v. 74. knew not Christ, who for all that, still beleeued in Christ to the end.

How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once? it seemeth to me a thing impossible.

I answere: first, that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once, as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once: and yet do all Logi­cians grant, that this latter may be effected with all facili­ty. For, one and the same man, may at one and the same time, be both a father in respect of his own child, & a sonne in respect of his father, who is Grandfather to the saydRelatiua a [...] ctu sese po­nunt & an [...] f [...]runt. child. Secondly, that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop, as there is betwéene a true man and a good man: but as he is a true man, that hath the nature of a true man, how bad soeuer he be inIudas was a true Apo­stle, & yet array [...]or too. faith, life & conuersation, as Turkes, Iewes, Traitors, Heretickes & Apostataes; euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church, who haue their calling, places, & iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church, how bad soeuer they be in other respects.

Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests, in the beginning of Queene Eli­zabeths reigne, ordeyned and consecrated them after ano­ther manner, then they are this day, and euer haue beene since that time, ergo, either must their Bishops, or else all our Bishops, the first onely excepted (who were created after the popish manner) be false, counterfeit, and no true Bishops indeed.

Neither their Bishops, nor ours, are false and conterfeit, but both true and perfect Bishops, in euery es­sentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop.

Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope, yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory. Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme, [Page 94] and many other ceremonies, which yours doe not vse at all.

All the things by you named, are méere extrin­secall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop, or of a Priest.

Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle, Chrisme, and other ceremonies, or you in reiecting and contemning the same.

I answere: 1 first, that neither of both doth fol­low of necessity, the reason is euident: because things méerely adiaphora, and indifferent of their owne nature,Annoint­ing is not an essenti­all part of a King. may be vsed or not vsed, as it séemeth good to the supreme magistrate. For example sake: whether Kings & Quéenes be annointed at their Coronations, or not, it is méere extrin [...]ecall to their sacred soueraignty, as who are as per­fect Kings before it, as after the same: and consequently, though our Church haue reiected such ceremonies, as vn­profitable or not necessary at the least, yet doth shee not condemne other reformed Churches, which vse and still reteine the same, after the simple vse and manner of the first inst tution thereof; all leuity, superstition, and o­pinion of necessity set apart. 2 Secondly, that though our Bishops were consecrated in popish maner with oyle and Chrisme, and by the Popes authority: yet neither did, nor could such externall rites, frustrate and euacuate, their ministeriall dignity: for to vse your Schoole-termes;Valide non [...]ice [...]è. many things, are done validè, which are not done, licitè: if the Iesuites and Iesuited papists deny this, they must condemne many of their Popes, as it is already proued. 3 Thirdly, that the abolishing of néedles ceremonies, super­stitiously abused, can no wayes preiu [...]ice the lawfull and true calling of our Bishops.

All Bishops and Priests made by them, are receiued as true Bishops of you; but Bishops and Priests made by you, are but meere Lay-men with [Page 95] them; which seemeth an euident argument, that true Bishopes are onely made by the authority of the Pope.

I answere: 1 first, that the authority of the Bi­shopCommune Nice [...] c [...]n. [...] dist 3▪ cap. [...]os [...]ntiquus [...] [...]. Co [...]sta [...]ti [...] n [...]p. 6. [...]an. [...]6. of Rome, is but like the authority of other Patri­arkes; as it was defined by the first famous generall Councell vnder Constantine the great. 2 Secondly, that the famous generall Councell of Constantinople (which was celebrated in Anno 681.) granted the Bishope of Constantinople equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome, and to excell in all Ecclesiasticall affaires as the Bishop of Rome; saue onely that the chief Patriarchall seat was reserued to him for order-sake and peaceable gouernement of the Church. For as Rome was the chiefe seate of the Emperour, and therefore called Caput mundi; so was y^e Bishop there for y^e honor & dignity of the Empire, (to which all the world paid tribute in y^e daies of Augustus Caesar) reputed the chéefest Bishop of the visi­bleLuke. 2. 1. Church. 3 Thirdly, that the Bishop of Romes autho­rity, was so farre from being superiour to the Emperours (who was euer called the Emperour of Rome) that no Bishop there for the space of 684. yeares, could haue and enioy any iurisdiction, vnlesse the same Bishop were con­firmed by the letters pattents of the Emperour. ThisA. D. 684. point of doctrine (which is of great consequence) is alrea­dy proued; and that, euen by the testimony of many lear­ned and famous Papists. 4 Fourthly, that neither the Popes authority, neither Oyle nor Crisme, nor any other Popish ceremony, either is or can be any essentiall part of the Ecclesiastical ministery, and consequently, that the Papist must néedes be condemned, either of too too grosse ignorance, or else of extreame malice, whilest they reiect our Ministers, and repute them méere Lay-men: and that for the want of a few curious and vnprofitable cere­monies, which are not onely meere extrinsecal to the fun­ction, [Page 96] but withall superstitiously abused euery where. 5 Fifthly, that the Papists condemne themselues in their owne practicall proceedings, whiles they admit our Sa­crament of Baptisme by our Ministers administred, andMarke this well. withall reiect as méere Lay-men our Ministers of y^e same. For as they supply the accedentall ceremonies in the one, so may they do also w^t as great reason in y^e other. Where­fore I conclude, that as our Church sheweth both charity and wisedome, in admitting their Bishops and Priests, so doth their Church shew both malice and ignorance, in refusing ours. And that is all indéed, that truly can be in­ferred of their senslles and péeuish refusall; albeit many sil­ly simply seduced papists, neither doe nor can so conceiue the matter. This my answere is yet confirmed by ano­ther Popish practicall vsage. They reiect our Ministers,Silly igno­rāt papists are grosly deceiued. because they want their popish beggerly ceremonies: and for all that▪ they grant their owne Ministers to be true Priests still, euen after they haue degraded them, and ta­ken all their ceremonies from them. Marke well, what I shall relate, for it is a wonderment of the new world. The Papists tell vs (and it is a speciall article of late po­pish faith) that if a popish Priest come into a great mar­ket place, where there is great store of wheate-bread, though a thousand or moe loaues in number, and then, and there looking on the same bread, shall pronounce theseThis can­not be de­nied by po­pish do­ctrine. words (hoc est corpus meum, this is my body) with in­tention to consecrate the same: then forthwith euery loafe of the sayd wheat-bread, is made Christs body, and per concomitantiam as their Schooles terme it) God almigh­ty; so as the people are bound by popish faith and lawes to adore the same loaues, euery loafe as the sonne of the euer­liuing God: trial here of was once made a Rome as my self being in Rome, heard from the mouth of a Iesuite. For, as the Iesuite reported to me (and I haue reason to credite him in such a case and cause) a Priest being degraded, and [Page 97] designed to dye for his homely qualities, as he passed in the stréete by a bakers shop, beheld a great quantity of wheat­bread, and recited these words (hoc est corpus meum) and then told the people that he had cōsecrated the same bread;Behold here a great My­stery of po­pish foole­ry. so desiring once to be auenged of the Pope, and his god­lesse Popelings: Wherupon consultation was had out of hand among the learned there, and sentence resolutely [...]en by the Pope, that euery loafe was God almighty. After which sentence so clearkely pronounced, the bread was carryed away with great solemnity, and such reue­rence and adoration exhibited to the same, as was due to the sonne of the euerliuing God. Now, if Popish Priests can this doe, euen after their annointing and greasing ta­ken from them: yea, after their deare Pope hath degra­ded, and after his best maner vnpriested them, they haue no reason, doubtlesse to say, that our Bishops cannot per­forme the function of true Bishops, séeing our BishoppesMarke well gentle reader. are consecrated of popish truly made Bishoppes, though without Popish vnprofitable and superstitiously abused ceremonies. This resolution is soundly deduced out of the very bowels of Popish faith and religion.

What? was not that religion popish, whichA. D. 596. your nation receiued at their first conuersion from Paga­nisme? did not Pope Gregory affect their conuersion, by sending Augustine, Melitus [...]ustus, and others into En­gland? how then can yee for shame ( [...]ay our Popes, Car­dinals and Iesuites) deny that faith & religion which your natiue country embraced and beleeued, at your first recei­uing of the Christian faith? how can yee contemne and condemne those Popes, who bestowed such inestimable and precious treasures vpon your country? Would to God I could soundly answere this reason.

Listen well to my discourse, and you shall (God willing) be able to confute it with all facility: this is the answere. First that our nation first receiued the faith, i [...] [Page 98] the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome, about 70 [...] yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation, by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes. 2 Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth, the Brutans had re­ceiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6 [...]. by the prea­ching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent in­to this land whereof Ioseph of Aramath [...]a was the chiefe. 3 Thirdly that about the yéere 1 [...]9. Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Co [...] ­lis, A. D. 179. sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to bap­tise the said King and his people, and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. 4 Fourthly, that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans, aboueNote, that Elutherius called king Lucinus the Vi [...]ar of God in his kingdome. 600. yéeres, it is no rare thing, that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans, should send preachers into En­gland with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent: for it is euery Christians duty, to doe what in him lieth in such a case. 5 Fifthly, that the name Pope is a Gréeke word, which signifieth father, and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome, which you may finde proued at large, in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion 6 Sixth­ly, that in the time of this Gregory, and long after, the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome, was in good case, though in some part steined with some corruptions: neither is it blame worthy, either in Bishop Gregory, that sent it, or in King Ethelbert that receiued it, that ourEuery child knoweth romanum eloquium is the Lat­tin tongue nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue, for (as the prouerbe saith: necessity hath no law) besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue, (and so to them their vulgar tongue) and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation: for of old time, (as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs) euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother andLyr. in 1, cor. 14. vulgar tongue: of which subiect I haue written at large, [Page 99] in the suruey of popery: and no maruell, if our Church re­ceiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue, (though vpon necessity, for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language,) did a long time reteine the same: for, though it were a fault, (comparatiuely a small one) would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions: one thousand yéere are fully expired, since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome: since which time, most intollerable abuses, superstitions, errors, and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome,The true member [...] of the Church are sayd to be invisible, not because the men bee not seene, but for that their faith and consci­ence to God-ward is not per­fectly knowne to vs▪ which is all that our Church hath abolished, still constant­ly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion.

You told me that the visible Church both may erre, and, de facto, hath erred: and the same (as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued po­pish writers) may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome: but how any Church can be inuisible, (which is the Church, say you, that cannot erre) I doe not yet vnderstand▪ I pray you take some paine, for my better instruction in that behalfe.

True it is that euery particular Chuch is visi­ble in it selfe, for all men, women, and children, (euery one in his corporall consistence) are visible, as experience teacheth vs: and for all that, this is a true and most constant position, that that Church which cannot erre,Mal. 1. 2. Ephes▪ 1. 4. Rom. 10. 12 1 Tim. 2. v. 19. Ioh. 10. 36. Rom. 8. 27. [...]ere. 17. 9. Apoc. 2. 23. inuisible: for the true a [...]d exact knowledge whereof, you must distinguish in man two things: his externall corpo­reity or corporall consistence, and his internall election in Christ Iesus. Man considered the former way is visi­ble indéed, euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible, and knowne onely vnto God, or to those to whom he reuealeth it.

I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the que­stion, though no perfect insight into the same. I pray [Page 100] you vnfold the case distinctly, and declare it by some fa­miliar examples, if it may be.

At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria, that he onely was left alone an3 Reg. 18. 22 Rom. 11. 4. Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner: I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men; which haue notThey are visible in themselues, but their faith and conscience is not known vn­to men. bowed the knée to Baal. By which diuine Oracle it is e­uident, y^• seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias, and all the same visible in themselues, at one and y^• same time▪ Do yée now vnderstand the case?

I seeme to conceiue it, by vertue of your for­mer distinction. They were visible as men, but inuisible as the children of God: for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ.

You conceiue it aright, Iudas Iscariot as he wasMat. 10. 4. and 26. 47. & 22. a man, was visible both to the rest of the Apostles, and to others; who for all that, as he was a traytor, was visible to God alone: for which cause the Apostles were astoni­shed, when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister. The Apostle confirmeth the same, when he saith, the foundation of God remaineth sure, and hath this seale, the Lord knoweth who are his:Mat. 26. v. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 19. the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward, is vn­knowne to men, and so to them they are inuisible, though visible in their owne persons.

I must needes yeeld to this▪ as to a manifest truth: but are not all members of the which Church be­leeue in Christ, and hold the catholike faith, as we do?

All that professe externally the Catholike faith, are members of the visible Church, and must be reputedMat. [...]8▪ 17. 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 2. v. [...]. 10. for such, so long as they are not cut off from the Church, by the iust censure of excommunication. But Gods elect onely are the true Church, that is to say, that mysticall body, whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head, Gods e­lect onely are that Church, to which Christ promised his [Page 101] inuisible presence to the worlds end. Gods elect only are that Church, which is the pillar of truth▪ and cannot erre.1 Cor. 10. 17. Ephes. 5. 23. 25, 26. Col 1. 18. 24 Ioh. 10. v. 16, 27. 1. Ioh. 2, 19. Mat. 28. [...]0. 1. Tim 3. 15. But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body, whereof Christ is the head: for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head, that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse, and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis, at the generall doome. Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus y^e Bride-grome, betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion, as no power create vpon earth, or in heauen, is able to dis­soluePsal. 5. 7. Mat. 25. ver. 14. 2. Tim 2. 19, the same.

God reward you for your great paines, which you haue taken herein for his names sake, and my good, you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficultiesOur Church doth still retaine all the old Ro­man religi­on. of christian religion, that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine, highly reueren­cing the old Roman religion, and so much of late Romish faith and doctrine, as is consonant and agreeable to the same. But for all this, the Papists seeme to haue strong reasons for their vnwritten traditions, which indeede are so strong as my selfe know not how to answere them.

Doubt nothing in this behalfe: God of his mercy will illustrate your vnderstanding in this difficul­ty, as he hath done already in the rest: but for this sub­iect, I haue written so largely thereof in two seuerall bookes, (viz. the downe fall of Popery, and the Iesuits Antepast) that I am altogether vnwilling to handle the same a fresh.

I haue read both those bookes, & they doe con­tent me exceedingly: howbeit, some obiections may yet be made against the doctrine there deliuered, which my selfe am not able to confute: I therefore would humbly in­treate your paines, not for a new discourse thereof, (which I hold needlesse) but for a fuller and plainer explication [Page 102] of some especiall doubts, wherewith our learned papists troubleme.

Propound them in Gods name, by whose ho­ly and powerfull assistance, I trust to returne them to the Popes vtter shame, to the and euerlasting confusion of al Iesuited papists, that shall obstinately beléeue or defend the same.

I will still by your fauour argue as a papist on the be­halfe of the papists, that so I may more cleerely haue a soūd insight into the truth: you Protestants (for so we vse to terme you,) beare vs in hand, that the scripture or writ­ten word of God conteineth all things necessary for mans saluation: but our learned and religious Cardinall Bellar­minus assureth vs, that the truth is farre otherwise, and that many things necessary for mens saluation, are onely know­en and receiued by tradition: and what he writeth, is the Popes ownefaith, and consequently the faith of the whole Church: for he dedicated his bookes to the Popes holy­nesse, who highly commended and approued them, that he made him Cardinall (though before but a poore Fryer) for his paines.

I answere 1 first, that I know your Cardinall right well, and willingly acknowledge him to be learned,Act. 9. v. 1, 2 Act. 26. v. 4 5. as also religious and [...]ealous after the manner of his sect, but in such sort as Paul was before his conuersion. Se­condly, that your Cardinal doth often acknowledge the truth vnawares against himselfe, as doe your other Ie­suits: one onely assertion I will now cite, out of the Ie­suite S. R. (Robert Parsons is the man) in his preten­sed [Page 103] answere to the downefall of popery: these are his ex­presseS. R. pag. 286. words; where if by diuina eloquia, we vnderstand holy writ, (as Bell translateth and Saint Austen séemeth to meane) me thinkes he plainely auoucheth, that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written, which to know is necessary to euery mans saluation: the same tea­ceth Saint Syril, saying, not all things which our LordS. Cyril lib. 11. in Ioan. cap. 68. did, are written, but what the writers déemed sufficient, as well for manners, as for doctrine, that by right faith and works, we may attaine to the Kingdome of Heauen: and Saint Chrisostome, what things soeuer are necessary,Chrys [...]st. 2. Thes. hom. 3. are manifest out of scripture: this is our Iesuites owne tale, in the best manner he can vtter it, whiles he bestir­rethThe Iesuits confession. himselfe more then a little, to answere my booke (the downefall of popery) out of whose confession and frée graunt, (such is the force of truth) I obserue these me­morable and golden lessons. 1 First, that euery thing ne­cessary for euery mans saluation, is contained in the holy scriptures. 2 Secondly, (and this is a thing to be admi­red,Marke well for Christs sake. comming from a papists mouth) that euery point necessary for saluation, is plainely and cléerely set downe in holy writ. 3 Thirdly, that God himselfe appointed all necessary things to be cléerely written. 4 Fourthly, that Saint Augustine, Saint Chrisostome, and Saint Cyrill, are of mine opinion. 5 Fiftly, that the Iesuite vnawares iustifieth that doctrine, which he puposely laboureth to o­uerthrow:Act. 9 5 for, as our Lord Iesus said to Saul, it is hard for him to kicke against prickes.

The Iesuite S. R. (when you rightly name Parsons,) graunteth all things to be written which are ne­cessary for saluation but not which are necessary forS. R. p. 285. faith and doctrine: these are his owne and expresse words: for surely, the Prophets and Euangelists writ­ing their doctrine for our better remembrance, would omit no one point which was necessary to be actually [Page 104] knowne of euery one especially, seeing they haue written many things, which are not so necessary: and this con­clusion [...], 49. in Ioan, 10, 9, teacheth Saint Austen, when he saith, that those things are written which seemeth sufficient for the saluation of the faithfull: where I note (saith S. R.) that he said not, which seemeth sufficient to Christian faith, but which see­med sufficient to saluation: because fewer points suffice to saluation, then the Christian faith containeth, thus writ­eth the Iesuite in flat termes, freely graunting the scriptureLo, the Christian faith is su­perfluous. to containe all things necessary for saluation, but not all things necessary for faith and doctrine.

I answere: 1 first, that the Iesuite granteth as much as I desire, when he graunteth the holy scripture to containe all things necessary for our saluation: for doubtlesse, if all things necessary for saluation, be writtenThis is all I desire, in the scripture, it followeth of necessity, that no vnwrit­ten tradition is necessary for the same. 2 Secondly, thatLo, no vn­written tradition is necessa­ry for salua­tion, noting is or can be necessary for the Christian faith, but the same is also necessary for saluation: for otherwise it would follow, (which no Christian may anouch) that a man may be saued without the Christian faith: but S. Athanasius in that créede or summary of faith, (which the Church of Rome receiueth and highly reuerenceth,) affir­methAthanasius in symbol, resolutely, that whosoeuer beleeueth not stédfastly euery iote of the Christian faith, shall perish euerlastingly. 3 Thirdly, that whosoeuer hath the holy scripture, hath all things necessary for his saluation. 4 Fourthly, that sée­ing the Christian faith by popish doctrine, contaïneth ma­ny points not necessary for saluation, it followeth of ne­cessity, that many points of popish, so supposed Christian faith, are néedlesse in very déede, and for that respect with some other, our Church of noble England hath abo­lished the same with spéede: for we are the true reformed Catholikes, who hold constantly the old Roman religion in euery point: but the late start-vp Romish faith is fully [Page 105] replenished, with curious sophistications, friuolous di­ [...]ns, vain inuentions, counterfeit myracles, grosse errors, palpables her [...]stes, intollerable superstitions, méere foolishnesse, and flat leasings.

It is nowhere siad in scripture, (saith the Iesuite S. R.) that all the bookes, chapters, verses, and sen­tencesS. R. p. 292. which in the Bible are admitted for Canonicall, are truly Canonicall and Gods pure word, without the mix­tureThe Pa­pists inuin­cible Bul­warke. of mans word: and yet is this a point of Christian faith, yea, hereupon depend all the articles which we gather out of the scripture: this is that inuincible Bulwarke, (saith Parsons) which no Protestant can euer batter downe while the world shall endure.

I answere: 1 first, that by our Iesuits doctrine (as we haue head) if may be a point of Christian faith, and yet not necessary to saluation, and consequently, ifMarke this point well this point were not knowne by the scriptures, yet might the scripture containe all things néedefull to saluation. 2 Secōdly that y^• holy scripture sheweth itself to be Canical, and the pure word of God: for, as holy Dauid saith, it isPs. 11. v. 105. 2. Pet. 1. 19. Hebr. 4. ver 12. He is a re­probate whole heart Gods word doth not touch. 2. Cor. 44. a Lanterne to our féete and a light to our pathes, as Saint Peter saith, it is a light that shineth in the darke: and S. Paul saith. Gods word is liuely, and mighty in operation, and sharper then any two edged sword: it is not incke and paper, or a bare and dead Letter, but quicke and power­able, and sheweth it selfe as light to the children of light. For, (as the same Apostle telleth vs) if Christs Gospell be hid, it is hid in them that perish, in whom the God of this world hath blinded the mindes of them which beleue not, lest the light of Christs glorious Gospell should shine vnto them: yea, the selfe same Apostle saith, that1. Cor. 2. 15. 1. Ioh. 2. ver. 27. 1. Ioh. 10. ver. 27. the spirituall man iudgeth all things. Saint Iohn also saith, that the v [...]ction which Gods children haue recei­ued, teacheth them all things. And what néede many words? Christ himselfe assureth vs, that his shéepe heare [Page 106] hi [...] voy [...] ▪ and that they follow him, because they know his voyce▪ he addeth, that they will not follow a straun­ger, and he yéeldeth this reason there [...], because they know not the voyce of straungers: this is confirmed by anIoh. 10. v. 3. 4. 5. Ioh. 3. 18. old receiued Theologicall maxime, viz, that when wee pray, we speake to God, but when we read, or heare the holy scripture redde, then God speaketh to vs: but certes, when God speaketh to vs, if we be his, wee will heare him, if we be his shéepe we will know his voyce and follow him. 3 Thirdly, that euery part of the new Te­stament, doth affirme it selfe to be the pure word of God: for it saith, the holy Gospel of Iesus Christ, according to Matthew Marke, Luke and Iohn: the Actes of the holy Apostles, written by Luke the Euangelist: the Epistle of the Apostle Paul, to the Romans, Corinthians, Gala­tians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessaloni­ti [...]ns, Timotheus, Titus and Philemon: the Epistle of Pe­ter Iames, Iude, and Iohn, the seruants of Iesus Christ: the reuelation of Iesus Christ, which God gaue vnto Iohn his seruant by his holy Angell. 4 Fourthly, that the new Testament giueth testimony to the old, and the old to the new, in the swéete harmony of diuine truth: for Christ himselfe te [...]l [...]th vs, that all must come to passe which are written of him, in the law, in the Prophets, and in the Psalmes: and for this end was it, that Abra­ham Luke. 24▪ ver. 29. answered the rich glutton in these words; they haue Moses and the Prophets, let them heare them: as if he had said, now the law is not studied now the Pro­phets are contemned, and now God is not heard spea­king in his holy word: some would haue Angels come downe from heauen, some desire myracles, others theTo heare Moses and the Pro­phets, is to reade their bookes. dead to rise againe: howbeit to heare Moses and the Prophetes (which is to read the scriptured, for Moses and the Prophets were dead many hundred yéeces afore) is the true and onely way to attaine eternall life: this [Page 107] reason striketh dead, as which proueth the scripture of theRom. 1. v. 1. old Testament to be Canonicall, and the pure word of God: and this reason is confirmed by Saint Paul, when he telleth vs, that he was put apart to preach the Gospel of God which afore was promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures: and it is further confirmed, because theAct. 26. ver. 22. same Apostle saith in an other place, that he taught no­thing, but which Moses and the Prophets had foretold should come to passe. Fifthly, that these holy writingsChrist con­firmed the old Testa­ment to be Canonical. of Moses and the Prophetes, were common among the Iewes in Christs tune, and yet did Christ neuer once re­proue the Iewes for any corruption therein, or charge them with changing, adding, or taking away of any one iote or title either of the law or of y^• Prophets: for our mer­cifullNomb. 23. ver 5. 7. 8. Act. 9. ver. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Mat. 7 15. 16. Iob. 2. v. 8. 10 11. and powerable God, who caused Balaam to blesse when he entred to curse: who, when Saul was a cruell persecuter, blasphemer, and rauening Woolfe, made him with one word as méeke as a Lambe: who shut vp the Sea with doores and staied her proud waues, & appointed her boūds whither she should come, but no further: enforced y^• aduersaries of the truth (the Iewes I meane) to preserue the holy scriptures of the old Testament inuiolable and pure from all corruption, and not to adde any thing there­to,Exod. 8. 19 Deut, 4. 2, Deut 12. 32 or take ought therefrom, neither to prophane the same, with the least mixture of mans word: our Lord Iesus assured vs hereof, when he constantly pronounced, that it was more easie for Heauen and Earth to passe a­way,Luke, 2 [...], 35 Luke, 16, ver, 17, Mat, 5, 10. Mat, 24, 34, Luke 21, ver, 33. then that one title of the law should fall: thus you see, or may sée, I wéent, that the popish inuincible bul­warke is battered downe, & made euen with the ground: for none but God alone, can infallibly foretell things to come.

Your reasons are vnanswerable in my iudge­ment, and your manner of disputation so forcible, as it is able fully to perswade any indifferent reader. Howbeit, I [Page 108] do not yet see how the holy scripture doth proue it selfe canonical: for if that were possible to be proued, not onely our Iesuite Pars [...]as, but the Pope, his Cardinals, and all his Iesuited Popelings should be confounded euerlastingly.

I haue proued out of Christs own words, that whatsoeuer is contained in the law of Moses, in the bookesLuk. 24. v. 44▪ Luk. 16. v. 26. Esa. 41. ver. 23. Exod. 8. 19. of the Prophets, & in▪ the Psalmes, that same must néeds be true, and come to passe: and consequently, whatsoeuer scripture must néedes come to passe, and cannot but bee true, that Scripture doubtles is Cannonicall, and y^• pure word of God: for onely Gods prediction of future things is infallible.

Doe not many godly people, especially the zealous Preachers of Gods word, vtter many speeches which must needs come to passe, and cannot but be true?

I answere with this distinction, that words vt­tered by men, may be considered two waies. 1 First, as the words of pure man. 2 Secondly, as Gods words pro­nounced by pure man. The words vttered by man the se­cond way, must néedes come to passe, and cannot but bee true: and therefore do we receiue and reuerence, as the pure word of God, and Canonicall scripture, all the law giuen by Moses, as also all the rest of the old and new te­stament,Psa. 116. [...]1. Psa. 62. 10. Exod. 8. 19 Ier. 17. 5. 1. Reg 13. v. 18. 24. Esa. 41. v. [...]2. 23. this day truly acknowledged for Canonical and holy writ: but words vttered by man the first way, are fallible, and may deceiue both the speaker and the hearer. For as Gods Prophet telleth vs, all men are lyars: ano­ther Prophet accurseth him y^• putteth his trust in man: another Prophet was deuoured of a Lion, for y^• he gane cre­dit, & relyed vpon the feined reuelation of an old Prophet in Bethel: for none can infallibly foretell things to come, except one that is Almighty and all-sufficient of himselfe.

Men tell vs, that the sunne shall rise at such an houre, and go downe at such an houre: as also, that the Moone shall shine at such a time, be darke at such a time, [Page 109] and so in sundry other things: All which, though foretoldMans pure word must not needes come to passe. by man, cannot but be true and come to passe. Semblably may we say, that though the predictions recounted in the law and the Prophets, must needes come to passe, and can­not but bee true, yet may they be the words of pure man, and not canonicall Scripture.

You deceiue your selfe in your owne allegati­ons: for neither the rising and setting of the sunne, nor yet the light and darknesse of the moone, must néedes comeIos. 10. v. 12 13. 2 Reg. 20. v. 11. Mat. 27. v. 45. Luk. 23. v. 44. Mark. 15 v. 33. Ioh. 18. v. 20. Exod▪ 12. 18. [...] to passe, as Astronomers do affirme: for God, all sufficient, the author thereof, can stay or change their naturall cour­ses at his holy will and pleasure. Ioshua in the power of God commanded the sunne to stay in Gibeon, & the moone in the valley of A [...]alon; and it came to passe accordingly. The sunne, at the request of good King Ezechias, went backward ten degrées. In the time of Christs most bitter and sacred passion, darknesse was ouer all the land of Cha­naan, from the sixth houre vntill the ninth, that is to say, by Theological supputation, from twelue a clock till thrée in the afternoone: and yet did Christ suffer when the moone was at the full, and about noone or mid-day. For, he was crucified (oh cruell Iewes) euen when they kept their feast of the Passeouer, which was, and must néedes be done in the full moone, according to the prescript of the law.

Your discourse yeeldeth great solace toExo. 8▪ 19. Psa. 135. 6. Rom. 9. 19. mine heart. I see it as cleerly as the noone day, that all creatures are subiect to God their maker, that euery word of man is fallible, and that onely Gods will is Cano­nicall, and cannot but be true. But Christ addeth a limita­tion and restrictiō to his words, which troubleth me moreLuk. 24: v. 44. then a little. He saith not simply and absolutely, that all things written in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalmes, must be fulfilled, but that all things which are there writ­ten of him, must of necessity come to passe.

Though Christ vse a restriction, by reason of his occasioned particular application, yet is his argument ge­nerall, as which is drawne from the excellencie & infallibi­lity of holy writ: as if he had said, whatsoeuer is written in the law of Moses, in the Prophets and in the Psalmes, y^t same must néedes come to passe, and cannot but be true, and consequently, whatsoeuer is there spoken of me, that must néeds come to passe: neither is this mine, but Christs owne exposition, I assure you.

If it bee possible to proue this, the Papists mayO dolefull Placebo. sing this dolefull song, The Pope from their royall Scep­ters, hath many Kings put downe, but now his necke is broken, and the Romish faith quite ouerthrowne.

It is not onely possible, but a thing very easie. Marke well, and vnderstand my discourse aright. Our Sauiour in the same chapter, reproueth his Disciples asLuk. 24. v. 25. they went to Emmaus, condemning them of folly and infi­delity, for that they did not simply and generally beléeue all that the Prophets had spoken. Oh fooles (saith Christ) and slow of heart, to beléeue all that the Prophets haue spoken. Againe, another text saith that he began at Mo­ses, and at all the Prophets, & interpreted vnto them in allLuk. 24. v. 27. the Scriptures, the things which were written of him. This is that interpretation which the holy Ghost affoor­deth vs. Out of which, I obserue these memorable do­coments. 1 First, that Christ spake absolutely and simply without any restriction at all, of all things written in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalmes. 2 Secondly, that Christ interpreted in all the Scriptures the things that were written of him. 3 Thirdly, that all the Scriptures of the Prophets, of Moses, and of the Psalmes, are true, and the Canonicall rule of our faith.

Christ indeed speaketh simply and generally of the Prophets; but he neither nameth Moses, nor the booke of Psalmes.

I answere: 1 first, that Christs speech is Synec­dochicall, The figure Synecdoche. very usual and frequent in the holy Scriptures, it compriseth the whole in the part thereof. 2 Secondly, that Christ nameth both Moses and all the rest of the old Testament: For after he had reproued his Apostles forLuk. 24. v. 27. not beléeuing all things in the Prophets, the text saith plainely in the words following, that Christ began at Moses, and interpreted in all the Scriptures: and a little after, in the selfe same chapter, he maketh mention both ofv. 44. v. 45. Moses, of the Prophets, and of the Psalmes: and in the verse then immediately following it is sayd, that Christ opened their vnderstanding, that they might vnderstand the Scriptures: so that Christ vndoubtedly meaneth all the scriptures of the old Testament, when synecdochically he meaneth onely the Prophets: which thing I shall yetIoh. 5. v. 45 46. 47. Ioh. 7. 38. Ioh. [...] 2. 48. proue by another scripture more plaine then all the rest. Do not thinke that I will accuse you to my father, there is one that accuseth you, euen Moses in whom yée trust. For had yée beléeued Moses, yée would haue beléeued me, for he wrot of me: but if yée beleeue not his writings, how shall yee beléeue my words? These are the very words of our Lord and Maister Christ: out of which I gather these comfortable lessons. 1 First, that the writings of Moses accuse the reprobate, and consequent­ly, that they are Canonicall Scripture: for otherwise, neither their condemnation, nor their accusation should be of force. 2 Secondly, that to beléeue Moses (marke these words) is to beléeue Christ himselfe. 3 Thirdly, that not to beleeue the writings of Moses, is not to beléeue Christs words, and consequently, that the writings of Mo­ses are Canonicall Scripture, and the pure word of God.

You resolue me so soundly in euery point, that I can no way in truth withstand your doctrine. Howbeit, me thinke I heare the Iesuite Parsons whispering in the [Page 112] eares of his silly Disciples, that there is no text from the firstS. R. Pag. 292. Boasteth of this his ob­iection. of Genesis, to the last of the Apocalips, which saith, that all the Bookes, Chapters, Verses, and Sentences, which in the Bible are admitted for Canonical, are truly Canonical, & Gods pure word, without the mixture of mans words: if possibly you be able to confute this obiection, they haue no more to say.

Answere me awhile to my demaundes, and youPs, 62, 10, Ps, 116. 11, shall easily finde out the confutation, he that saith gene­rally without restriction at all, that all men are lyars, doth he not affirme old men and yong, rich and poore, lear­ned and vnlearned, and euery man of what state or calling soeuer he be, to be a lyar?

He so affirmeth, it cannot be denied.

Doth not he, who saith that all things in S. Paules Epistles, are the pure word of God, affirme eue­ry Chapter, euery verse, and euery sentence therein con­tained, to be the pure word of God?

It is most true, it cannot be gainesaid.

Doth not he affirme euery Booke, euery Chap­ter, euery verse, and euery sentence of the Propheticall writings, to be y^• true & the pure word of God, who saith, that al things which the Prophets haue written are true, and the pure word of God? an he deny any particular, that granteth all?

He cannot doubtles: do it for he that granteth the whole must perforce grāt euery part of the whole euen as he that granteth God to haue made all things, must of necessity grant him to haue made euery particular thing, whatsoeuer hath any essence or beeing in the whole world.

You haue granted enough, (though no more then the truth) for the full refutation of our Frier Iesuite. I haue proned (as ye know) out of the expresse Scripture of the new Testament, that all things written in the law [Page 113] of Moses, in the bookes of the Prophets, & in the PsalmesPsa. 35 19 Mat. 5. 17. Mat. 22. 40 Mat. 19. 17. Rom. 4. v. 13, 14. 15. 16 Gal 3. v. 24 Heb. 7. 19. Heb. 8 v, 7 9. [...]0. 13. Heb. 9. 22. Psa. 35. 19. (in which thrée, as also somtime in the law & the Prophets, and other sometime in the law onely, all the old Testa­ment is comprised) are the pure word of God, and conse­quently the Canonicall scripture: For if we beléeue not the bookes of Moses, neither will we beléeue Christs owne words, as it is already proued.

But our sesuite perhaps will say, that there are sundry Canonicall bookes in the old Testament, besides these which you haue named.

What the Iesuiticall Fryer Parsons will say,See the A­natomy of Popish ty­raany. small account is to be made: for, (as his deare brethren by popish profession haue written of him) he is a monster of mankind, a notorious lyar, the wickedest man vpon the earth, begotten of some [...] Incubus, and depending v­pon the Deuill of hell: this and much more of like home­ly qualities, the secular Priests haue confessed of Par­sons that vnfortunate Rector of the English Colledge in Rome: and this they haue done in their printed bookes lately published to the view of the whole world: this ho­nest man Parsons, hath lately published the pretensed answere to the Downefall of Popery: but his backe is so pittifully broken with the said Downefall, (alas poore Fryer, I am sory for thy heauinesse) that his neighbours thinke he cannot liue any while: Yet I hope (which is my smal comfort in such a distressed case) that the Popish se­cular Priests will sing a ioyfull dirge (if not a blacke sanctus) for his soule. But woe is me, that my natiue countrey-men at Rome, haue such a gouernour set ouer them: now to your obiection out of Parsons, I answere thus. First, that y^• scripture saith plainely, that Christ in­terpreted all the scriptures which spake of him, and con­sequently all the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament, for no booke Canonicall can be named, which maketh not some mention of our Lord Iesus. Secondly, that both [Page 114] our sauiour, his Apostles, and all the auncient fathers, did euer comprise all the old Testament▪ in the lawe the Prophetes, and the Psalmes, it cannot be denied.

The scripture saith not, that Christ interpre­ted all the scriptures that spake of him, but that he interpreted out of them, those things which they spake of him.

I answer [...]: 1 first, that Christ interpreted Gods word, but not the word of man. 2 Secondly, that in in­terpreting that which was of him else, he did in effect in­terprete the whole. 3 Thirdly, that in interpreting and pe [...] consequens, approuing those things which were of and concerning himselfe, he did indéede approue, com­mend,Ioh. 5. v. 46▪ 47. and authorise the whole: for▪ as Saint Austen and other holy fathers tell vs, and the Iesuite doth yéeldS. R. thereto, if any part of the holy scripture should be false,Pag. 29 2. we could haue no certainety of the rest, much lesse couldIoh. 5. v. 47. we ground our faith vpon them.

You haue soundly proued the scripture of the old Testament to be Canonicall, euen by the expresse words of the new Testament: but what text of scripture can proue the new Testament to be Canonicall, and the pure word of God without the mixture of mans word? is this possible to be done?

It is not onely possible, but very easie to be done: I proue it. 1 First, because the Gospell (which is Rom. 1. v. 2. 17. the whole new Testament) is conteined in the old Te­stament, for Saint Paul plainely testifieth, that he was set apart to preach the Gospell of God, which he afore had promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures. 2 Se­condly, because the same Apostle constantly auouched toAct. [...]0. v. [...]. 27. the Elders of Ephesus, that he had shewed to them all the councell of God. 3 Thirdly, because the selfe same Apo­stle affirmeth in an other place, that he taught nothingAct. 26. v. 23. but the law of Moses and the Prophets: neuerthelesse [Page 115] (saith he) I obtained helpe of God, and continue vnto this day, witnessing both to small and to great, saying none other thing, then those which the Prophets & Moses did say should come to passe. 4 Fourthly, because Saint 1. Tim. 4. 12. 2. Tim. 3. 15. Paul testifieth to yonge Timothy, that he kn [...]w the holy scriptures of a childe, which are able to make him wise vnto saluation, through the faith which is in Christ Ie­sus. By these testimonies and authorities, two things are [...]léered: the one, that all the bookes of the old testament deliuered by Moses to the Iewes, are Canonicall and the pure word of God, able to make vs wise vnto salua­tion: the other, that all Saint Pauls doctrine, and conse­quently of the other Apostles, (for he taught all the councell of God, which was all the doctrine of all the rest in substance) was conteined in Moses and the Prophets: and this is confirmed by the Apostles words to King A­grippa, which are these: O King Agrippa, beléeuest thouAct. 20. v. 27. Act. 26. v. 2 [...] ▪ v. 27. the Prophes? I know that thou beleuest: Lo, Saint Paul knew that Agrippa beléeued the law and the Pro­phetes, and commendeth him for the same: I therefore conclude, that the holy scripture it selfe doth proue it selfe to be Canonicall, and the pure word of God.

The Papists say, that we receiued both the oldS▪ R. p. 369. and new Testament from them, and not from the Iewes.

I answere: 1 first, that the primitiue and Apo­stolicall Church receiued the old Testament from the Iewes, and that the Apostles were onely the publishers of the new Testament, not of the old. 2 Secondly, that we beleue the old Testament to be Canonicall scripture, neither for the testimony of the Iewes, (though they de­liuered it, and were the publishers thereof▪) neither yet for the authority of the Church of Rome, or of any other Church in the Christian world. Thirdly, that we belée­ued it to be the pure word of God, and Canonicall scrip­ture, because Christ so pronounced of it, long before the [Page 116] Apostles were confirmed in the truth. Fourthly, thatLuke, 24. ve [...]. 27▪ 4 [...]. Ioh. 16▪ 13. 4. the Pope, his Iesuites, and Iesuited Popelings, doe enforce [...] to a [...] [...] the holy Bible, that which is in very many places the pure word of man.

How is this possible? haue not the Papists the holy Bible?

The old Testament, which is the pure word of God, is in the Hebrew tongue, and the new in Gréek▪ but the late popish Councell of Trent (which the Iesuits and all Iesuited Papists haue admitted) commaundeth [...]raitly to vse onely their Latin vulgata editio, which the Apostles did neuer read or sée, much lesse did they autho­rise it for Canonicall scripture▪ and the pure word of God: and consequently, albeit they haue both the He­brew and the Gréeke locked vp in their studies and Libra­ries: yet for as much as they preferre their owne vulgar Latin translation, (commonly called Saint Hieromes) and cruelly bind and tie all di [...]nes to [...]s [...] the same in all schooles and pulpits, and no textes, sentences, or allega­tions to be admitted, saue onely out of the same: it fol­loweth by an ineuitable consequente, and necessary dedu­ction,The Po­pish Bible is the word of man. that their Canonicall so supposed Bible is not Ca­nonicall, but in very déede the word of man: this is con­firmed, because the Papists this day violently obtrude for Canonicall, sundry bookes of the old Testament, which are not in the Cannon of the Hebrewes, neither yet de­liuered to the Church by Christ or his Apostles.

I now remember a straunge saying of the Ie­suite Parsons, viz, that many parts of the Bible were doubted of long after the death of the Apostles: whichS. R. p. 387. argueth to me, that their vnwritten traditions are fallible, and their doctrine new.

The Popes religion Chaugeth euery day, by reason of new reuelations made vnto his Holinesse: but from whence they came, wheather from Heauen or from [Page 117] hell, that cannot I tell, let the rea [...]er iudge: this I am assured of, that their owne learned maisters cannot agrée about their reuelations: Melchior Canus a learned Po­pish Bishop affirmeth constantly, that the Church hathCanus de lo­cis, lib. 3. cap 4. p. 10 [...]. no new re [...]elations in matters of faith: but the Popes minorite Fryer T [...]telmannus, otherwise a learned man in­déede, telleth vs an othertale, viz. that many mysteries of diuine truth, are daily reuealed to the Church, eueryT [...]telm de locis d [...]alect▪ cap. 33. day more and more: and thus by reason of their Popish feined reuelations, the late Romish faith doth daily en­crease aboue mans expectation, and is as like the old Ro­man religion, as Yorke is like soule Sutton: I will now make an end of this question, referring you for the rest to the Iesuites Antepast, where you may find at large, con­cerning this subiect, whatsoeuer your heart can desire: but before I end the conference, let me aske you a merry que­stion: what will you say, if (for a parting blow with the Iesuite Parsons) I proue out of his owne printed booke, as also out of the Iesuiticall Cardinal Bellarmine, euen in that booke which he dedicated to the Popes holinesse, with which booke he so pleased the Pope, that he made him Cardin [...]ll for the same, that all the bookes, Chapters, verses, and sentences, which are admitted for Canonicall, are actually proued in holy scriptur to be truly Canonical, & Gods pure word without the mixture of mans worde? which for all that, is that mighty point of faith, which the said two Iesuites and all Iesuited Papists contend with might and many to be an vnwritten tradition of the Church.

What will I say? Is that your question? I will tell you both what I will say and doe: I will say you haue done that, which to this day was euer thought impossible: and this I promise to cause the same to be written in Mar­ble with golden Letters, and to put the stone in Saint Pe­ters Church at Rome, In Perpetuam rei memoriam.

Be attentiue, and marke well what I deliuer, for I trust by Gods helpe, to proue it most substantially: these are the expresse words of S. R. or of Robert Par­sons that Trayterous and brasen faced Iesuite. FirstS. R. pag. 284. conclusion is: all such points of Christian faith, as are ne­cessary to be actually beléeued of euery one, that hath vse of reason though he be neuer so simple, are actual­ly cōteined in scripture, either cléerely, or obscurely: these are Parsons words, I neither adde any thing, chaunge any thing, nor take any thing away: the Iesuite Bellar­mine Bellarm. lib. 4. de verb. scripto, c. 11. col. [...] 91▪ to 1. hath these expresse words: These obseruations being marked, I answere, that all those things are written by the Apostles, which are necessary for all men, & which the A­postles preached openly to all the vulgar people, but that all other things are not written: These are the Cardinals words: I cite them most sincerely. I hold it a damnable sinne to bely the Diuel. Out of these testimonies, I gather very plainely, that all things which euery one is bound to beléeue, are actually conteined in the holy scripture: and consequently y^• all the bookes, chapters, verses & sentences which are admitted for Canonical, are truly Canonicall & Gods pure word without y^• mixture of mans word: which conclusion, for all that, is it that both our Iesuites and all their cursed Iesuited broode doe violently impugne.

The Papists would seeme to frustrate your con­clusion, because they onely beleeue it for the testimony of the Pope, and Church of Rome.

They would gladly séeme indéed to doe many things which they are not able to performe. But the truth is as I haue said: & thus both briefly & pithily I proue the same. Whatsoeuer is necessary for euery Christian, the same is contained in the scriptures of the Apostles: but the knowledge of all the Bookes, Chapters, Uerses, andMarke well this my probation. Sentences, admitted for Canonical to be truly Canoni­call, and the pure word of God, is necessary for euery [Page 119] Christian, ergo, the same is conteined in the ScripturesGlogismus in prima figura & modo Da­ril. of the Apostles. The conclusion of this argument can­not be denyed, because it is a perfect Syllogisme, in the first figure, and in the third made called Darij. The pro­position is confessed both by Cardinall Bellarmine, and by the Iesuite Parsons. You haue heard their expresse words truly alledged, as themselues in printed bookes haue set them downe so then the difficulty (if there be any at all) resteth in the assumption, viz. if to know the holy Bible toLoe, late Popery is flat heresie be Canonicall and the pure word of God, be necessary for euery Christian, which being a fundamentall point of re­ligion, is so cleere and so apparant to euery one, as me­thinkes it is a néedlesse labour to take in hand to proue the same. But I proue it: 1 first, because the knowledge of the holy Gospel & euery part thereof▪ is necessary to euery onsIoh. 10. 22. Rom. 16. Rom 14. 23 Hebr [...]. 7. Rom 10. 17 Ioh. 3 18. saluation. Secondly, because the Papists themselues doe euer vrge the same, as a necessary point of faith and sal­uation, so often as it séemeth any way to make for their vnwritten traditions. Thirdly, because all the articles of faith deduced out of the sciptures, depend thereupon: for these are the Iesuite S. R. his owne words, yet this is a point of the Christian faith, yea, thereupon depend all the articles we gather out of Scripture. Thus disputeth our Iesuite in his pretensed answere to the Downe-fall of Popery, after he hath bitterly many times denyed▪ thatNote this point well▪ S. R. pag▪ 292. The Iesuite plainely confound­eth himself▪ the holy Scripture doth shew it selfe to be Gods word: but the force of truth is so mighty in operation, y^e while of malice he striueth against it, he vnawares confoundeth himselfe, and pleadeth for the truth in very déed. Fourth­ly, because the Iesuite S. R. vrged, and as it were deadly wounded with the sharp pikes of his aduersaries argu­ments, plainely & resolutly confesseth the doctrine which I defend. In one place hee hath these expresse words: me thinkes he plainely auoucheth (he speaketh of Saint Au­sten) y^t God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely writ­ten, [Page 120] which to know, is necessary for euery mans saluati­on.Pag. 287. In another place hee hath these words: whatThe Iesuite vnawares▪ killeth the Pope & his religion. things soeuer are necessary, are manifest out of scripture. Now sir, what man can thinke our Iesuite to bee in his right wits, that thus woundeth himselfe with his owne weapons? for he doth not onely grant, that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation, is manifest in y^e scrip­ture, but withall, that euery necessary thing is cléerely written in the same: and consequently, he granteth vna­ware & against himselfe, either that to beléeue the holy Bible to be the pure word of God, is a trifle, a thing of small moment, and not at all necessary to saluation, which if the Papists doe, they must perforce condemne themselues, and vtterly ouerthrow their Romish faith; or else, that the same is plainely and cleerely set downe in the holy Scripture; the cause is cléere, I hope I haue said enough.

All the world knoweth, old and yong, rich and poore, learned and vnlearned, that to know and beleeue the holy Bible to be Gods word, is so necessary to salua­tion, as none without it can be saued.

It now remaineth for my full satisfaction and resolution in all points of Catholike doctrine in controuersie, that if I know how to answere the Papists concerning one point of doctrine, wherwith they neuer cease to charge you & your profession, I would think my selfe able to answere and con­found all Papists in the world, and to perswade all indiffe­rently affected persons, to abhorre and detest late start-vp popery world without end.

Let me know, I pray you heartily, what y^• point of doctrine is, wherewith our aduersaries so surcharge vs and our profession, conceale nothing from me, that any way troubleth your conscience: for doubtlesse I am most willing to vndergoe any paines for your instruction in the truth.

They charge you to hold & teach, that the best liuer among you sinneth in the best act he doth, which see­meth a doctrine so strange & irksome to all godly eares, as my selfe cānot but detest the same: for if we can do nothing but sinne, we must perforce condemne all good workes, all preaching, all teaching, and all holy conuersation.

I wonder that any liuing wilcharge our Church with such vnsauory doctrine.

Your aduersaries affirme with open mouthes, (so disgracing you and your profession, as much as in them lieth) that this is a generall receiued axiome with all yourS. R. p. 220. Deuines: Iustus in omni opere bono peceat: The iust man sin­neth in euery good worke he doeth; and that all, euen our best workes are sinne.

My selfe, though most vnworthy of that sacred name, am one among the rest. Howbeit, I am so farre from beléeuing or defending that doctrine, that I vtterly renounce the same, in the sense formerly by you auouched. For the exact examination of which proposition, by them te armed our Maxime or Axiome, let vs dispute the que­stion, pro & contra, as we haue done the rest.

THis proposition, which séemeth to trouble you more then a litle (the iust man sinneth in euery good work) may admit a double sense and meaning, viz, a rigorous and a fauourable interpretation. I [...] we interprete it accor­ding to the rigour of the words, the sense must be this: the iust man sinneth, euen in the best worke he doth: [Page 122] which sense I willingly graunt) is not onely straunge, but with all very irkson [...] to all Christian eares: howbeit, if it may finde a fauourable interpretation, the sense and meaning will be this: the iust man sinneth, whiles heMark well, the iust man sin­eth whiles he doth good workes, but not in doing▪ them. doth the best worke he can: which sense is most Christian, sound, Catholike, Apostolicall, and consonant to the holy scriptures. But here ye must marke seriously, that it is one thing to sinne, in doing a good worke, an other thing to s [...]me while the same good worke is a doing.

This your distinction: as it is very subtile, so is it also right iovous & comfortable to mine heart: it af­fordeth me a kind of glimmering though no ful insight in­to the question.

He that will exactly know the truth of this que­stion, must ap [...]ly distinguish the quadruple state of man. 1 First, his state before sinne vntill his fall. 2 Secondly, his state after sinne vntill his regeneration. 3 Thirdly, his state after regeneration vntill his glorification. 4 Fourth­ly, his state after glorification world without end. In the first state, albeit man sinned indéede, and thereby made both himselfe and his posterity subiect to eternal torment: yet was he so created of God his maker, that he might haue liued without sinne for euer and aye. In the second state, man can doe nothing that good is, but sinne conti­nually. In the third state, man by Gods grace and great mercy is enabled to do good, though not wholly to [...]schew sinne, saue onely according to the measure of his regeneration. In the fourth state, man is so confirmed in grace, that he cannot sinne world without end. Which distinction being well marked and remembred, we shall easily vnderstand, that albeit man can neuer be without sinne in this life but adde sinne to sinne continually, yet may he by the grace of regeneration, do good workes, e­uen while he sinneth mortally.

It seemeth to mee a thing impossible, that man [Page 123] shall be able to do any good worke while he sinneth dam­nably?

It is a generell receiued axiome with all skil­full Logicians, that true things must be graunted, fals [...] things denied, and ambiguous things distingushed: which being true, as it is most true indéede, if we shall distin­guish regeneration aright, the truth of this intricate que­stion will soone appeare: viz. that one may aswell both sinne and do good at one and the same time, as he may at the same time be both a father and a sonne.

Our Papists contend with might and maine, that howsoeuer we distinguish regeneration, yet shall man in his iustification be freed from all sinne, and conse­quently he cannot sinne mortally in the best act he doth.

The Papists erre grosly about regeneration, whilest they doe not vnderstand the same aright according to the holy scriptures: or they beare the world in hand, that euery iustified person is fréed from all sinne in his soule, and onely subiect to sinne materially in his body: which if it were true, as it is most false, then doubtlesse could not the regenerate man commit mortall sinne while he doth his best workes.

The Apostle seemeth to stand on their side,Gal. 5. 17. when he telleth vs, that the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh: and it is confirmed by theRom. 7. 25. same Apostle, in another place, where he affirmeth him­selfe to serue the law of God in his minde, but the law of2. Cor. 4. 16 Ephes. [...]. 2 [...] 24. sinne in his flesh: which doctrine elsewhere he deliuereth in other termes, distinguishing man into the inward and outward man, and in another place into the old and new man.

The Pope, his Cardinals, Iesuits, and Ie­suited Popelings, for the maitenance of their false and erronious doctrine of mans iustification, do shamefully [Page 124] abuse and wrest the holy scriptute to a contrary sense and meaning, fraudulently perswading their silly deuoted vas­sals, that originall concupiscence remaineth onely in the body, and not at all in the soule, where as the truth is farre otherwise, as holy wridtoth euidently co [...]uince.

They contend and obstinately affirme, that the inward man doth connotate the soule, and the outward man the body: and the termes of inward and outward, seeme very agreeable to their application.

The spirit, the law of the mind, the inward, and outward inall, are all one with the holy Apostle, and do signifie the whole man as he is regenerate: and sembla­bly, the flesh, the law of the members, the outward, and the old man, are with the same Apostle all one, and do signifie the whole man as he is corrupt by the fall of Adam.

If it be possible for you [...]oo demonstrate this doctrine out of holy writ, you thereby giue the Pope a deadly wound, and turne his religion vpside downe.

Marke well my discourse, that ye may vnder­stand the same. Saint Iohn hath these expresse words: which are borne hot of blood nor of the will of the flesh, norIoh. 13 of the will of man, but of God: in which asseuera­tion, the holy Euangelist vnderstandeth by the word (flesh) the whole man as he is corrupt and vnregenerate.

How can it be proued, that Saint Iohn: vnder­standeth the corrupt man by the word (flesh.)?

These foure are distinguished in the Euange­list, blood, the will of the flesh, the wil of the man, and God: by which distinction he giueth vs to vnderstand, that the will of the flesh doth connotate the whole man corrupt: I proue it, because the Euangelist distinguisheth blood, flesh, and man, one from another by a particular dissun­ctiue, and God from them all, by a particular aduer­satiue.

Your affirmance of the quadruple distinction, is euident, but how should flesh connotate the corrup man, it doth not so well appeare.

I proue it two waies. 1 First, if the word (flesh) should signifie the body or fleshly parts of man, the Euangelist should thereby consound himselfe, and fr [...] ­strate his distiction: the reason is euident, because in the first word (blood) he did formerly inf [...]nate so much vnto his reader 2 Secondly, because the Euangelist addeth an adiunct to the word (flesh) which can no way agrée to the body.

What is that adiunct, I pray you.

The will of the flesh: for will is added vnto flesh, not vnto blood, and it is a proper faculty of the soule, but not of the body: for the flesh or body hath no will at all.The body doth not cou [...]t without the soule. which for all that the Euangelist attributeth to the flesh: and consequently, he meaneth and speaketh of that flesh which hath a will, and so of the corrupt man, fitly com­pared to flesh, as who before his regeneration sauoreth onely the things of the flesh: which sense the Apostle plain­ly vn [...]oldeth, when he affirmeth the animall, sensuall, and naturall man, not to perceiue the things of thy spirit of God. This reason or explication is confirmed by an other1. Cor. [...]. ver. 14. testimony of the same Apostle, where he auoucheth the flesh to lust against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, so that the children of God cannot performe theGal. 5. v. 14. things they will and earnestly desire: for this conflict be­twéene the flesh and the spirit, must néeds be vnderstoode [...]ug. de perf. iust. r [...] tioc. 17. of the regenerate and vnregenerate parts of man: for the flesh lusteth not without the soule, as both Saint Austen and reason teaceth vs.

The Papists expound the words of the Apo­stle otherwise, affirming the cumbat to be betweene the bo­dy signified by the flesh, and the soule signified by the spirit.

The Papists say much, but proue little: they striue for life to obscure the Apostles true sense and mea­ning, as which turneth their faith & religion vp [...]idedoune: but I God willing) will proue what I say, by the expresse words of holy writ, and by euident reason. 1 First therefore, many texts of holy scripture doe conuince the Papists o [...] S. R. p. 160. P [...]. 51. 10. 11 grosse errour, while they peruer [...]ly and, mordicus auerre, that the soule of the regenerate is frée from all mortall sin, and that originall sinne remaineth onely in the body materially: the first text is comprised in these words, create in me a cleane heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me: cast me not away from thy presence, and take not thine holy spirit from me. In these words the holy Prophet sheweth plainely, that he was regenerate, and yet not frée from sinne: for in that he desireth his heart to be purified, and his spirit to be renued, he giueth vs to vnderstand, that his soule is not frée from sinne, nor him­selfe perfectly regenerate. On the other side, in that he prayeth God not to take away his holy spirit from him, nor to cast him away from his presence; he sheweth eui­dently to the indifferent reader, that he is regenerate, though not wholly, yet in part. The second text confir­meth the same, in these words: though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed daily. The third2 Cor. 4. v. 16. Ephes. 4. 23 Col. 3. 9. text is yet plainer, in these words: be renewed in the spirit of your minde, and put on the new man, which af­ter God is created in righteousnesse and true holines. The fourth text is as plaine, in these words: séeing yée haue put off the old man with his works, and haue put on the new, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. The fifth text doth further con­firme the same, in these words: night and day praying excéedingly that we might sée your face, and might accom­plish1 Thes. 3. v. 10. 1 Cor. 13 v 12. that which is lacking in your faith. By al which texts it is very cléere and euident, that the regenerate man is [Page 127] not wholly renewed in his souls: for which respect, SaintApoc. 22. v. 11. Rom. 7. Iohn exhoedeth him that is iustified, to be iustified more: Qui iustus est, iustificetur adhuc Yea, S. Paul through­out a whole chapter, doth in effect intend no other thing, but onely to demonstrate by many arguments, that mans regeneration is vnperfect aswell in the soule as in the bo­dy: two verses onely will suffice, for the cléering of our question. The former verse is conteined in those words:v. 14. v. 18. for we know that the law is spirituall, but I am carnall, fold vnder sinne. The latter verse, in these words: for I know, that in me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing, for to will is present with me, but I find no meanes to performe that which is good. Out of which verses, I obserue these memorable doctrines. 1 First, that by the word (flesh) must néedes be vnderstoode the whole man, as he is corrupt and not regenerate: I proue it, be­cause the Apostle saith, (in me) and expoundeth it by his flesh. 2 Secondly, that the word (flesh) cannot determine the word (me) vnlesse it signifie the corrupt parts both of body and soule: for the words (I and (me) do connotate his person, not barely any one part of his soule or body. 3 Thirdly, that he saith, no good dwelled in him: albeit he confesseth both in this chapter, & in sundry other places, that the grace of God and the holy Ghost dwelleth in him,1 Cor. 15. 10. 1 Cor. 6 v. 19. Rom. 8. 9. 1 Cor. 13. 12 and consequently, that when he saith, no good dwel­leth in him, he meaneth of the parts vnregenerate, which he nameth his flesh, saying, in me, that is, in my flesh dwelleth no good thing. Fourthly, that the holy vessell of our Lord Iesus, affirmeth himselfe to be sold vnder sinne, and to be carnall, and consequently, that sinne is in him formally throughout all his vnregenerate parts, and not onely in his body materially, as our Pope and Iesuits would enforce vs to beéeue: for though the regenerate be spirituall in the greater part, yet are they in part carnal; as the holy Apostle here auoucheth of himselfe, [Page 128] and S. Iames of himselfe and all the rest: howbeit, Saint Paul & S. Iames were as spirituall as any this day li­uing, if not more: yet the best liuers of all haue not so put on the new man, but the reliques of the old man still re­maine [...]ac. 3. 2. in them, which they must indeuour by the grace of regeneration, daily more & more to abolish and put away from them.

Secondly, the same truth of mans vnperfect regenera­tion,Secundè princip. ter. may be proued by euident reason. For the soule which giueth life, sense, and mouing to the body, and doth informe the same, cannot possibly be an enemy to the bo­dy,anima est forma corpo­ris. and haue continuall warres wich it. For (as the Apo­stle teacheth vs) no man euer yet hated his owne fleshe, but nourisheth and cherisheth the same, euen as Christ doth his Church: and it is confirmed, because the flesh co­uetethEphes. 5. v. 29. nothing without the soule. These authorities and reasons wel considered, this illation cānot but bee cléere &Aug. de perf. iust. ra­t. [...]6. 17 euident, viz. that the contention, conflict, and rebellion, which is betwéene the flesh and the spirit, cannot possibly be vnderstood of the soule and the body, but of the parts vnregenerate, aswell of the soule as of the body: for the A­postle by the flesh, euery where vnderstandeth the sensuall man, as he is begotten aud borne of his parents: to wit, that old Adam, which is not led by the spirit of God, nei­ther obeieth the law of God, but his wicked affections: so doth our sauiour himselfe call that flesh which is borne of the flesh, and that spirit which is borne of the spirit: forIoh. 3. 6. Aug. in Io­han. [...]r [...]ctat 80. 2 Cor. 7. 1. Apoc. 22. 11. (as S. Austin saith) the iustified man is yet mundus & mundandus, cleane, and to be made cleane, cleane in part, and in part vncleane: and therefore is he willed to clense himselfe from all filthinesse of the flesh and spirit, and to grow vp into all holinesse in the feare of God.

You haue so soundly proued that mans regene­ration is vnperfect, and that originall concupiscence still remaineth euen formally in the vnregenerate, not onely in [Page 129] his body but also in his soule, as it is able fully to perswade any indifferent reader, and all such as are carefull of their saluation. Howbeit I still stand doubtful, & am at my wits end what to thinke of this your receiued Maxime; Iustus in omni opere bono peccat; the iust man sinneth in euery good acte.

I told you afore, that it is one thing to sinne in do­ing a good act, another thing, to sinne while the good act is a doing. The former way no man sinneth at any time; but the latter way, the best liuer on earth, sinneth conti­nually. For of originall vncleannesse there is that yet sticking in the best, for the which God may iustly con­demne them to hell fire.

I remember the distinction very well, but there are many texts of holy Scripture, which seeme to make against the same.

Propound them all one by one, and omit not any that troubleth you: for I hope in God so to answere them, as you shall neuer henceforth stand in doubt there­of.

God himselfe saith, that the wickednesse of man was great on earth, and that all the imaginations ofGen. 6. 50 the thoughts of his heart were only euill continually. Out of which words proceeding from the spirit of God, I ob­serue these memorable points of doctrine. 1 First, that man is very wicked. 2 Secondly, that not onely some, but euen all the imaginations of his heart, are euill. 3 Thirdly, that they are not only euill for a day, weeke, moneth or a yeere, but euen continually. 4 Fourthly, that they are onely euill, and haue no good at all in them, and consequently, that man can do no good at all, but sinneth in his best acts con­tinually.

I answere: that the text by you alleaged, is vnderstood in the corrupt man before his regeneration, in whom there is no good at any time; not of the regenerate [Page 130] man, in whom there is much good continually. I proue it many wayes: 1 First, because in the very next chapter, theGen. 7. 1. spirit of God pronounceth Noah righteous in his sight.2 Secondly, because holy writ affirmeth constantly that Za­charias Luk. 1. 5. 6. and Elizabeth, were both iust before God, and walked in all his commandements. 3 Thirdly, because the 1 Ioh. 3. 9. holy Apostle of our Lord Iesus, telleth vs very plainely, that he which is borne of God sinneth not: yea, S. Iohn procéedeth further, and auoucheth resolutely, that he can­not sinne, because he is borne of God. 4 Fourthly, be­cause 1 Ioh. 3. 10. by doing of righteousnesse, the children of God are knowne and discerned from the children of the Diuel. 5 Fifthly, because y^• Apostle comparing the works of Caine 1 Ioh. 3. 12. and of Abel together, affirmeth the workes of the one to be euill, and the others to be good. 6 Sixthly, because S. Iohn telleth vs of Uirgins which are not defiled with women,Apo [...]. 14. 4. but follow the Lambe whithersoeuer he goeth. 7 Seuenth­ly, because the holy scripture commendeth Cornelius for a deuout man, and one that feared God, and affirmeth his prayers and almes to haue come vp into remembrance be­fore God. 8 Eighthly, because Peter did a good act when he Mat. 16. v. 16. 17. confessed Christ to be the sonne of the liuing GOD: for Christ answering, pronounced him blessed, affirming, not flesh and bloud, but God aboue to haue reuealed it to him. 9 Ninthly, because they are happy that suffer persecution Mat. 5. v. 10 for righteousnesse. 10 Tenthly, because the whole Scrip­ture (especially the Epistle to the Hebrewes) maketh fre­quentHebr. 11. mention of the good workes which the children of God haue done.

The Scripture saith plainely, that wee all arePsal. 51. 5. Ps. 1 43. v. 2. Psa 1 30. 3. Iac. 3. 2. Prou. 20. 9. conceiued and borne in sinne, that no flesh can be iustified in Gods fight, that if he straitly marke our iniquities, none is able to abide it, that the holy Apostles offend in many things, that all haue sinned and are depriued of the glory of God: ergo, it seemeth that the best liuer sinneth, in the [Page 131] best worke he doth.

True it is, that the best liuers on earth are great sinners, and that they may iustly be damned to hellAug. lib. 9. confes. c, 13. for the same. For as S. Austen saith grauely: Woe to the best liuer on earth, if God iudge him, his mercy set apart. But hereupon can it neuer be concluded that the iust man sinneth in euery worke he doth.

The best workes of the regenerate are vnper­fect, and consequently the regenerate man sinneth in the best worke he doth?

Your consequence doth not hold, the reason is at hand, viz. because euery imperfection, neither doth nor can make a good act euill: for although imperfection be so linked and chained with sinne in y^• regenerate, that wher­soeuer it be found, there is sinne also in the same subiect; yet is not that sin in the act well done, but either in some other act euill done, or else in the omission of that which ought to be done. Let vs take an example for the illustra­tion of the truth and question now in hand; and let vs suppose, that S. R hath lent 40. pounds vnto T. B. to be repaid vpon May-day next, at which day y^• said T. B. brin­geth onely 30. pounds, being all y^• he possibly can prouide. In this ease, the debtour tendereth an vnperfect paiment to the Creditour. Howbeit, he doth not wrong the credi­tour in bringing him 30. pounds, but the iniury is done in not bringing more.

He wrongeth his creditor by his vnthankeful­nesse, in that he doth not bring him the iust summe which he borrowed.

The Creditor is wronged indéed, yet not in y^• paiment of the 30. pounds, but in the non paiment of o­ther ten pounds. Imperfection is euer cheyned with sin, as is already sayd, yet the sinne or wrong done in this case to the Creditor, is not in the 30. pounds truly paid, but in the ten pounds remaining vnpaid. For example [Page 132] sake. A seruant receiuing of his maister ten shillings to be distributed to the poore, giueth onely eight shillings there­of to them, and reserueth two shillings to himselfe. In this case the seruant trespasseth generally: yet not in di­stributing eight shillings, a part of his charge, but in kée­ping back two shillings which he should haue giuen: For when a seruant is commanded to do althing, which hée doth onely in part, but not wholly, the offence is not in that which he doth, but in that which he leaueth vndone.Luk. 18. v. 13. 14. Exod. 1. 17. Exod. 32. v. 27. 1 Sam. 1. 15. Heb. 11. 31, 2 Sam. 12. v 7. 13. Mat. 26. 75. Act. 10. 2. 1 Reg. 15. 11. 2 Reg. 18. 6 2 Reg. 23. 25. Act. 13. 9. Rom. 7. v. 15. 25. Hebr. 11. Euen so is it in the question now in hand. For the lowly Publican sinned not in smiting his breast, and in asking mercy for his sinnes. The Mid-wiues, Shiphrah & Puah sinned not in that they feared God, and disobeyed y^• kings wicked commandement. Moses sinned not, in s [...]aying y^• Idolaters at Gods appointment. Hanna sinned not in powring out her soule before the Lord. Rahab sinned not in receiuing the spies peaceably. Dauid sinned not in cō ­fessing his sinnes when Nathan the Prophet reproued him for the same. Peter sinned not in wéeping bitterly for his sinnes. Cornelius sinned not in fearing God & pray­ing continually. King Asa sinned not in doing right in the eyes of the Lord. King Ezechias sinned not in cleaning to the Lord, and in not departing from him. Iosias sinned not in turning to y^• Lord with al his heart, w^t all his soule, and with all his might. Paul full of the holy Ghost, sinned not in reprouing Elimas the sorcerer, for peruerting the right waies of the Lord: neither yet in hating the sinne which he could not auoide. Abel sinned not in offering a greater sacrifice then Caine, by which he obtained Gods owne testimony that he was righteous. Abraham sinnedHebr. 11. v. 8. 17. Gen. 22. v. 2. 3. 9. 10. Iob. 1. v. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 5, 6. not in obeying God when he was called, neither in offe­ring vp his onely sonne when God commanded him so to do. Iob sinned not in being vpright and iust, in fearing God, and eschewing euill. Zacharias and Elizabeth sinned not in walking in all the commandements of the Lord, [Page 133] without reproch. S. Stephen full of the holy Ghost, andAct. 7. 59. ready to giue his life for the truths sake, sinned not in cal­ling on God and saying, Lord Iesus receiue my spirit. 1 Tim. 2. 7. 2. 3. The rege­nerate sin not in wal­king after the spirit. Rom. 8, 4. Dutifull subiects sinne not in praying dayly for their So­ueraignes: for holy writ pronounceth it to be good and ac­ceptable in the sight of God. All which, and many other like testimonies (which in regard of breuity, I now omit) do proue and euidently conuince, that though the regenerate sinne while they do their good workes, yet do they not sinne in doing the same: for it is one thing to sin in doing the worke, another thing to sin while the worke is a doing.

Your discourse hath fully satisfied me in this intricate and difficult question: I perceiue your distinction to be as true, as it is subtile: the ignorance whereof, hath brought no small ruine to the Church of God: howbeit, sundry mighty obiections, may be made against the same: which by your fauour I shall propound as they come to my mind.