The first Hounde.

GIue me leaue O ho­ly father of Rome, to tell you in the way of charitie, what your owne beloued vassales, haue in printed books reported of your holinesse, Gods spirit no doubt en­forcing them thereunto. Thou O dis­holy Pope, fearing that thy Antichristi­an vsurped primacie, would in time be turned vpside downe, if euery man might frely examine thy doctrine & ty­rannicall constitutions, according to Gods sacred worde the true touchstone of veritie; hast by an abhominable de­cree in thy detestable canon-lawe, made it flat sacriledge to dispute of thy power, I will forge nothing of mine own brayn, I will deale sincerely in euery point, euen [Page 2] as I will answere at the dreadfull day of dome, and therefore do I exhort the gen­tle readers, to marke well what I say. Franciscus a victoria, one O pope, of thy dominican Fryers, and the learnedst di­uine that euer Spaine brought forth doth constantly thus report the matter; non spectat ad subditos determinare aut exami­nare Victoria rel [...]ct, 4. de potest. papae & concilii, propos. 16. quid possit Papa aut quid non possit, & quomodo teneātur parerevel non, quia sacri­legium est disputare de poteutia principis, & praecipuè Papae. It belongeth not to po­pish vaslals, to determine or examine what the pope may doe, or what he may not doe, and wherein they ought to o­bey, or not; because he hath made it sa­criledge by his lawe, to reason & dispute of his power. Consonant hereunto is a decree of the late counsell of Trent, by which it is made vnlawfull aswell to the clergie as to the layicall people, to read either the olde or the newe Testament translated into the vulgar tongue; and that vnder the paine of the Popes curse, vnlesse such person or persons be by him Pius. 4. in bulla synod, Trident. licensed thereunto. Yea, it is strictly [Page 3] inhibited by the said counsell, that no person or persons whosoeuer, shall print, read, keepe, or lend any booke at all; saue such only as are not oriously knowne to be allowed by the Pope, and why I pray your holinesse, did you make this most cruell law? doubtlesse, because if learned bookes might be allowed pub­liquely, your heathenish late Romish re­ligion, woulde soone receiue a deadelye wound. For notwithstanding this your ty­rannicall law, & many other decrees of like sort, your own dearest hounds do still hunt your holinesse, euen to very death.

The second Hounde.

THy hellish glosses O Pope of Rome, do tell vs manifestly that thou canst change the nature of things, that thou canst apply the substantiall parts of one thinge to another, and that thou canst make of nothing somthing; & consequēt­ly, that thou canst make thy selfe another God. For although it may seme a wōder, that any not bewitched by the maister Deuill of Hell, woulde euer vtter [Page 4] such folly and open blasphemie; yet doe I neither say any thing of malice, neither vrge any one iote against thee O Pope, but those very things, which thine owne The Popes treachery is discoue­red by his own dear­lings. deare Doctors, haue in printed bookes published to the worlde, and this I ob­serue to my great comfort, wishinge al Christiā readers to note the same seri­ouslie; that thou O Pope with thy late predecessours, wouldest long sythence haue musseled the mouthes of these houndes, if the holy Ghost for the good of his elect had not appointed the con­trarie to be done, thus therfore O Pope writeth thine owne approued glosse, e­uen vpon thine owne decretals; sic Papa dicitur habere caeleste arbitrium, et ideo eti­am G [...]sa, [...]iq. 1 decretal tit, 7, Cap, 3. naturam rerum immutat, substantia­lia vnius rei applicando alij; et de nihilo po­test aliquid facere. So is the pope saide to haue celestiall arbitrement, & ther­fore doth he chāge the nature of things, by applying the substantiall parts of one thing to an other; and he can make that which is nothing, to be something. Be­holde here most execrable blasphemie, [Page 5] that euer was or henceforth can be, for it is proper to God alone to make some­thing of nothing by his peculier worke of creation. This to be so, neither euer did, or can any diuine denie.

The third Hound

Tell me O Pope, haue not thy sworne vassals written of you, that Christ him selfe hath engrauen in thy thighs, that thou art king of kings, & Lord of Lords? as this also, O sweete Iesus, that though thou carry a thousand soules to hell, yet may noman say to thee, why doest thou so? sundry I knowe haue so written, but Iohannes Gerson shall speake for himselfe and the rest; I will not alter one worde or syllable that he saith. Thus doth he write; Sicut Christo collata est omnis potest as in caelo et in terra, siceam Christ us omnem Ioan: Ger­son de potest ate ecclesiae concl. 12. part. 3. Petro suisque successoribus dereliquit, vndo nec Constantinus Siluestro papae contulit, quod non esset prius suum, sed reddidit in­iuste detentum. Porro; sicut non est potest­as nisi a Deo, sic nec aliqua temporalis vel [Page 6] ecclesiastica, imperialis vel regalis, nisi a Papa; in cuius faemore scripsit Christus, Rex regum, dominus dominantium; de cu­ius potestate disputare, instar sacrilegij est; cui neque quisquam dicere potest, cur it a facis? mentior, sinon inueniantur haec scrip­ta, ab illis etiam qui sapientes sunt in oculis suis. As all power was giuen to Christ, in heauen and on earth; so Christ left all that power, to Peter and his successours (for euer.) Wherefore the Emperour Constantine gaue nothing to Pope Syl­uester, which was not his owne before, but he onely restored that, which was vniustly kept from him. Further, as there is no power but of God, so is there neither any temporall nor ecclesi­asticall, neither imperiall nor regall, but only of the Pope; in whose thighes Christ hath written, the King of Kings, the Lord of Lordes; of whose power to Behold, here the blasphe­my of An­tichrist. dispute; it is euen as sacriledge; to whom no man may say, why doest thou so? Let me haue the lye if these things be not found written, euen by those that seeme wise in their owne conceites. Thus [Page 7] writeth Maister Doctor Gerson, who though he liued in the altitude of Pope­dome, yet coulde hee neither digest nor conceale these antichristian blas­phemies, ascribed to the Pope against the Sonne of GOD. Neuerthelesse, the Popes themselues did chalenge the same, & tooke no small delite therein. For thus writeth Pope Gregorye the ninth of that name; ad firmamentum caeli, hoc est, vniuersalis ecclesiae, fecit deus duo magna luminaria, idest, duas insti­tuit Gregor. 9. lib. 1. decret, tit, 33. Cap, 6. dignitates, quae sunt pontificalis au­thoritas & regalis potestas; sed illa quae praeest diebus, idest, spiritualibus, maior est; quae vero carnalibus, minor, vt quan­ta est inter solem & lunam, tanta inter pontifices & reges differentia agnosca­tur. To the firmament of heauen, that is, of the vniuersall Church, God made two greate lightes, to witt, hee ordeined two great dignities, which are the authoritie of the Pope, & the po­wer Marke here the Popes goodly ser­mon. of the Kinge; but that power which ruleth spirituall things, is greater, & that which ruleth things carnal, is lesser; that [Page 8] there may be as great difference knowne betweene Popes and Kinges, as there is betweene the Sunne and the Mone.

The fourth Hound.

TEll me O Pope, is not thy Romishe Purgatorie so sotted and senselesse a thinge, as it can neither be proued by the scriptures, nor yet by the ancient wri­ters? haue not thyne owne renowmed children, Syluester Prieras, who was som­time maister of thy sacred pallace, and for his profounde knowledge surnamed Absolutus Theologus, as also thy glorious so supposed Martyr Iohn Fisher our late Byshoppe of Rochester, vttered so much in printed bookes to the viewe of the worlde? I wote it is so, and that all the worlde may knowe the vanitie and ab­homination of late Romish religion, I will set downe their expresse wordes. Thus therefore writeth Syluester; Indul­gentia nobis per scripturā minime innotuit, licet inducatur illud apostoli, (si quid donaui Syluester de indulg. vobis,) sed nec per dicta antiquorum docto­rum [Page 9] sed modernorum, the Popes pardons were not knowne to vs by the holy scrip­tures, although some doe alledge S. Paul for that purpose; nether knowne by the auncient father, but onely by the late writers. Loc, pardons, and consequent­ly purgatory being the ground thereof, cannot be proued out of the scriptures. My Lord of Rochester hath these ex­presse Roffensis con, assert, Luther, arti 18. prope initium. wordes; sed & graecis ad hunc vsque diē, non est creditum purgatorium esse. Le­gat qui velit graecorum veterum commen­tarios, et nullum quantum opinor, aut quam rarissimum de purgatorio sermonem inue­niet. Sedneque Latini simul omnes, at sen­sim, huius reiveritatem cōceperunt: & pau­lo post; non absque maxima sancti spiritus dispensatione factum est, quod post tot anno­rum curricula purgatorij fines, & indulgen­tiarū vsus ab Orthodoxis sit receptus; quam­diu nulla fuerat de purgatorij cura, nemo quaesiuit indulgentias, nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgentiarum existimatio. Si tollas purgatorium quorsum indulgentiis o­pus erit? his enim si nullum fuerit purgatori­um, nihil indigebimus, contemplantes igi­tur [Page 10] aliquandiu purgatorium incognitum fu­isse, deinde quibusdam pedetentim, Partim ex reuelationibus, partim ex scripturis fu­isse creditum, at (que) ita tandem generatim e­ius fidem ab orthodoxa ecclesia fuisse recep­tissimam, facillime rationem aliquā indul­gentiarum intelligimus. Quum ita (que) purga­toriū, tā sero cognitū ac receptū ecciesiae fu­erit vniuersae, quis iam de indulgentijs mi­rari potest, quod in principio nascentis eccle­siae nullus fuerat carū vsum; caeperunt igitur indulgentiae, post quā ad purgatorij cruciatus aliquandiu trepidatum erat. The Greeks to this day, do not beleeue there is a pur­gatorie. Reade who will their com­mentaries, Loc, a great lear­ned man and a fa­mous po­pish by­shop and Martyr, doth plain­ly tell vs, the vanity and late birth of Romish pardons. and he shall finde either verie seldome mention of purgatorie, or ra­ther none at all, for neither did the La­tine Church, conceiue the veritie of this matter all at once, but ley surelye by little and little; neither was it done with­out the great dispensation of the holy ghost, that after so many yeares Catho­licks both beleeued purgatory, and recei­ued the vse of pardons generally; so long as there was no care of purgatorie, no [Page 11] man sought for pardons. For of it de­pendeth all the estimation, that we haue of pardons. If thou take awaie purgato­ry, to what end shal we need pardons. For if there be no purgatory, we shall need no pardons. Considering therfore how long purgatory was vnknown, thē that it was beleeued of some by little and little, part­ly by reuelations, and partly by the scrip­tures, and so at the last beleeued gene­rally of the whole Church, we doe ea­sily vnderstande the cause of pardons, synce therefore purgatory was so lately knowne, and receiued of the whole Church; who can now admire pardons, that there was no vse of them in the Pri­mitiue Church. Pardons therefore be­gan after the people stoode in some feare of purgatorie. Thus O Pope, writeth thine owne deare Byshoppe, whose testimonie must needes be of great cre­dite with thee. Whose wordes notwith­standing, if they be well marked with the due circumstances thereof, are able of themselues without more adoe, to per­swad any man liuing, to detest all popish religion. For first we learne here, that the 1 [Page 12] greekes neuer beleeued purgatory, no not to the daies of this Byshoppe, who liued within these three score yeares last past. Secondly, that the church of Rome 2 (now the mother of all superstition,) did not beleeue the said purgatory, for many hundreds of yeares after S. Peters death, whose successour for all that, thou O Pope, boasts thy selfe to be. Thirdly, that 3 this purgatory, which is now the foun­dation of papistry, crept by little and little, not all at once, into the Latine 4 Church. Fourthly, that purgatorie was found out by reuelation from hea­uen, 5 (or if you had rather so thinke, from the deuell of Hell,.) Fiftly, that pardons came not vp, vntill purgatory was found out: the reason hereof saith our popish Byshopp, is this; because forsooth, if there be no purgatory, all popish pardons are needlesse. Sixtly, that pardons were not 6 heard of, nor knowne to the Primatiue 7 Church. Seuently, that pardons then began, when men began to feare the paines of purgatorie: but of this matter I haue written more at large, in my booke [Page 13] of Motiues.

The Fift Hound.

TEll me O Pope, hast thou not impo­sed vpon thy Monkes, Friers, and Nunnes, such an heauie yoake, as they are not able to beare? Is not the prohibi­tion of matrimonie, contrarie to Christs institution, to the doctrine of the Apostls, & to the practise of the Primitiue church? was not Pope Syritius the first man, that made any setled law for that purpose? was not the mariage of priests allowed in the Church, for one thousand yeares after christ? doth not thine owne Gra­tianus tell vs, euen out of thine owne ap­proued decrees, that many priests sonnes haue beene Popes of Rome? Doth hee not name, Bonifacius, Agapitus, Theodo­rus, Syluerius, Faelix, Hosius, Gelasius, Densdedit, and many others? Doth not thine owne glosse vpon the same text, thinke it better to say they were all bast­ardes, then to graunt them to be legiti­mate children, lawfully begotten in holie [Page 14] wedlocke? doth not the same glosse al­ledge for his excuse, that vit iu tollitur per successionem, the fault is taken away by vertue of their holy succession; commeth not the same Gratian roundly vpon the glosse, and affirmeth plainly, that priests might marrie lawfully euery where, vn­till the late inhibition made by Siritius? doth not Socrates that famous Greeke historiographer tell vs, that Byshops of the east Church, did in his time beget children of their lawfull wiues, and that euen in the time of their priestly function? This thing I haue prooued so effectually in my booke of Suruey, as all the pa­pistes in Europe are not able to disproue the same. Here onely I will adde the flatte testimonie of Socrates out of his ecclesiasticall historie, whose expresse wordes are these; non pauci illorunt (E­piscoporum) Socrates, hist, lib, 5, Cap, 21. dum Episcopatum gerunt, libe­ros ex vxore legit tima procreant; Many of them saith Socrates speaking of Bysh­oppes, doe beget children of their law­full wiues, euen in time of their Episco­pall or Byshoplike functions. these [Page 15] wordes are so plaine, that they neede no glosse.

The sixt Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, doe not so many in­tollerable excommunications, & so many dissolute dispensations, come dai­ly and hourely from the chuch of Rome, as therby the state of vs Christians is now become more seruile, then was of olde the condition of the Iewes. I wote it is so, thine owne doctors, Uictoria, Syluester, Fumus, Gerson, Rhenanus, and Geile­rius affirme the same, as I haue pro­ued at large in my booke of Suruey. One onely Victoria I will here alledge, whose expresse wordes are these: vide­mus quotidie a Romana curia tam largas, imò omnino tam dissolutas dispensatio­nes profectas, vt orbis ferre non possit, Victoria de potest, Papae et con, re­lect, 5, pag, 139, non solum in scandalum pusillorum, sed maiorum. Wee see dailye so large, yea altogether so dissolute dis­pensations come from the court of Rome, that the worlde cannot endure [Page 16] it, neither is this dissolutiō to the scand all only of the weake, but euen of the perfect sort, and those that are the wisest among the rest. Againe he writeth thus; ego vbisupra Pag. 149. nullam dispensationem in particulari con­demno, sed video duo; primunm, quid in fi­ne anni sunt tot dispensationes factae, vt nes­cio an sint tot qui legem seruent, secundo, video quod omnes qui petunt adferunt dis­pensationes. I condemne no dispensati­on in particular, but I see two thinges; First, that in the ende of the yeare there are so manie dispensations gotten, that I knowe not if so many keepe the lawe: se­condly, I see all that aske, bring dispen­sations with them. In another place, the same Victoria hath these words; Paula­tim ad haue i [...]temporantiam deuentum est, vbisupra pag. [...]51. & hunc tale in statum, vbi nec mala nost­ra, nee reme [...]a pati possumus. Da mihi The Church of Rome is now brought to a most miserable state. Clementes, L [...]s, Syluestros, & omnia permittā arbitrio eorū. Sed vt nihil grauius dicatar in recentiores Pontifices, certe mul­tis partibus sunt priscis illis inferiores. By little & little we are brought to these in­ordinate dispensations, and to this so mi­serable [Page 17] state, where we are neither able to endure our owne griefes, nor the re­medies which shoulde mitigate the same. Yet giue me Clements, Lines, Syluesters, and I will commit all thinges to their charge. But to speake fauourably of our late Popes, they are doubtles farre inferiour to Popes of old time Loe, the Chuch of Rome is not now, as it was in old time.

The seauenth Hound.

TEll me O Pope, haue not thy prede­cessours made their beginning like Foxes and theeues and in the end dyed like dogges? haue not thine owne reli­gious Fryers, made report of this veritie? I wote it is so, and Carranza together with thy sweete Platina shall witnesse the same with mee. Platina hath these expresse wordes; qua quidem bearitudine Ioanes caruit, fur certe in pontificatu [...], & latro; non enim vt par fuerat, per ostium intrauit. Which happie life Pope Iohn Platina in vit [...] Ioan, 18. wanted, as who was a theese and a rob­ber, [Page 18] for he entered not in by the doore, as he should haue done. Againe, in an o­ther place the same Platina writeth in this maner eo enim tum pontificatus deuenerat, vt qui plus largitione & ambitione, non dico Platina in vita Syl, 3. sanctitate vitae et doctrina valeret, is tan­tum inde dignitatis gradum, bonis oppres­sis & reiectis obtineret, quem morem vti­nam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tem­pora. For to that passe was the Popedome now brought, that who so could excell others in giuing bribes, & in ambition, I say not in godly lyfe & sound doctrine, Extortion and ambi­tion is the life of po­pery. (for that was farre from them,) he one­ly should haue the degree of honor, and good men should be reiected; which v­sage would to God it had neuer bene in our time. Herken O Pope, is it not now with your Byshops of Rome, as it was with Annas, Caiphas, & others of old time among the Iewes? thy holines can it not denie, but let Carranza byte thee in the haunch, whose expresse words are these: intrauit vt Vulpes, regnauit vt Lupus, mor­tuus est vt Canis. He entred as a foxe, he Carranza in summa con. sol. 369 reigned as a Wolfe, he died as a dogge. [Page 19] He spaketh of Pope Boniface, the eight of that name. This Carranza, albeit he were one of the Popes deare Friers, is for all that a well mouthed Hound.

The eight Hound.

TEll me O Pope, can not thy holines with plenitudine potestatis, euacuate hellish purgatory, and deliuer all soules tormented there, & send them streight away to heauen? nay, canst thou not free all men from all punishment due to their sinnes here on earth? I am sure thou canst, for thy deare doctors Fumus, Syluester, & Vignerius, haue so affirmed to mee. Fumus shall speake for all, whose expresse wordes are these; Pa­pa posset liberare omnes animas purga­porij, etiam si plures essent, si quis pro sis fa­ceret Fumus in verbo, Papa, 11. quod iuberet, peccaret tamen in­discretè concedendo; & in hoc sensis dicunt Doctores, quod non potest spoliare Purgatorium. The Pope coulde deliuer all the soules out [Page 20] of purgatory, albeit they were very ma­nie, if one did that which he appointed to be done, marrie the Pope should sin, for his vndiscrete dealing therein. Thus writeth our holy fryer, who addeth well in the ending, that the Pope wanteth somtime his capp of discretion, to which The Pope doth som­time want his cappe discretion. I will make another addition, if percase it may stand with the Popes good liking, to witte, that since as Popery telleth vs, the fire of purgatory is the selfe same in nature with the fire of Hell, if there­fore his holinesse had but one droppe of charitie, he would neuer suffer so ma­ny soules to abide that doolfull miserie. Yet I must needes graunt, that in so do­ing his holinesse should want discretion; because forsooth, if there were no soules in purgatory, then for trentals, diriges, and Masses, men woulde not bestowe one quatrine vpon his vassals.

The ninth Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, canst not thou Free a man by thy plenary pardon; from [Page 21] all punishment due in this life and in the life to come? I know thou canst doe it, because thine owne deare Syluester so affirmeth. These are his expresse words; qui plenariam indulgentiam rite assecutus Syluester. de indulg, par. 33 est, si eo instanti moreretur, euolaret statim ad caelum. He that hath orderly gotten the Popes plenarie pardon. if he should dye presently, he should flie to heauen out of hand. Thus writeth Syluester the Popes Theologus absolutus. Where now, if it were not sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power, as I haue proued it to be; I would aske this one question, why; any soules abide in purgatory, since a plenarie is sufficient for their discharge, Pardon my bold­nes I pray your holi­nesse. which for all that, the Pope graunt­teth vsually, as a thinge verie frequent during mine owne aboade at Rome, Is it because he cannot? that is con­trary to his owne doctrine. Is it be­cause it stādeth not with discretion, there is asmuch discretion to doe it for the deade, as for the liuing. Is it because he will not? so it seemeth, and then he wanteth charitie, as I haue already said.

The tenth Hound.

TEll me O Pope, doth not thy sottish religion tell vs, that thou maiest erre as a priuate man, but not as Pope or a publicke Person? as if it were saide, thou maiest sitte in thy pontificalibus, O mon­ster of the world. thou mayest ride vpon thy white Pal­frey, thou mayest talke and write they pleasure, and that euen while thou art Pope, and so vtter heresies and blasphemies whatsoeuer, and yet for all that canst thou neuer teach or define any errour or heresie, as beinge Pope indeede. I wote it is so, thy chiefest Doctors haue so tolde mee. Vigneri­us hath these expresse wordes; si di­catur, summus pontifex errare potest, & vigner de potest, con­dendi sym­bolum, pag, 337. in animo suo concipere aliquem articulum Orthodoxa fidei contrarium, & eti­am priuatim proferre, vt legitur de A­nastasio secundo. Si ergo posset nouum symbolum edore, fides ecclesiae vnius hominis periculo subiaceret; dicendum, quod summus pontifex vt priuata perso­na [Page 23] errare potest, non tamen vt est sum­mus pontifex. Ideo si vt priuata persona symbolum edere tentaret, non esset symbo­lum; maximè vbi a vera fide deuiaret. If any say, that the Poope may erre. and conceiue in his hearte any article contrary to the Catholike faith, and also vtter the same priuately, as we read of Pope Anastatius the seconde: If therefore hee coulde make a new creede the faith of the Church shoulde be sub­iecte to the hazzard of one man. We answere saith (Vignerius,) that the Pope may erre as a priuate person, but not as Pope or the hie Byshoppe. Ther­fore if hee should make a creede as a priuate man, it should be no creede at all; especially, where hee swerued from the right faith. Beholde here gentle reader, vpon what rotten stuffe the Papistes woulde haue vs to ground our faith. Wee must say they, be­leeue that the Pope cannot erre, and yet are wee sure that hee can erre, and that hee hath alreadie erred in verie deede. Wee must likewise beleeue, [Page 24] that he cannot but teach the truth; and yet must we also beleeue, that hee can both teach heresie, and be an here­tike himselfe. VVe must furthermore be­leeue, [...]hat heart will not derest Po­pery. as you haue already heard; that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power, and yet must we both dispute of his pow­er, and straitly examine his doctrine, as also know constantly, whether he speak­eth publiquely as a publike man, or pri­uately as a priuate man. And neuertheles when we haue done all that we can, we know no more what to thinke or say of his doctrine, then when we haue an E [...]le by the taile. For when he shall tell me, I must beleeue this and that; then if hee speake as a priuate man, where is my saith? but let vs here the cry of some o­ther houndes. That famous papist Io­h [...]ures Gerson, sometime the chancellor Iohn Gerson in serm, de pasch. part. 3. of Paris, hath these expresse wordes; hoc fecit latroni, qui verisimiliier nondum compleuer at paenitentiam pro omnibu pec­catis suis, qui fuit illa hora propria beatifi­catus, & vidit deum facie ad faciem, sicut sanctiin Paradiso. Propter quod insu­per [Page 25] apparet falsitas doctrinae papae Ioannis 22. quae damnata fuit cum souo buccina­rum coram rege Philippoper Theologos Pa­risienses, & credidit potius Theologis Pa­risiensibus, quam curiae. This hee did to the theefe, who by likelihoode had not yet accomplished pennance for all his sinnes, who was blessed in that ve­rye houre, and sawe GOD face to face, as doe the Saintes in Paradise, by reason whereof, further appeareth the falshoode of the doctrine of Pope Iohn, which was condemned with the sounde of Trumpetes, before king Phillippe by the diuines of Paris, and the king be­leeued the diuines of Paris, rather then the court. In which wordes we haue to note. First, that Maister Gerson auouch­eth the theefe crucified with Christ, to haue seen God face to face in that houre, and so to haue beene blessed. Secondly, that he reproueth the false doctrine of Pope Iohn. Thirdly, that his doctrine was condemned with the sound of trum­pets, in the presence of the king of France Fourthly, that the king gaue more credit [Page 26] to the diuines of Paris, then to the iudge­ment of the (Pope,) or court of Rome. Fiftie, that neither the king, nor the lear­ned Papists, did at that time graunt to the Pope such power and authoritie, as the Pope this day doth insolently cha­lenge to himselfe. Sixtly that the Pope taught false doctrine euen in a weighty matter of saith. Which thing not onely Gerson affirmeth, together with the di­uines of Paris, as you haue heard; but Pope Adrian himselfe testifieth the same, as the zealous papist Alphonsus de castro, Alphonsus, lib. 3. adu­baeres, pro­pe finem. reporteth in these expresse words; sexta haeresis docet nullam animam ante diem iudicij, esse beatam, quum vt ait, nulla a­nima an [...]e illum diem videt deum. Huius haeresios authores sunt Armeni, eandem etiā tuentur Greci, post istos surrexit Iohannes, 22. huius nominis pontifex. Sed ne verbis meis aliquis in hac parte deroget, verba A­driani papae referā, qui in suo quarto sentētia­rum, in calce cuiusdam quaestionis de sacra­mento confirmationis, it a ait; nonissime fer­tur de Ioanne, 22. quod publice docuit, decla rauit, & ab omnibus teneri mandauit, quod a nimae purgata aute finale indicium non ha­bent [Page 27] solā, quae est clara & facialis visio dei; & vniuersitatem Parisiense ad hec indux­isse dicitur, quod nemo in ea poteraet gradum in Theologia adipisci, nisiprimitus hunc er­rorem iurasset se defensurum, & per petuo ei adhaesurum. Haec Adrianus. The sixt heresie teacheth, that no soule is in eternall blisse before the day of dome, because as it saith, no soule before that day, seeth God, the Armeni are the authors of this heresie, and the Greekes holde the same. After these rose vp Pope Iohn, the 22. of that name. But least any man distrust my words in this point, I will receite the words of Pope Adrian, who in his fourth booke of sentences, in the ende of a certaine question of the sacra­ment of confirmation, saith thus; last of all, it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that he publiquely taught, declared, & com­maunded The Pope comman­deth his Vassals, to sweare to false doct­rine. all men to held (this opinion) that the soules of the iust, haue not before the day of dome, the sole, which is the cleare and faciall sight of God. And it is said, that he induced the Vniuersity of Paris to this; that no man should take de­gree in the same, but, he that first did swear to desend this error, & to mantain the [Page 28] same for euer. Thus saith Adrian, who was him selfe the Byshoppe or Pope of Rome, and the most excellently learned Byshoppe, that euer was in that sea. And it will not serue the turne to say as the Iesuite Bellermine doth, in the defense of popish faith: to wit, that Pope Iohn er­red as a priuate man, but not as Pope, for that distinction doth not onely want a good foundation, whereupon it should be built, but also it flatly destroyeth the plain text: the reason hereof is most euident, euen to euery childe. First, be­cause 1 Pope Adrian saith, (docuit,) hee taught. Secondly, because he saith, 2 (publice,) publiquelie. Thirdly, because 3 he saith, (mandauit,) he cōmaunded all to holde it. Fourthly, because none coulde be made graduate, saue onely he that held 4 this opinion. Fiftly, because euery gradu­ate 5 did swere, to hold & defēd it foreuer. So then, the Pope may erre, not only as a priuate man, but also in the publike de­cree of faith, & that euen by the consente & testimonie of Adrian, who was Pope himselfe; yea, who for learning & know­ledge [Page 29] as the papists thēselues cōfesse, was one of the rarest Popes that euer came at Rome. But of this point, I haue spoken more largely, in my booke of Motiues.

The eleunth Hound.

TEll me O Pope, doe not thy Doc­tors deare, wrest the scriptures most cleare, that so they may serue thy turne? thou must for shame confesse it, for thine owne sworne vassall Polydorus Virgilius, doth witnesse it to be so; these are his ex­presse words; Non secus isti iurisconsulti Polydorut. lib. 4 cap. 9. aliquoties detorquent sacras literas quo vo­lunt, ac sutores sordidas solent dentibus extendere pelles: These popish Legistes and Canonistes, doe nowe and then so wrest and writhe the holy scriptures; euen as Coblers doe gnaw with their teeth, and stretch out their filthy skinnes. Out of these wordes I note first, that this 1. Polydore was a great papist himselfe, and so this testimonie must needs be of great force against the papistes. I note second­ly, 2. that he speaketh not of the meanest and basest sort of papistes, but euen of the [Page 30] best, and of their renowmed Doctors; because he meaneth Hostiensis, their grande and famous Canonist. I note thirdly, that their mangling and wre­sting of the holy scriptures, is most in­tollerable; The papists wrest the scripture, and that without the same, they cannot possibly maintaine their wicked doctrine.

The 12. Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, doth not Dominicus Soto thine owne Dominican Frier, tell vs with open mouth, that no soules abide in Purgatorie aboue tenne yeares? Doest not thou for all that, giue pardons Soto in 4. lib sent. dist. 19 q. 3. arg 2. for tenne thousand yeares? doe not thy Romish priestes take money, to saye Masses for those that were dead and bu­ried, seuen thousand yeares agoe? the vsuall practise which my self haue know­en, doth proue it to be so; I haue also proued the same in my booke of Motiues and more at large in my booke of Suruey.

The 13 Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, doest not thou teach thy children, that they are iu­stified by their owne merites, and by their workes of supererogation? and yet doth not thy deare Frier Iohannes de Combis, oppose himselfe roundlie a­gainst that wicked heresie, Gods holy spirit mouing him so to doe? I wote it is so, for these are his expresse words; Hoc patet, quiae Deus semper remunerat supra Ioan▪ de Combis lib; 5. theolog. verit. cap. 1 [...] meritum, sicut punit citra condignum. All this is euident, because God euermore rewardeth vs aboue our merites, and al­so doth euer punish vs, lesse then we de­serue. For which respect, Saint Au­sten saith grauely, Ue etiam laudabil­vitae hominum, si remotae misericor­diae discutias eam. Woe, euen to the best liuer of all, if thou (O GOD) Aug. lib. 9. confess. cap. 13. shall examine his life, thy mercie set a­part.

The 14. Hound.

TEll me O Pope, doth not thy famous Canonist and most reuerend Bishop, Couarruuias, tell vs without blushing, that albeit the doctrine of thine Angeli­call Doctor Aquinas, be confirmed for Authentical by sundry Popes afore thee, The Popes doings & doctrine, must needs be defen­ded. yet must the contrary opinion be defen­ded of necessitie? because forsooth saith Couerruuias, the life of popery cannot otherwise saued bee. These are his ex­presle words; Nec me latet D. Thomam praevia maxima deliberatione afferere, Couern. To. 1. ca. 20 part. 11. in [...]ed. col. prima. Rom. pontificem non posse propria dispeae sa­tione continentiae solenne votum monatho­rum tolere, & paulo post, oportet tamen pri­mam opinionem defendere, neque passim fi­ant, euertantur omnino. Neyther am I ignorant, saith Couerruvias, that Saint Thomas affirmeth after great deliberati­on, that the Bishop of Rome cannot with his dispensation, take away from monks their solemne vow of chastity, this not­withstanding, we must defend the first [Page 33] opinion, least the common practise of the Pope be turned vpside downe. Out of these wordes, sundry very necessarie 1 obseruations may be gathered. First, that the best learned Papistes, doe not agree 2 about the Popes Authoritie. Secondly, that great learned papistes among whom Aquinas is one, doe deny the Popes re­solution, iudgement, and authority, and that euen in the highest points of doc­trine. Thirdly, that false and absurd opi­nions 3 must be defended, for the credite and safegarde of the Popes religion. What a beggerly thing is poperie. Fourthlye, that most miserable is the Popes religion, which must haue such beggerly shiftes, for the maintenance of the same.

The 15. Hound.

TEll me O Pope, doest thou not reiect the sixt generall synode, because it prescribeth limites to thy holinesse? do­est thou not like wise reiect one parte of the generall counsell of Constance, for that it preferreth the authority of the [Page 34] counsell against thee? doth not thine owne Iesuite Bellarmine, reiect the Epistle of Damasus to Hierome, and an other of Hierome to Damasus? doth Loe, how roundly the papists reiect the fathers. not thy renowmed canonist Nauarre, reiect the common opinion, so often as hee disliketh the same? doth not Cardinall Caietanus contemne a whole multitude of Fathers, when they seeme to him to holde against the scriptures? doth not Melchior Canus a most lear­ned papist, oppose himselfe against the Thomistes and the Scotistes? Against all both olde and newe writers? all this is true, I knowe it well, and I houe proued it, in my booke of Mo­tyues. One or two testimonies I will heere set downe, because they are verie profitable for the Reader. Caietanus hath these expresse wordes; Si quando occurrerit nouus sensus textui consonus, Caietan. in praefat. in quin que lib. Mos. nec à scriptura sacra, nec ab ecclesiae do­ctrina dissonus, quamuis à torrente docto­rum sacrorum alienus, aequas se praebeant censores. Memineriut ius sum vnicuique tribuere, solis scripturae saecrae authoribus [Page 35] reseruata est authoritas haec, vt ideo credi­mus sic esse quod ipsi ita scripserunt, nul­lus ita (que) detestetur nouum sacrae scripturae sensum, ex hoc quod dissonat à priscis docto­ribus. Sed scrutetur perspicatius textum ac contextum scripturae, & si quadrare in­uenerit, laudet Deum, qui non alligauit expositionem scripturarum sacrarum pris­corum doctorum sensibus, sed scripturae ipsi integrae sub catholicae ecclesiae censurae. alioquin spes nobis ac posteris tollere­tur exponendi scripturam sacram, nisi transferendo (vt ainnt) de libro in quinternum. If at any time a new sense occurre, which is consonant to the text, & not dissonāt frō holy writt or doctrine of the Church, although it swarne from the opinion of neuer so many fathers; yet let the Readers iudge there of in­differentlye, and according to equi­tie. Let them remember to giue to euerie one his right, because this pri­uiledge is onelie graunted to the wri­ters This testi­monie of Caieta [...], is worthye to be noted. of the holy scriptures, that we must therfore beleue it to be so, because they haue written so, Let none therfore loath [Page 36] a newe sense of holie scripture, be­cause it dissenteth from the old Doctors, but let him exactly consider the text and context of the scripture, and if he find it to agree, let him praise God, who hath not tyed the exposition of the holy scrip­tures, to the opinions of the olde Doc­tors, but to the integritie of the scripture it selfe, vnder the censure of the Catho­lique Church. For otherwise, neither we nor our posterities shall haue any hope to expound the scripture, but onely to trans­late out of one booke into another. Thus we heare the crye of a well mouthed hound; to wit, the verdict of our lear­ned Caictain, our great Thomist, our re­ligious The holie scripture ought to be the tri­all of e­uerie doubtfull question. fryer, our Cardinall of Rome. By whose graue resolution, well worthy to be written in golden letters, it is euident to euery child, that no sense, though ne­uerso new; no exposition, though ne­uer so strange, no opinion, though dif­ferent from neuer so many fathers, must, or ought to be reiected, if it be agreable to the holy scriptures. And consequently it followeth by the said resolution, that [Page 37] euerie trueth is to be tryed by the scrip­tures, and none at all by the fathers. Mel­chior Canus an other learned papist, is of the selfe same opinion. These are his expresse wordes; Vbi ego si Thomistae Canus de locis, lib. 8. cap. 5. Ep. 245 omnes cum Scotist is existant, si cum anti­quis iuniores vellent contra me pugnare, ta­men superior sim necesse est, non enim vt nō ­nulli putant, omnia sunt in the logorum authoritate. Wherein, though all the Thomistes stand with the Scotists, though the olde writers with the younge fight against me, yet shall I of necessitie haue the vpper hande ouer them. For all thinges doe not as some thinke, rest in the authoritie of diuins. And why shoulde any man, depende vpon the iudgement of men, seeing O Pope thine owne sweete Iesuite Bellarmine, doth tell vs plainely, that all Bishops doe so dissent among themselues, and so swarue from the truth of the scrip­turs, as he knoweth not in the worlde whom to followe. These are his ex­presse wordes; At sine dubio singuli epis­copi Bellarm. lib. 2. de conc. cap. 2. [Page 38] errare possunt, & aliquando errant, & inter se quaudoque dissentiunt, vt nesci­amus quisnam eorum sequendus sit. But without all doubt, all Byshops may erre one after an other, and they sometime doe erre, and sometime dissent one from an other, so as we cannot in the worlde tell, whome it is best to followe. Out of these wordes, I note first, that God 1 who caused Balaams Asse to speake, hath enforced our Iesuite against his will to Nu, 22. 28. confesse the truth. I note secondly, 2 that there is no Bishoppe in the worlde, but he both may erre, and sometime doth erre, and consequently, that the Pope of Rome is eyther no Bishoppe at all by his owne Iesuites graunt, or else that he both may erre, and doth erre in deede. Of which testimonie I make the the greater account, because it procee­deth from a Iesuites mouth. For none more forcible weapons can be vsed a­gainst Popish do­ctrine is most forci­ble against it selfe. the papistes, then to beate them with their owne swordes. I note third­lie, that by our Iesuites confession, euerie 3 [Page 39] Bishoppe hath so manie errours, that the people cannot tell whom to followe. I note fourthlie, that since euerie aunci­ent 4 father both may erre and doth erre, and that by popish grant, there is no reason, why the papistes shoulde vrge vs as they doe, to stande to the cen­sure of the fathers in euerie thing, Nay they ought to giue vs leaue to examine their writinges, Ad amussim scriptura­rum, according to the true meaning of the scriptures: because the greate papistes, Caietanus, Canus, and Bel­larminus, doe all three graunte the same, as is alreadie prooued. Adde heereunto the sente of the nexte hounde.

The 16. Hound.

TEll me O Pope, doest not thou take awaye all freedome and li­bertie graunted of olde time to all [Page 40] assemblies and synodes. Doest not thou denie voyces, and definitiue sentence, to all persons in all counsels, euen to the Emperour himselfe, admitting none, though neuer so learned, but Bishoppes onely, to iudge of doubtes in faith or re­ligion? doest not thou absente thy selfe from all counsels, and yet reseruest all iudgement to thy selfe, sitting in thy chaire at home? doest thou not with all this, take thy Bishops sworne, euen when they are made Bishops, to defende thy papall Tyranny and lawes whatsoeuer? I wote it is so, and I haue proued it in my booke of Motiues. I will ne­uerthelesse in this place briefely shewe the same, by the testimonie of three Romish Houndes. The first hounde is Gregorie, who was himselfe the late Bishoppe of Rome. His expresse words in his decreetals, are these; Ego N. e­piscopus, Greg. lib. 7. decret. lit. 24. cap. 4. ab hac hora sidelis ero S. Petro, sanctaeque Romanae ecclesiae, dominoque meopapae N. eiusque successoribus Canonicè intrantibus. sequitur; papatum Romanae ec­clesiae, & regulas sanctorum patrum, ad­iutor [Page 41] ero ad defendendum & retinn­dum contra omnes homines; sic me De­us adiuuet, & haec sancta euangelia. I (Iohn Fisher) Bishoppe, will from this day forwarde be faithfull to saint Peter and to the holy Church of Rome, and to my Lorde (Boniface) the Pope, and to his successours chosen canoni­callie, and I will bee an helper to defende the popedome or papall au­thoritie, and the rules of the holie fa­thers against all people; so God me helpe, and the holie Gospell. Out of these wordes, it may be easilie gathe­red, that the decrees of late Romish counsels, are in these our daies of no force at all. The reason is euident, be­cause none but Bishops haue definitiue voyces in the saide counselles, neyther can the saide Bishops decree any thing, against eyther the Pope or the Church of Rome. For as we see by the Popes tyrannicall constitution nowe alledged, all Bishops are sworne to be faithfull to my Lorde the Pope, and to defend what­soeuer he hath set downe, against all [Page 42] people in the worlde. Te second hound is Bellarmine our Romish Iesuite, whose expresse wordes are these; Istum iura­mentum non tollit Episcoporum libertatem, Bellarm. lib 1. de conc. cap. vlt. quae in conciliis necessaria est, iurant enim se fore obediētes summo Pontifici, quod intelli­gitur donec Pontifex est, & dum iubet ea quae secundum Deum & sacras canones iu­bere potest; sed non iuràt se nō dicturos quod sentiunt in concilio, vel se non deposituros ei [...] si haeretioū esse conuincant, This oth taketh not away the liberty of Bishopps, which in counsels is necessarie. For they sweare that they will be obedient to the Pope, which is to be vnderstood, so long as he is Pope, and while hee commaundeth those thinges, which he may commaund, agreeable to God and the holy cannons; but they sweare not, that they will not speake what they thinke in the counsell, or that they will Marke this doctrine of our Ie­suite. not depose him, if they proue him to be an heretique. Out of these wordes of 1 the Iesuite, I note first, that he sawe right well, that this oth bringeth no small discredite, to the late Romish religion; in regarde whereof hee see­keth [Page 43] many shiftes, to saue the Popes credite if it might bee. I note se­condly, 2 that all clergie-men admitted to giue voyces in counsels, are sworne wholy to obey the Popes constitutions. 3 I note thirdly, that the said persons are sworne to beleeue, that the Pope can­not erre in his iudiciall decrees of faith or manners, that no counsels are of force, without the Popes confirmation; that all counsels confirmed by him, are ap­proued by the holy Ghost: that he can excommunicate and depose, all Empe­rours, Kinges, Queenes, and Bishops in the Christian worlde: that hee can deliuer by his free pardons, all soules out of purgatorie, and a thousand other thinges, of like homelie qualitie, for all such matters are contayned, in the Popes holie holie cannons, and con­sequently, in their most lamentable othe. I note fourthlye, that they 4 are sworne to admitte his decrees, who as they beleeue, may be an heretique. I note fiftlye, that they are sworne 5 to admit his iudgement in all matters of [Page 44] faith, whome yet them selues maye iudge and depose for heresie. (Fie, fie vpon all filthy popery.) I note sixtly, that the popish fundamentall article, in appointing the Pope iudge ouer all con­trouersies; is quite ouerthrowne & tur­ned vpside downe in this Bellarminus his explication. For when hee saieth, (while he commaundeth &c.) he gran­teth euery Bishop freedome, to examine and to iudge of the Popes cōstitutions. Which libertie, if they would constantly performe, all true christians would agree with them. For none that beleeue right­ly Would to God this were ob­serued a­mongest the pa­pistes. in God, will deny obedience to the Pope, When soeuer he preacheth or teacheth any thing, which is ag [...]eeable to God & holy cannons. But true chri­stians finding his canons to be disholy & his decrees to be against God; thinke as Bellarmine heere teacheth them, that they may iudge his bad dealing, and are not bound to obey him. The thirde hound is Melchior Canus, whose Canus, lib. 5. de aut [...]or, conc. cap. 5. pag. 102. expresse wordes are these; Decreta quoe a legatis contra sedis apostolicae [Page 45] traditionem apprebentur, non habent Ro­manae ecclesiae authoritatem, nec aliter se habent, quam si a consilio sine legatis pro­dijssent. Sequitur, solidam auctoritatem, quam in confirmandis & fratribus & dog­matibus Petrus habet, in legatos trans­ferre non potest. The decrees which the legates shall approue against the tra­dition of the Church of Rome, haue no authoritie from the Church of Rome, neither are they of any more force, then if they had proceeded from the counsell without consent of the Legates. The sound authority which Peter hath in con­firming his brethren and decrees, he can not transferre vnto his Legates. Thus writeth Canus, that great piller of Po­pishe Doctrine. Out of whose wordes I note first, that decrees of counsels 1 be of no force, without consent of the Popes Legates. I note secondly, that 2 the decrees of counsels, euen when they haue the consent of the Legates, are for all that of no force, when the Legates condiscend to any thing against the Popes minde. I note thirdly, that the 3 [Page 46] Pope cannot giue or translate his autho­ritie to the legates; and consequently, that the Pope doth no little abuse the whole world, when he calleth together Late Po­pish coun­sels are of no autho­ritie. all Byshoppes in the world. and yet will allowe nothinge that they do, vnlesse it be the same that he decreth in his chaire at home.

The 17 Hound.

TEll me O precursor of Antichrist, if thou be not that Antichrist himselfe? doest not thou take vpon thee to depose Kings, and to dispossesse them of their Scepters and regalities? doest not thou chalenge authoritie to make Kings? doest not thou tell them, that they haue not their power from God, but through thee and thy meanes? I wote it is so, thy domi­cican Fryer Syluester reprooueth it, thy Iesuite Bellermine confirmeth it, and thy sworne Vassals, Campion, Ballard, and their complices, did put the same in ex­ecution. Syluester hath these expresse Syluester. de papa, par 2. wordes; nec obstat, quod potestas imperialis [Page 47] est adeo concessa secundum multa iura, quia est a deo mediante Papa; quia eam concedit non vt homo, sed vt vicarius dei. Nec sunt sic distinctae potestates, spiritualis scilicet & temporal [...]s, quin vna alteri subaliernetur ad instar solis & Lunae; nec sunt distinctae, quasi semper sint in diuersis, sed quia sunt ordina­ta ad distincta, scilicet spiritualia & tem­poralia; & in vno eodemque summo pontifi­ce, est vtraque in summo. It skilleth not that many lawes affirme imperiall power to be of GOD. For it is but from God doth not make kings but by the Popes meanes. GOD, by the Popes meanes who granteth it not as man, but as the Vicar of GOD. Neither are the two pow­ers, the spirituall and the temporall so disti [...]ct, but that they remaine subor­dinate the one to the other, after the resemblance of the Sunne & the Moone. Neither are they distinct as being alwaies in diuers subiectes, but as ordeyned to distinct thinges, spirituall and tempo­rall. For they both are in one and the same Pope, euen in the highest degree. These wordes gentle Rea­der, neede no interpretation, they [Page 48] are full of open blasphemie, as all that haue eyes may see. Bellerminus hath these wordes; Childericum deposuit Papa, & in eius locum Pipinum Caroli magni pa­trem Bellerm, de tom, pontifice, lib, 5, cap, 8, &, lib, eod, cap, 7. regem creari iussit. The Pope de­posed Childericus, and commaunded to place Pipinus father to Charles the great, in his throne. Againe in an other place, the same Bellermine hath these expresse wordes; at si isti ijdem principes conantur auertere populū a fide, omnium consensu pos­sunt & debent priuari suo dominio. But if these princes goe about, to auerte the people from the faith (of the Church of Rome, for so he meaneth,) then by the consent of all, they may and must be dis­possessed, of their scepters & Regalities. Againe, in the second Chapter he saith Bellerm, cap, eodem. thus; quod si Christiani elim non depo­suerunt Neronem, & Dioclesianum, & Iulianum apostatam, ac valentem Arianū, & similes; id fuit, quia deerant vires tem­porales Christianis. If the Christians in time past, did not depose Nero, Diocleti­an, Iulian, Valens, and such like Em­perours; the cause thereof was this, be­cause [Page 49] they wanted power and force, and were not strong enough for that attempt. Againe, a little after hee hath these wordes; at non tenentur Christiani, imò Bellermin. cap, eodem. nec debent cum euidenti periculo religio­nis, tolerare regem infidelem. But Chri­stians are not bound to tolerate a King that is an infidell, (or not a papist, as the Ie suite vnderstandeth the worde, who will haue none to be christians: but papistes;) nay, they must not tollerate such a one, with the euident perill of religion. And our Ie suite hath this rea­son, to perswade vs thus to thinke; be­cause forsooth saith he, de iure humano est, Bellerm. vbi super. quod hunc aut illum habeamus regem. It is by the law of man, that we haue this or that man to be our Kinge. This is the doctrine of our Iesuite, and consequent­ly of the Pope himselfe. Out of which disloyall and most vnchristian assertion, I inferre. First, that the Pope and his 1 Iesuites would most willingly, depose our most gracious Soueraigne from her royall throne and regalitie, if they were of force and power so to doe. I inferre [Page 50] secondly, that our Iesuite doth here ap­prooue 2 peremptorily, many naughtie & abhominable factes; aswell in the sight Loe, the fruites of popery is flat & open treason of god, as in the eyes of the worlde. First, the diabolicall excommunication of Pope Pius. Secondly, the disloyall fact of Murton, who brought the same into this Realme. Thirdly, the publish­ing thereof by Felton. Fourthly, the practising of the curse or excommunica­tion, by Sanders, Fitz-Morice, Bal­lard, and others their sedicious compli­ces. Fiftly, the renewing of the printe, & the dispercing of the copies at Rome, by our Iesuites, Persons and Campion, which thing was done during mine own abode at Rome, as a very compendious preparatiue, for their more commodious entrance into this land. I inferre thirdly, that all subiectes are by this doctrine, styrred vp and encouraged to manifest rebellion, as also to haue no scruple of conscience in so doying, the reason here­of is euident, because if kinges receiue their authoritie from man, as this Ie­suite auoucheth; then may kinges in­deede [Page 51] be displaced by man, as Romish parasites & irreligious Pollitikes, do beare the world in hand. But God himselfe telleth vs another tale, by his annointed kinge Salomon the wise; per me reges Pro, cap, 8 vers. 15. regnant, & legum conditores iusta decernūt. By me kinge doe reigne, & Prin­ces decree iustice. By me princes rule, and all nobles, and iudges of the earth, And the apostle saith, non est potestas nisi a Deo. There is no power but of Rom. 13. 1. GOD.

The 18, Hound.

TEll me O holy disholy father of Rome, how thou hast aspired to thy Lordes titles? wilt thou holde thy peace? must I needes speake for thee? doubtles the glossers of thy Canons, gaue thee all thy Lordle titles, themselues being blind bayards, and very beggerly fellowes. For by reason of their pouertie, they flattered and sought to please; and by reason of their ignorance, they writt many things, which they did not vnderstand. The great [Page 52] papist Franciscus a Victoria, hath these expresse wordes; sed glossatores iuris hoc dominium dederunt papae, cum ipsi essent pauperes rebus & doctrina. But the glos­sers Victor, de potest: ec­clae, relect. 1 sect, 6. pag, 39. of the popish Canon-law, gaue this dominion and these royall titles to the Pope, when them selues were blinde bayards and beggerly fellowes. O noble birth of Poperie.

The 19 Hounde.

TEll me O three headed Cerberus, who blasphemously namest thy selfe the Vicer vniuersall of Christ Iesus; who was he that first gaue thee, the primacye Popish pri macie be­gan with bloude & is main­teyned with fire. and the headship of the Church? was it not that blodie Phocas the parricide? did he not rauish many godly matrons, and murder the godly Emperour Maur [...]ius together with his wife & children? didst not thou shortly after obtaine of him, that the church of Rome might be called the head of all churches? I am sure it was so: for so write thine owne zea­lous Papistes and renowmed Cronogra­pherss; [Page 53] Sigebertus, Plalmerius, Bergo­nensis, Polidorus, and others. Sigeber­tus hath these very wordes; post quē Bo­nifacius Romanae ecclesiae presidet. Hic obti­nuit Sygebert, in cron. apud Phocam [...]mperatorem, vt ecclesia Romanacaput esset omnium ecclesiarum, cumprius Constantinopolitana id vsurpare tentasset, After whome Boniface go­uerned the Church of Rome. He obtai­ned of the Emperour Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be the head of all Churches; and this he did, because the Church of Constantinople writt it selfe the head of all Churches. by whose testi­monye it is most euident, as yee see, that the Church of Rome neuer sought for the primacie ouer other Churches, vntill the church of Constanti­nople proudly chalenged that name. For which proude appellation. S. Gregory surnamed the great, that holy and lear­ned Byshoppe of Rome, stoutly with­stoode Iohn the Byshoppe of Constanti­nople, tearming him Antichrist, and the Gregor. lib. cap. pe. 6 194. name Antichristian. And because his owne assertion plainly recited, is most forcible to perswade the reader, I will set [Page 54] downe his owne expresse words, which are these; ego autem fidenter dico, quia quis quis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua, Antichri­stum praecurrit. I speake boldly, that whosoeuer either calleth himselfe vni­uersall Priest, or desireth so to be cal­led, is for his intollerable pride, become the precursor of Antichrist. So then, the Church of Rome for the space of sixe hundred yeares after Christ, continued in equalitie and vniformitie with other Churches; euen vntill the yeare of our Lord, 607. at which time Bonifacius A. D. 607 the third of that name, was proudly ex­alted by Phocas as is already saide.

The 20 Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, thou that makes thy selfe the foundation and rocke, vpon which the Church is built; doe not thine owne deere darlings affirme boldly, that the church is neither built vpon Peter, nor vpon thee, but vpon the faith and confession that Peter made? I wote they doe so, and thou shalt heare their [Page 55] expresse wordes: Dyonisius carthusianus Dionisius Carthus. in 16. cap. Math. hath these wordes: super hanc petram quam confessuses, hoc est, super meipsum lapidem angularem, montem altissimum, de quo ait apostolus, fundamentum aliud nemo potest ponere, praeter id quod positum est, quod est Christus Iesus. Vpon this rock which thou hast confessed, that is, vpon mine owne selfe the corner-stone, the 1. cor. 3. 11. high mountaine of which the Apostle speaketh: another foundation can no man lay, then that which is layed, which is Iesus Christ, vpon this rocke I say, will I builde my church, that is, the congre­gation of the faithfull. Thus writeth thine owne Fryer, and thy deare Doctor. Nicholaus de Lyra confirmeth this ver­dict in these expresse wordes: & ego di­co tibi, pro te & pro socijs tuis, quin tis es Petrus. 1. confessor verae petrae quae est Christus. Et super hanc petram quam con­fessus es, id est, super Christum, aedificabo ecclesiam meam, & portae inferi, id est, persecutiones tyrannorum et tentationes spirituum malignorum non praeualebunt ad uersus eam, a vera fide subuerten­do. [Page 56] ex quo patet, quod ecclesia non consistit Iyran, in 16, cap. Mat. in hominibus ratione potestatis vel digni­tatis ecclesiasticae velsecularis, quiamul­ti principes, & summi pontifices, & alij inferiores, inuenti sunt apostatasse a fi­de; propter quod ecclesia consistet in illis per­sonis, in quibus est notitia verae, & con­fessio fidei, & veritatis.

And I say to thee for thee and for thy fellowes, that thou art Peter that is to say, the confessor of the true rocke which is Christ. And vpon this rocke which thou hast confessed, that is, vpon Christ, will I builde my Church, and Hel-gates, that is, the persecutious and tentations of wicked spirits, shall not preuaile a­gainst The Church is built vpon Christ, & confiteth not of wicked Popes, but of those persons that con­fesse the faith of Christ. it in subuerting it from the true faith. Whereby it is euident, that the Church doth not consist in men, by rea­son of power or dignitie, either ecclesi­asticall of secular; because manie both Princes and Popes, and others of the in­feriour sort, are founde to haue reuol­ted and made an appostasie from the faith, for which cause, the Church, consisteth in those persons, in whom [Page 57] there is true knowledge, and confession of the faith and veritie. Loe, by the verdict of Lyra a great learned papist, that which was spoken to Peter, was spoken to him, not as to himselfe alone, but to him for, and in the behalfe of his fellowes. And the rocke vpon which Christ promiseth to builde his Church, is not Peter, but his owne person, euen our Lord Iesus. But this point is hand­led atlarge, in my booke of Suruey. To which as also to my booke of Motiues, the papists would ere this, haue framed some answere, if they knewe in the worlde, how to deuise the same. But the truth must needes in time, haue the vpper hand.

The 21 Hounde.

TEll mee O pope, thou that bearest the worlde in hand, that the par­ticular Church of Rome can not erre? is not that Church which cannot erre, the whole congregation of the faithful? I wote it is so, and thine owne children [Page 58] doe testifie the same against thee. Panor­mitanus a famous popish Archbishope, & thyrenowmed canonist, hath these expres wordes; ecclesia uniuersitatis errare non Panormit. apud Silu. deside, s. 9. potest, scilicet in fide vel articulis fidei; & pro hac tantum christus in euangelio o­rauit ad patrem. The church vniuersall cannot erre, to witte, in the faith, or in the articles of our beleefe; and for this church onelye was Christs pray­er when he prayed to his Father in the Gospell. Syluester hath these wordes: & sicintellige glossam dicentem, quodecclesia quae errare non potest, dica­tur non papa, sed congregatio fidelium, Siluefter, de eccles. 5, 4. quae silicet tenet fidem, quam Petrus cum aliis populis docuit. And thus must we vnderstande the glosse which saith, that the church which cannot erre, is not the Pope: But the congregation of the faithfull, that is, such as holde that faith firmely, which S. Peter with other (godlye) people taught. By which testimonie, euery one may see that hath eyes, that all the auncient writers, euen the papistes themselues, did euer [Page 59] more both thinke and write, that the church which could not erre, was one­ly and solely the whole companie of the faithfull, which thinge our Iesuite Bel­lermine, as one that forgetteth himselfe, confesseth, vnawares in these expresse wordes: secunda opinio est, pontificem eti­am vt pontifex, posse esse baereticum & Peller, lib. 4 de rom, pont cap. 2. docere haresim. sequitur, hanc opinionem tuentur aliquot Parisienses, vt Gerson & Almain in libris de potestate ecclesiae, nec non Alphonsus de Castro, libro primo, cap. 2. contra haereses, et Adrianus sextus papa. The second opinion is, that the Pope e­uen as Pope, may be an heretique and teach heresie. Certaine doctors of Pa­ris follow this opinion, as Gerson and Al­maine, Alphonsus also & pope Adrian him selfe. Loe both papists & the Pope him­selfe tell vs, that the Pope euen as Pope, may be an heretique & teach vs a false The Pope as pope may teach a false faith, and flat here­sie. faith, & yet must we beleeue, that what­soeuer he desireth or teacheth as Pope, is as true as the Gospell, or else be repu­ted heretiques for our refusall in that be­halfe, and if it rest in the Popes power, be also burned at a stake.

The 22 Hound.

TEil mee O monstrous Pope, doe not all thy priestes in all their absoluti­ons, ascribe remission of sinnes & eternall life, to the merites of mans works? I wote they doe so, I know your practise right Polanchus de modo aud [...]en [...]. onsess. well, and Polanchus our Iesuire hath published the same in print. These are his expresse worde; passio D. N. I. Chri­sti, merita, B. V. Mariae, & omnium san­ctorum, & quicquid bonifeceris, vel mali sustineris, sit tibi in remissionem peccatorum tuorum, in augmentum gratiae, & praemium vitae aeternae. The passion of our Lord Ie­sus Christ, the merites of the blessedvirgin Marie, & of al Saints, whatsoeuer good thou shalt do, & what punishment soeuer thou shalt suffer, be to thee for remission of thy sinnes, for increase of grace, & for reward of eternall life. Thus doth our Ie­suite truely set downe, the vsuall practise of the Romish Church, & of all popishe Priestes dispersed whersoeuer. This prac­tise is agreable to the hymne made of [Page 61] Thomas Becket late Bishop of Canterbury. In hymne Tho Caut. These ar the words; Tu, per Thomae sanguinē quem pro te impendit, fac nos Christe scan­dere, quo Thomas ascendit. By the bloud O Christ, which Thomas for thee did spend make vs come thither, whither Thomas did ascend. Which doubtles, is blasphemy intollerable.

The 23. Hound.

TEll me O Pope, if it like your holines; what malice, hatred, and dissention, hath bene among you Popes, and that in most weighty and important matters? e­uen in matters of faith, & fundamentall points of your religion? did not Pope Stephanus the sixt of that name, persecute the very name of Formosus? did he not dis­anull his giuing of orders? did he not de­grade them, that had receiued orders by him? did not Pope Romanus, abrogate the whole Actes of Pope Stephanus? did not Sergius the third persecute the very Carranza, in summa concil. Fol. 354. & fo. 355 name of Formosus? did he not cause his head to be cut of, after his body was laid in the graue? Carranza and Platina doe [Page 62] so write of thee & thy brethren, O holy father of Rome.

The 23. Hounde.

COnfesse the truth O cruell Pope; dis­ssemble no longer with the worlde. Doe not thy wicked lawes, charge all men, women, & children of mature age, to make auricular confession of all their Caietan. in summual. Pag. 590: thoughts, words, & deeds? doth not for all that, thine owne Cardinall Caietaeine tell thee, that it is a thing impossible to be done? did not Iohannes Geilerius a ve­ry graue and reuerend diuine, who was a long time the preaher at Argentoratum, cōplaine, oftentimes to his trusty friends that it was impossible for men to make their confessions, as the Popes lawe re­quired? I wote he did so, and thine owne deare friend Beat us Rhenanus doth so affirme. I haue set downe his expresse words, in the 12. chapter of my Suruey. And heere I note by the way, that there were euer some good men amongst the The truth is & euer was con­fessed by some, euē among the papistes. papistes, as this Godly Geileirus, who dis­liked and reproued as farre as they durst; the absurdities and abhomination, of late Romish doctrine.

The 24 Hound

TEll me O Pope, is not thy late Romish religion, like to a patched beggars cloake, with clouts vpon clouts? doe we not knowe, how euery clout was put one to an other, by whome and at what time? I wote we knowe it, and my selfe haue proued it; in my booke of Suruey. If any papist can deny it; let him answere that, that I haue written there.

The 25. Hound.

TEll me O pope, doest not thou make hauocke of Christes gospell? doest not thou dissolue that matrimonye, which Christ himselfe pronounceth to be indissoluble? doest not thou dispense with persons lawfully married, that the husbande may take an other wife, and the wife an other husbande? I wote thou doest it, and thine owne deare Doctors Nauarrus and Couer­runias, doe testifiye the same against [Page 64] thee Nauarre hath these expresse words, Diuiditur (matrimonium) ante consumma­tionem per dispensationem Papaeinsta de can sa factam. Matrimony is dissolued before Na [...]arr. in. [...]. cap. 22. par. 21. consummation (or carnall copulation) by the Popes dispensation, if it be granted vpon iust cause. And the same Nauarre a­noucheth boldy in the place already quo­ted, that Paulus the third, and Pius the fourth late Bishops of Rome, did giue such dispensations in his time to certaine mar­ried persons, at the same Nauarrs request; Couerrunias hath these words; Nec me la­tet Paulum quartum summum ecclesiae pon­tificem, an: 1558. hac vsum fuisse dispensa­tione Couarrau. t [...]m 1 cap. 7 par 4. [...]. 3. [...]. quibusdam ex causis, quas iustissimas esse idem summus ecclesiae praesul existima­uit; idem paulo ante Iulius tertius fecerat in eodem matrimonio, cum ecclesiae vniner­sali presideret. Neither am I ignorāt, that Pope Iulius the fourth put this dispensati­on in practise, for certaine causes which the same Pope thought to be most iust. The Pope doth dis­solue [...]trimo­ny at his pleasure. Iulius the third likewise when he was Bi­shop of Rome, granted the same dispensa­tion in the same matrimoniall contract See more herof, in my booke of Motiues.

The 26. Hounde.

TEll me O Pope, dost not thou teach vs, that the Virgin Mary was conceiued without sinne hast not thou for that end appointed the feast or festiuall day of her conception? doth not thine own sweete Beholde flat Idola­try, inpo­pish solē ­nity. Bernard forsake thee herein; doth not he sharply reproue the Carhedrall Church of Lyons, for the self same thing? doth not he terme that practise, the nouelty of presūption, the mother of temerity, the sister of superstition, & the daughter of leuitie? do not S. Austin, S. Ambrose, S. Chrisostome S. Bede, Eusebius, Remigius, Anselmus, Bonauentura, Aquinas, Hugo, and all the resti, sing the selfe same song? are anye with these idolatrous Pope) in this point of doctrine, saue onely thy late hatched Iesuites and Seminaries? few or none I The Pope and his Ie­suites, are against all the fathers assure thee, as I haue proued in my Sur­uey, and in my booke of Motyues. To which bookes I earnestly wish, that some of thy vassals would once frame some answere

The 27. Hounde.

TEll me O pope, thou that commaū ­dest thy Church-seruice, to be said [Page 66] and song in a vnknown language which the cōmon people, & the greater part of the priests cānot vnderstand; were not all prayers & other seruice of the Church, in the vulgar tongue as well in the primi­tiue Church, as many hundred years after Christ, I wote it was so, & I haue pro­ued it in my booke of Suruey. But harken O Pope what thine own Lyra telleth thee he is a wel mouthed hound, take heed lest he bite thee, for these are his words; (Cae [...]e­rū si benedixerit.) 1. Tu sacerdos vel episcope (spiritu) 1. abs (que) hoc quod populus intelligat (qui Lyra. in 1 cor. 14. supplet locū idiotae quasi diceret, quid profi­cit populus simplex & nō intelligens q. d. nihil aut modicū, quia nescil se cōformare tibi qui estainister ecclesiae, respōdendo Amen. Propter quod in primitiua ecclesia, benedictiones & cetera cōmunia fiebātin vulgari. But if thou shalt blesse, that is, thou that art priest or Bishop; (in spirit,) that is, so as the people vnderstand not what thou saist, what pro fit shal the simple & igno [...] people haue? truly eyther very little or none at all, be­cause they cannot cōforme thēselues to thee, who are the minister of the Church, in saying Amen to thy giuing of thanks. For [Page 67] which cause both praiers & other cōmon the church seruice ought to be in the vulgar tongue. things, were done in the vulgar tongue in the primitiue church. Out of which words I note first, that the church-seruice in old time, was made in the vulgar tong, which 1 all the people vnderstood. I note secōdly 2 that the church seruice ought to be in the vulgar tongue, according to S. Pauls do­ctrine. I note thirdly, that the people re­ceiue 3 no profit by the church seruice, whē it is made in a tongue, which they do not 4 vnderstād. I note fourthly, that the people ought to pray together with the minister & to answer Amē to this blessings. I note fiftly, that the people in the Romish 5 church, cānot this day performe that which their own Lyra a learned man indeed, a­uoucheth very constantly to be the doc­trine 6 of S. Paul. I note sixtly that the late Romish religion is farre different & no­thing like, to the olde catholike religion and practise of the primitiue Church.