THE VVoefull crie of Rome.

Containing a defiance to popery. With Tho­mas Bells second challenge to all fauorites of that Romish faction.

Succinctly comprehending much variety of mat­ter, full of honest recreation, and very profitable and expedient for all sorts of people: but especially for all simply seduced Papists.

Goe out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receiue not of her plagues.

Apocal. 18.4.

LONDON. Printed by T.C. for William Welby, and are to be sold at his shop in Paules Church-yard, at the signe of the Grayhound. 1605.

Academiae Cantabrigiensis Liber.

TO THE RIGHT HONOVRA­ble my very good Lord, Thomas, the Lord of Ellesmere, Lord high Chauncellour of England.

SAint Paul, that chosen Vessell of God, (Right Honourable) made a base reckoning of all other things in the world, in respect of the knowledge of our Lord Iesus Christ. Philip. 3.8. This know­ledge was so deare to the Princely Prophet Dauid: that he desired to be but a doore-keeper in Gods house, rather then to dwel in the goodly Pallaces of great Parsonages: esteeming one day better in Gods Church, then a thousand other­where.Psal. 84. vers. 10. This knowledge yeelded so sweete a sauour in the nosethrels of holy Moses: that he chose rather to be the childe of God, then to be called the sonne of King Phoraohs daughter. Heb. 11. vers. 24. Pro. 1.7. Eccles. 12.13. This knowledge was to the wisest King so precious: that hee reputed it not onely the beginning of wisedome, but euen the finall ende which he aymed at: with the loue of which knowledge hee was so rauished: (Oh most excellent knowledge,) that hauing in his owne free election what hee would receiue at Gods hands: hee desireth neither long life, (which the greater part of people thirst after) nor ri­ches (which are the greatest ioyes of al couetous world­lings:) nor yet the death of his enemies, (which the dauncing Damosell preferred before a Kingdome) 1. Reg. 3. verse. 59.11.12. Matt. 14.8. but [Page] he humbly asked an vnderstanding heart, that he might discerne between good and euil, and iudge aright Gods people committed to his charge: a most wise and holy request. King Salo­mon the wise.This petition pleased God so well, that he gaue the King a wise and vnderstanding heart, so that there was neuer any either before or after him, comparable or like vnto him.

And no marueile, that the true Children of God, de­sire the true knowledge of God, before all other things. For as our Sauiour himselfe teacheth vs, this knowledge is life eternall, the ioy of all ioyes. But (my good Lord) it may here bee demaunded, how this most excellent knowledge can bee attained?Ioh. 17.3. 1. Cor. 2.9. To which I answere, euen by dilligent reading of the holy Scriptures▪ For Saint Paul, writing vnto Timothie, commendeth his know­ledge in the holy Scriptures, which he had attained of a childe, and he yeeldeth this reason therof: because for­sooth, (saith the Apostle,) the Scriptures are able to make him wise vnto saluation.2. Tim. 3. vers. 15. Is this possible? is it so in­deed? euen so doubtlesse, Gods Spirit cannot lye. Howe then commeth it to passe, that the late Byshops of Rome, (now Cat' e'xochen called Popes,) doe this day sup­presse the light of the Gospel, and forbid the Lay-peo­ple to read the holy Scriptures in their vulgar language? How chanceth it, that none may read any Commenta­ries vpon the old and newe Testament, nor any other bookes compiled for the furtherāce of mans knowledge in that behalfe? vnlesse either the said bookes & Com­mentaries, be composed by professed papists: or the rea­ders being the Popes sworne vassals, haue his dispensa­tion and licence so to doe?

This (my good Lord,) is the reason, that cannot in truth be denied. They that doe euill hate the light, fea­ring that it should reproue their naughtie deedes.Iohn 3.20. And [Page] for this end is it, that the Pope can not endure the ma­nifestation of Gods word, which is a lanterne vnto our feete, & a bright shining light vnto our soules, directing vs the path-way to heauen. Psal. 119.105. 2 pet. 1.19. Ioh 5 39. Rom. 10.13. For this light, if the pope did not smoother it vnder the ashes, and violently keepe it vnder a bushell: would in short time so enlighten the hearts of all well disposed people, that all the world would detest the Pope, all popish superstition, heresies, and blasphemies, and all his bloodie, tyrannicall, and plaine antichristian dealing.

In regard hereof, (most honourable Baron) and most worthy, zealous, christian, vpright, and religious Magistrate,) because it is not enough for a Christian to know God himselfe, but he must withall, heartily wish and effectually procure, (so much as lyeth in him,) that others may also know and worship the euer-liuing God with him: Leu. 19.18. Ma [...] 19.19. Gal. 5.14. Rom. 12.20 [...]oh. 3.16. Luke 3.11. I haue employed my studie, diligence, care, and industrie, to deliuer a very compendious en­chiridion to al simple seduced Papists, & to other thank­full Readers, wherein they may behold as cleerely as the noone-day, the original of popish falsly pretended Primacie: the meanes by which the Byshops of Rome, aspired thereunto: the royall titles and power plaine di­uine, ascribed to the Popes: the liues, maners, and con­versation of Popes: the rotten foundations vpon which and by which, Poperie is builded and vnderpropped: the originall and sundry grounds of Popish Purgatorie: the vanitie and vncertaintie of Popish Succession: the popish execrable Excommunications, Superstitions, A­dorations, and many other matters of great moment. By the due and serious consideration whereof the indif­ferent Reader, cannot but behold the abhomination of late Romish Religion: and consequently loath, de­test, and vtterly renounce the same for euer.

[Page]The worke such as it is, I haue dedicated vnto your Honour, for two speciall causes. First, to intimate to the world, my inward conceiued comfort, ioy, and solace, (which either is, or at least ought to bee, common to my selfe, with all other honest and true harted English Subiects,) of your Lordships most honorable, zealous, christian, conscionable, vpright, painefull, and religi­ous care, vigillancie, & holy constant indeuours, vnder God, and his most exellent Maiestie: both for the in­differencie of iustice extended at al persons, aswel to the poore as to the rich, which is not the vsuall practise of many Magistrates, alas for the pittie,) and also generally for the common good and peaceable gouernment of this Kingdome.Leu. 19.15. Exod. 23.2. Deut. 16. ver. 19.20. Esa. 5.23.

Secondly, to giue at the least some smal signification of a thākfull minde, (where power is wanting,) for your Lordships most honourable, yea, vnspeakable fauours towards me from time to time: euen such and so great, as without which, I could not this day breathe vppon earth: & much lesse make vse of my small talent, (Quod sentio quam sit exiguum,) for the common good of others. The Almightie giue your Lordship, many, long, ioyfull and happy yeares, with much increase of vertue, holy zeale, and true honour in this life, and with life eternall in the world to come. Amen.

Your Lordships most humble and bounden: T. Bell.

Thomas Bels defiance to Poperie, with a second challenge.

CHAP. I. Of the originall of Popish Primacie.

I Haue proued at large elsewhere,In my suruay of Poperie. how Poperie crept into the Curch by peece­meale, and how she receiued her daily increments: Now it shall bee suffici­ent, to touch succinctly and plainely, when & by what meanes, Rom [...] became the head of al Churches: the truth ther­fore of this point, is this; viz. That for the space of sixe hundred and six yeares after Christ, the Byshops of Rome liued in all dutifull obedience vnto the Emperours, neither was the Church of Rome the head of all other Churches, but one of the three patriarchall seates, wherof mention is made in the first famous councell of Nice, Tres sedes pa­triarchales; Ro­mana, Alexan­drina, Antio­ch [...]na. which was called by the worthy Emperour Constantinus, surnamed the great. Two things I haue to proue, for the clearing of this question, the one, the subiection of the Bishops of Rome, in Anno, 606. vn­to the Emperour. The other of the supremacie of the Church of Rome after that time.

Concerning the former, most impudent and intollera­ble is the Popes insolencie, when he exalteth himself aboue kings and Emperours, threatning them that he can depose [Page 2] them from their scepters & regalities, & dispossesse them of their Empires and dominions. For Gregory, Gregor. libro. 2. epist. 61. chap. 100. surnamed the great, a very famous Byshop of Rome, when he was appoin­ted by the Emperour Mauritius, to publish a certaine law, sent him from the said Emperour; did not refuse to accom­plish the Emperours designement, but very dutifully and loyally acknowledged himselfe to be the Emperours sub­iect, and of duty bound to execute his cōmand therein; al­beit he deemed the law to be in some part therof, disagree­able to Gods holy wil. These are the Byshops own words; ‘Ego quidem iussioni subiectus, eundem legem per diuersas terra­rum partes transmittifeci; & quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo mini­me concrodat, ecce per suggestionis meae paginam, serenissimis dominis nunciaui: vtrobique ergo quae debui exolui, qui & impe­ratori obedientiam praebui, & pro deo quod sensi minime tacui.’ Englished thus. I subiect to your cōmandement, haue caused the same law to be sent through diuers parts of the land; and because the law is not agreeable to Gods holy wil, behold▪ I haue in­timated so much vnto your maiesty by my Epistle: I haue therfore discharged my duty in both respects; as who haue yeelded my obedience to the Emperour, & haue concealed what I thought in Gods behalfe.’ These are the words of the good Byshop of Rome ▪ for that Church was in good case & order, in his time & age, out of whose discourse I note, 1 first, that Pope Gregory, & S. Gregory (as the Papists terme him) as famous & as learned a man, as euer was Byshop of Rome, acknowledgeth the Emperour to be his Lord and Soue­raigne. 2 Secondly, that he confesseth himselfe to be the Em­perours subiect. 3 Thirdly, that he freely and willingly gran­teth, that hee oweth faithfull and loyall obedience to the Emperour; Marke this, o Papist. for which duty, he durst not but publish the Emperours law, though in some part against Gods wil, as he deemed it; and that, least he should haue bene guiltie of disloyaltie towards his Prince and Soueraigne.

Touching the latter, the cruel tyrant Phocas (who raui­shed [Page 3] many godly matrons, & murdered the emperor Mau [...]ritius with his three sons, Theodosius, Teberius, and Constanti­nus) decreed yt the Romā seat shuld be ye head of al churches. This to be so, I haue proued else wher at large,In my suruay of Popery. out of many famous Chronographers, viz. Sigebertus, Platina, Palmerius, Bergomensis, Polidorus, Marianus, Scotus, Martinus, Polonus. Here it shal be enough, to adde the testimony of Rhegino a famous popish Abbot. These are his words;Rhegin. Anno. 628. Hic obtinuit a­pud Phocam principem, vt sedes romana caput esset omnium ec­clesiarum. He obtained, (hee speaketh of Bonifacius the By­shop of Rome) of the Emperour Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be the head of all Churches.

Hermannus Contractus, an other famous Chronographer, hath these expresse words;Herm. Contr. Anno. 600, ‘Hoc tempore Phocas Romanam ec­clesiam omniū ecclesiarum caput esse constituit.’ Englished thus. ‘At this time Phocas decreed the Church of Rome, to be the head of all other Churches.’

So then, Gregorie the good Byshop of Rome, died in the second yeare of Phocas his Empire, about which time Mau­ritiu [...] the Emperour was murdred, & fiue yeares after that Rome was made the head of all Churches. That is to say, 607. yeares after Christs sacred byrth, and most holy ad­uent. Iohannes Nanclerus a late writer of high esteeme with all papists, and consequently of great force against them, hath these words;Nauclerus. in Ebronic. pag. 629. ‘Phocas pontificis suasione, publica ac ad vni­uersum orbemdimissa sanctione constituit, vt romanae ecclesiae ro­manoque pontifici omnes orbis ecclesiae obedirent, quod retroactis temporibus non ad vnguem seruabatur, maxime a graecis.’ Englished thus. Phocas by the perswasion of Boniface the third, then By­shop of Rome, made a publique cōstitutiō, & sent it through out the whole world; in which he decreed, that all churches in the world should obey the church and Byshop of Rome: which thing was not exactly obserued in former time, es­pecially of the Greekes. Thus writeth this famous popish Cronographer, whose testimony is able to confound al pa­pists, & popish falsely challenged primacie. For first, pope Boniface was made byshop of Rome, but Anno. 607. so that [Page 4] Rome was 606. yeares without her now, chalenged prima­cie. Secondly, the fathers of the great church, S. Epiphanius, S. Chrisostome, S. Bassil, S▪ Gregorie Nazianzene, and the rest, did not yeeld so much to the Church of Rome, as to admit it for the chiefe patriarchall seate. To this testimonie of this great Papist, it is not amisse to adioyne the flat and hum­ble confession of the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine; who confesseth roundly and peremptorily,Bellarmine, Lib. 1. de con [...]cilij [...] Cap 19. Tom. 1. that the popes would neuer come in person to the councels in the East-church, because the Emperour would euer sit in the highest place; although the Pope himselfe had bene there present, in his Pontificalibus. Out of whose grant three things are cleared; 1 First, that the highest place in general councels, was in old time reserued to ye Emperour. 2 Secōdly, that our holy father (such is his humilitie) could not endure the Emperours su­perioritie ouer him, as the good Byshop Gregory did in his time. 3 Thirdly, that the Greeke Church did neuer acknow­ledge the Popes vsurped primacie. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church bewitched vs?

CHAP. II. Of the way and meanes, by which the Popes attained their vsur­ped primacie.

In the downfall of Poperie. OF the steppes of the ladder, by which the Byshops of Rome did clime vp vnto their Lordly primacie, I haue elsewher discoursed at large. Now I deeme it e­nough to insinuate in brief, the generall meanes of the accomplishment thereof.

That Romish pontificalitie, and pompe of popery, came vp first by beggerly Canonists, who to aduance thēselues, flattered the Pope, & gaue him more then princely and royall titles: the popes owne deare Doctor a Spanish Fryer, professour of Theologie in the famous Vniuersitie of Salmantica, Franciscus a Ʋicto­ria, a witnesse that cannot but carrie credite on his [Page] backe, telleth vs roundly without blushing▪ who after hee hath rehearsed many Lordly titles, and more then royall power ascribed to the Pope, addeth these expresse words:Victor. de potest. Eccles. relect. 1. sect 6. Pra [...]. 39. ‘Sed glossatores iuris hoc dominium dederunt Papae, cum ipsi essent pauperes rebus & doctrina.’ Englished thus. ‘But the Glossers and Interpreters of the Popes lawe, gaue this dominion (and these royall titles) vnto the Pope, themselues being blind Bayards, and beggerly fellowes.’

Thus writeth the Popes learned Doctour, and religi­ous Fryer, by whose verdict it is most apparant to the world, that pouertie and ignorance (two gallant Romish courtiers,) were the beginning of al royall Pope-dom. And no maruaile: for by reason of their pouertie, they flattered and sought to please the Pope; and by reason of their igno­rance, they desperately published many things which they did not vnderstand.

The vsual practise of Papists in their Commentaries, Bookes, and Glosses, hath bin such & so intollerable in wre­sting the holy Scriptures: as their owne deare brethren and great Doctors, can not for shame denie or conceale the same. Polidorus Virgilius a famous papist, hath these words: ‘Non secus isti iurisconsulti aliquoties detorquent sacras literas quò volunt, ac sutores sordidas solent dentibus extendere pelles.’ Englished thus. ‘These (popish) Legists and Canonists, doe now and then so wrest and writhe the holy Scriptures, to that sense which themselues like best, euen as Coblers do gnaw with their teeth, and stretch out their filthy skinnes.’

1 1 Out of these words, I obserue first, that this Polidore, was a great Papist himselfe, and consequently, that his te­stimonie must needes be of great force against the Papists.

2 Secondly, that he speaketh not of the meanest and worst sort of Papists, but euē of their best & renowmed Doctors: viz. of Hostiensis their grand and famous Doctor.

3 Thirdly, that their mangling and wresting of the [Page 6] holy Scriptures is most intollerable, & that without the same they cannot possibly maintaine their wicked doc­trine.

This is that which Doctor Fisher, the late Byshoppe of Rochester hath freely confessed, in his answere to the Arti­cles of M. Luther, which hee could not in truth withstand, or gainesay. These are his expresse wordes:Roffensis art. 37. aduers. Lu­ther. pa. 11. ‘Contendentibus itaque nobiscum haereticis, nos alio subsidio nostram oportet tueri causam quam scriptura sacrae.’ Englished thus. ‘Therefore, when Heretiques contend with vs, we must defend our cause by other meanes, then by the holy Scrip­ture.’ These are the very expresse wordes (I neither adde any thing, nor take any thing away) of their owne fa­mous popish byshop, of their owne holy Saint, of their glorious martyr, a learned man in deed: who laboured with might and maine, for the popes vsurped soueraigntie, and defended the same in the best manner he was able, and to the vttermost of his skill. And yet for all that, hee hath boulted out vnawares, & against his will, (such is the force of trueth, which must needs in time preuaile) so much in plaine tearmes, as is sufficient to ouerthrow all poperie for euer; and to cause all people that haue any care of their sal­uation, to renounce the pope & his abominable doctrine, to their liues end. For our popish Byshoppe being put to his best trumpe, telleth vs plainely, and without all dissi­mulation, (his mouth being now opened by him, who cau­sed Balaams Asse to speake,) that they must not (because forsooth they cannot,) defend and mantaine their pope­rie by the authoritie of the Scripture, but by some other way and meanes: Marke wel for Christs sake. Viz. by mans forged inuentions, and popish vnwritten vanities, which they terme the Churches Traditions.

Now gentle Reader, how can any papist, (who is not giuen vp in Reprobum sensum, for his iust deserts) read such testimonies against poperie, freely confessed and plaine­ly published to the world, and that by the pennes of most [Page 7] learned and renowned papists: euen while they bestirre themselues busily, to defend their pope and his popish doctrine; & for all that continue papists stil, and be carryed away headlong into perdition: beleeuing & obeying that doctrine, which (as themselues confesse▪) cannot be defen­ded by the holy Scripture. Me-thinkes, they should bee ashamed, to hold and beleeue that doctrine: in defence whereof, they can yeeld no better reason. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church seduced vs?

CHAP. III. Of kissing the Popes feet.

TOuching the kissing of the Popes feet, the truth is this, that some Christian kings and Emperours vppon a blinde zeale not grounded in knowledge, did humble themselues to the Byshops of Rome, and did yeeld vp their soue­raigne rights vnto them, and thereby opened the windowe to all Antichri­stian tyrannie. For in short time after, the Romish By­shoppes became so Lordly and insolent, that they tooke roundly vpon them to despose the Emperours, to translate their Empires, & to dispose at their owne pleasures, of their royal scepters & regalties. Yea, to be reuerenced, honored, and adored as Gods, & for that end must al faithfull Chri­stians kisse the Popes feete. Here for the better credite of mine assertion, I will put downe the flat testimonie of their Saint, Antoninus, their religious Fryer, who was sometime the Arch-byshop of Florence. These are his expresse words: ‘Nulli ergo angelo commissa iurisdictio, & cura toti­us orbis: sed papae totius mundi iurisdictio & cura commissa est, cum solum vt nomine mundi importatur terza, sed etiam vt no­mine mundi importatur caelum; que super calum & terram iu­risdictione accepit. [Page 8] Antonin. part. 3. tit. 22. cap. 5 §. 1. [...]4. Sequitur; vnde papae recipit a fidelibus adorationes, prostratio­nes, & oscula pedum, quod non permisit angelus a Iohanne E­uangelista sibi fieri.’ Englished thus. ‘Therefore the iurisdiction and charge of the whole world, is committed to none of the Angels: but the iuris­diction and care of the whole world, is committed to the Pope, not onely, as the name of the world doth import the earth, but euen as it doth also signifie Heauen: because hee hath receiued iurisdiction both ouer Heauen and Earth. Wherefore the Pope receiueth of the faithfull, adorations, prostrations, and the kissing of his feete; which thing, the Angel would not suffer Iohn the Euangelist to doe vnto him.’ Thus writeth this popish Doctor. For the better vnderstanding of whose discourse, I note;

1 First, that this Antoninus was not a bare papist, but a man of great authoritie and high esteeme among the pa­pists; Viz. a canonized Saint, a religious Fryer, a Domi­nican, and a most reuerend Arch-bishop: and conse­quently, that whatsoeuer he hath deliuered either touching the pope or poperie, must needes bee of good credite and great force against the papists. 2 Secondly, that the popes power and authoritie doth farre exceed the power of An­gels. 3 Thirdly, that the pope hath iurisdiction not onely ouer the earth, but also ouer heauen it selfe. 4 Fourthly, that by the reason of this exceeding and surpassing power, the pope doth admit and receiue that homage, which the An­gel refused and prohibited S. Iohn to doe vnto him. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church deceiued vs?

CHAP. IIII. Of power ascribed to the pope.

The first Paragraph, of his power in generall.

CHristus per passionem suam meruit iudici­ariam potestatem super omnē creaturam. Vnde ipse resurgens ait, data est mihi om­nis potestas in Caelo & in terra. Cū autem vicarius Christi sit papa, nullus potest se­ipsum subtrahere ab obedientia eius de iure: sicut nullus de iure potest se subtra­here ab obedientia Dei, & sicut recepit Christus a patre ducatum & sceptrū ecclesiae gentiū ex Israel e­grediens super omnē principatū & potestatē, & super omne quod­cumque est, vt ei genua cuncta curuentur, sic ipse Petro & suc­cessoribus eius plenissimam potestatem commisit.’ Englished thus. Christ merited by his passion iudiciare power ouer all creatures, wherefore when hee arose from death, hee sayd; all power is giuen me in heauen and on earth. Now seeing the Pope is Christs Vicar, none can lawfully withdrawe their obedience from him; no more then they may with­draw their obedience from God himselfe. For as Christ receiued the Dukedome and Scepter of the Church, ouer all principate and power, and ouer all whatsoeuer else hath being, that al knees do bowe vnto him: euen so did he com­mit most full and large power vnto Peter and his Suc­cessors, (the Byshops & popes of Rome).’ Thus writeth An­toninus, Antonin. part. 3. tit. 22. cap. 5. §. 8. & eius. cap. 7. in fine. that holy Archbyshop and religious Fryer.

Augustinus de Ancona, an other religious Fryer, in that booke which he dedicated to pope Iohn, the twelft of that name, singeth the same song with Antoninus his popish bro­ther. These are his words;August. de Anc. in summa pag. 152. ‘(papa) tanquam vicarius dei filij coelestis imperatoris, iurisdictionē habet vniuersalem super om­nia Regna & Imperia.’ [Page 10]Englished thus. ‘The Pope as he is the Vicar of the sonne of God, the heauenly Emperour, hath vniuersall iurisdiction ouer all Kingdomes and Empires.’

Gerson, a famous papist, who was sometime chancelour of Paris, maketh rehearsall of intollerable titles, & power more then royall ascribed to the pope, and derideth the same:Gerson de po­test. eccles. consid. 12. Part. 3. ‘Sicut non est potestas nisi a Deo, sic nec aliqua temporalis vel ecclesiastica, imperialis vel regalls, nisi a papa: in cuius foe­more scripsit Christus, Rex regū, dominus dominantium: de cuius potestate disputare, instar sacrilegij est; cui neque quisquam dice­re potest, cur ita facit?’ Englished thus. ‘Like as there is no power but of God, so is there nei­ther any Temporall nor Ecclesiastical, neither imperiall nor regal, but of the Pope: in whose thigh Christ hath wri­ten the King of kings, & Lord of Lords: of whose power to dispute is as meere Sacriledge: to whom none may say, why doest thou so?’

The pope himselfe, from his owne pen, Gregorie the ninth, deliuereth vs this doctrine:Gregor. 9. libr. 1. decr. tit. 33· chap. 6. ‘Ad firmamentum caeli hoc est, vniuersalis ecclesiae, fecit Deus duo magna luminaria, id est duas instituit dignitates, quae sunt pontificalis authoritas, & regalis potestas. Sequitur; vt quanta est inter solem & lunam, tanta inter pontifices & reges differentia cognoscatur.’ Englished thus. ‘To the Firmaments of of heauen, that is of the vniuer­sal Church, God made two lights, pontificall authoritie, and power royall: that wee may know, there is as much difference betweene Popes and Kings, as there is betweene the Sunne and the Moone.’

The Glosse setteth downe precisely, how farre a King is inferiour to a pope, that is to euery Byshop of Rome, in these words:Glossa vbi supra. ‘Restat vt pontificalis dignitas, quadragesies septies sit maior regali dignitate.’ Englished thus. ‘It remaineth, that the dignitie of the pope bee fortie times seuen times greater, then is the power of the King.’ [Page 11] Where the Reader must seriously obserue with me, that this Gregorie. being himselfe one of the Byshops of Rome (who now adayes are called popes (Cat'exochen) liued 1227. years after Christ, A.D. 1227 and had either forgotten, or neuer once learned, that the good Byshoppe Gregorie the first, acknowledged himselfe to be the Emperours subiect, and yeelded all loy­all obedience vnto him. The popish Canons do so plain­ly ascribe, diuine titles to the pope, that none without blus­ing can possibly deny the same. For, in the popes owne de­cretals, I find these expresse words:Super cap. 1. ‘Sic (papa) dicitur habere coeleste arbitrium, & ideo etiam naturam rerum immutat, sub­stantiam vnius rei applicādo alij: & de nihilo potest aliquid facere.’ Englished thus. ‘So the pope is said to haue coelestial arbitrement, and therefore doth he alter the nature of things, by applying the substantiall parts of one thing to another: and hee can make of nothing, something. Glos.. lib. 1. Decretal. tit. 7. cap. 3. Thus doe the papists write of their pope, & he is well pleased therewith. For without his good pleasure and liking, such doctrine & glosses could not be currant in the Church of Rome. Yea, the Expositors do gather their sense, euen out of the bowels of the text: and this collections are as authenticall, as is the text it selfe.

Pope Nicholas, as Gratianus telleth vs, was of the same minde, and in effect taught the same Doctrine. These are his expresse words:Gratian dist. 22. can. omnes. ‘Christus beato Petro aeternae vitae clauige­ro terreni simul & coelestis imperij iura commisit.’ Englished thus. Christ committed to S. Peter, who beareth the keyes of eternall life, the right both of earthly and heauenly empire.’ Where the glosse ascribeth the same power to the pope, in these words:Gloss. ibid. ‘Argumentum quod papa habet vtrunque gladi­um, & spirtiualem & temporalem.’ Englished thus. ‘This is an argument, that the pope, hath both the swords, aswel the spiritual as the temporal,’ And in the marginal note, the Reader may finde these expresse wordes: ‘Papa habens vtrum (que) gladiū, transtulit imperia.’ [Page 12]Englished thus. ‘The pope hauing both swords, translated the Empire. A.D. 1294 Appendix ful­den [...]is, apud Ma [...]t. Polon. To conclude, pope Boniface the eight, made a flat Consti­tution and Decree: in which he affirmed arrogantly, that himselfe was both Spirituall and Temporall Lord, of the whole world.

The second Paragraph, of power ascribed to the pope in speciall.

BArtholomaeus Fumus, a famous Summist, affirmeth boldly and resolutely, the popes power to bee so ex­ding great, that he is able with his word to deliuer out of purgatorie, all the soules that are boyling there in fire. These are his words:Fumus de Pa­pa, Par. 11. ‘Papa potest liberare omnes ani­mus purgatorij, etiam si plures essent, si quis pro eis faceret quod iuberet: peccaret tamen indiscretè consedendo.’ Englished thus. ‘The pope could set at libertie all the soules in pur­gatorie, though neuer so many, if any would doe that for them, which hee appointeth to be done: marry, hee should sinne by his vndiscreet pardoning.’

Siluester prieras, a learned & famous popish Canonist, some­time Magister sacripalatij, hath these words;S [...]lu. deindulg. ‘Sicut potest (pa­pa) liberare a poena peccatorum debita in hoc mundo omnes qui sunt in mundo, si faciant quod mandat, etiāsi essent millies plores quam sunt: ita liberare potest omnes, qui sunt in purgatorio, si quis pro eis faciat quodiubet.’ Englished thus. ‘As the pope can deliuer all that are in this world, from paine due for sinne in this world: if they doe that which he appointeth, though they were many thousands moe then they be, euen so can hee deliuer all that are in purgatorie, if any doe that for them which he commandeth.’

Viguerius a famous popish Fryer Dominican, Doctor and professor of Thealogie, proceedeth somewhat further then Siluester, and Fumus: auouching it to be neither inconue­nient, nor against Gods iustice.

[Page 15]These are his expresse wordes;Viguerius de sacram, ordin. in fine. ‘Nec est inconueniens, quod papa posset purgatorium [...]cuare. Non enim per hoc aliquid de­traheretur diuinae iustitiae.’ Englished thus. ‘Neither is it conuenient, that the pope can harrow hell; for that doth nothing derogate from the iustice of God.’

Aquinas the popish angelicall Doctor, (whose Doctrine no papist may reiect, because sundry popes haue cōfirmed the same for authentical,) hath these words:Aquinas in sup­lem. 9.25. ar. 1. ‘Christus poterat relaxare, ergo et Paulus potuit, ergo et papa potest, qui non est mi­noris potestatis in ecclesia, quam paulus fuit.’ Englished thus. ‘Christ could pardon, therefore Paul could also pardon, and therefore the pope can likewise pardon: as who hath no lesse power & authoritie in the Church then Paul him­selfe had.’ So then, the pope can doe as much as Christ, if we belieue popish Doctors, and Doctrine. He can make the deafe to heare, the dumbe to speake, the lame to walke, the blind to see, and the dead to arise to life againe, which I must first see, ere I can belieue it: howsoeuer Aquinas with his fellow Fryers, doe write in that behalfe, and doubtlesse, this Doctrine and this supereminent power ascribed to the pope, is plaine diabolicall and meere Antichristian. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church seduced vs.

CHAP. V. Of the qualitie and condition of the Popes pardons, together with the antiquitie thereof.

The first Section of the qualitie of popish pardons.

SIluester Prieras hath these words:Siluester de in­dulgentiam 33. ‘qui ple­nariā indulgentiam rite assequutus est si eo instanti moreretur, euolaret statim in cae­lum.’ Englished thus. ‘He that hath lawfully gotten a plena­rie pardon, if that man should dye at that instant, he should incontinently go [...] [Page 16] Aquinas, Fumus, Ʋiguerius, Antoninus, Augustinus de Aneona, and other papists teach the same Doctrine. But it is neede­lesse to alledge more authoritie for this point, seeing (as it is already proued) the pope hath as large power as Christ himselfe, by the constant doctrine of best approued popish writers. I wil therfore at this present onely name some par­dons that haue bin granted; the places and times: where and when they were granted; and the popes that did grant and giue the same: referring the reader for a larger discourse therein, vnto my booke of Motiues.

1 First, many pardons are set down in the old english pri­mars, which giue many thousands of yeares pardon to all that shall but say very short prayers. Before the prayer cal­led (Auste omnes animae) there the reader shal finde in Latine set down in red letters, that pope Iohn the twelft granted to all them that would say that prayer following, so many yeares of pardon, as there haue bin bodies buried in that church-yard since the originall therof. A great reward for a very small labour: for the prayer containeth but ten lines. Before the prayer called (Aue vulnus) the reader shal find in latin red letters, that Pope Innocent the second graunted 4000. yeares of pardon, to euery one that should say the same prayer. This was a greater reward, because the prayer is shorter then the other. Before the prayer called (Aue do­mina) there is set down in red letters, that whosoeuer shall say the short prayer following shall enioy eleuen thousand yeares of pardon, and withal shal see the blessed Virgin so many dayes before his death, as he shall continue yeares in saying the same praier. A large & bountiful reward indeed.

2 Secondly huge & infinit number of pardons are hanged vp in pardoning-tables, at the pillars of euery Church for the most part in Rome not my selfe onely, but many others, haue both seene and read the same.

3 Thirdly, there is a little pamphlet of the marueilous things of Rome which is commonly to be sold euery where in Rome, (one of which my selfe brought from thence, and [Page 17] haue it at this houre,) which pamphlet sheweth many par­dons for many thousands of yeares, to be graunted to many Churches for such as will but come vnto them, and there pray and visit the relikes thereof, some fewe I am content to rehearse, for the good of the readers. In the Church of Saint Iohn Lateran ▪ there are euery day graunted to all that come thither, 6048. yeares of pardon: & vpon the festiuall day of Saint. Iohn the Euangelist. 28. thousand yeares of pardon, with so many quarantenes, and plenarie remissions of their sinnes.

28000. yeares of pardon.In the church of Saint Peter in Vaticano are so many yeares of pardon giuen, as no man can number them (Vi sono indulgentie senza numero) there are pardons with­out number.

6048. yeares of pardon.In the Church of Saint, Paul there are giuen euery day. 6048. yeares of pardon, to all that come thither to pray. Many other like pardons are named in the foresaid Pam­phlet, with the deliuery of certaine soules out of purgatorie. But these fewe may bee a sufficient patterne, how to giue iudgement of the rest, peruse the 13. Chapter of purgatory and note it well for the explication hereof.

The second section, of the antiquitie of Popish pardons.

THat the Doctrine of popish pardons is strange and new, and that neither Christ nor his Apostles euer taught or practised the same, as the late Romish Church hath vsed and daily vseth them. Syluester a Papist so fa­mous, that he was not onely reputed, but as it were surna­med Absolutus Theologus, hath these words;Syluester de indulgentia. ‘Indulgentia nobis per scripturam minime innotuit, licet inducatur illud aposto [...]i, (si quid donaui vobis) sed nec per dicta antiquorum doctorum, sed modernorum.’ Englished thus. ‘The popes pardons (saith the popes owne deare Doctor,Sacri Palatij magister. sometime the maister of his sacred pallace,) were neuer known to vs by the scriptures, although some doe alleage S. Paul for that purpose: neither were they known by the auncient fathers, but onely by late writers.’

[Page 18] Antoninus, the popes famous Arch-byshoppe and canonized saint, hath the very same words, and holdeth the selfesame opinion with Syluester, & he addeth some thing, as it were for an explication of the matter. These are his words:Antoninus Part. 1. Tit. 10. Cap. 3. in initio ‘Dicitur tamen Gregorius imposuisse indulgentias sep­tennes, instationibus Romae, & quia ecclesia hoc facit, & seruat, non est credendum quod erret.’ Englished thus. ‘Yet Gregorie is reported to haue graunted seuen yeares pardons, when the stations were kept at Rome. And be­cause the Church vseth to practise this kind of pardoning, we may not thinke that it erreth therein.’ Or as Syluester saith: Credendum est ita esse; we must belieue that it is so. Petrus Lombardus, sometime the Byshop of Paris, surna­med magister sententiarum, because with great diligence he collected into one volume all worthy sentences of the aun­cient Fathers, maketh no mention at all, of popish pardons, as which he could not find in any of the holy Fathers, not­withstanding his painefull industrie imployed in that kind of exercise. And yet this maister Lombard the reuerend po­pish Byshop, (whose foure bookes of sentences are publike­ly read in the popish schooles of Diuinitie) liued in the year of our sauiour, 1163.A.D. 163 so as popish pardōs were not known to the world, for the space of one thousand, one hundred, threescore and three yeares. For as Antoninus and Syluester truly write, the old Fathers were not acquainted with any such thing. The like may be said of S. Cyprian, S. Austen, S. Hierome, S. Nazianzene, and others of antiquity. For which cause Durandus Caietanus, and sundry other schoolemen, af­firme the popes maner of pardoning, to be a new thing in the Church of God. Neither can Dominicus Soto deny the same indeed: albeit he busieth himselfe more then a little, in the defence therof. Yea, the originall of popish pardoning is so very young, as their popish martyr, and reuerend By­shop Maister Fisher, in his answere to Maister Luthers ar­ticles, was enforced to admit the newnesse and yong age of [Page 19] the same, and to yeeld this mightie and strong reason in de­fence thereof: viz. that purgatorie was not so well knowne at that time to the Church, as it is now adayes. Which say­ing I weene, is true indeed: because purgatorie and pardons were not heard of in old time, and now onely made known by vaine, grosse, and sensuall imaginations. But hereof I haue wr [...]tten else where more at large,In my booke of moti [...]s. preamble. to which place I re­ferre the reader for his better satisfaction.

The 3. section, of the valuation of popish pardons.

COncerning the vertue and efficacie of the popes par­dons: the matter is so intricate, doubtfull, and vncer­taine, & that euen amongst the greatest & best learned popish Doctors: Angelus de in­ themselues are therein at their wits end, and cannot tell in the world what to say or thinke thereof, Angelus de Clauasio a famous popish Canonist and religious Fryer, reciteth six seuerall & dissonant opinions, touching this question of pardons. And after he hath confuted them all, he setteth downe the seuenth for his owne and the best, which as he saith, is sound and true. Ios. Angl. in 4. Par. 2. Pag. 15. It is therefore no doubt very svbstantiall, seeing we must esteeme our Fryer to bee a man of credit, especially, for that Iesephus Angles reciting in like maner seuen seuerall opinions of his popish fellows, concludeth in effect as Angelus did afore him.

opinion 1 The first opinion holdeth (saith our religious Fryer) that the popes pardons onely remit that punishment, which God appointeth to be imposed in an other world, for a sup­ply vnto those, who haue onely done penance according to the canons: but doth in no case remit that penance, which is imposed and taxed by the Canons.

opinion 2 The second opinion holdeth pardons onely forgiue that penance which is tax [...]d by the lawe and penitentiall canōs: but not ye paine, which gods iustice appointed to be imposed opinion 3 The third opinion holdeth, that pardons forgiue paine due for sin, aswell before God as before his church: but this opi­nion addeth a clausie so sharpe, as our holy father doth not [Page 20] brooke it: viz. that the Pope is bound to doe penance, for that person whom he pardoneth.

opinion 4 The 4. opinion holdeth, that the paine of hell is partly remitted by the Popes pardons, for that it beōmeth thereby more tollerable.

opinion 5 The 5. opinion holdeth, that penance onely is pardoned, which the partie omitted of negligence, not of purpose or contempt.

opinion 6 The 6. opinion holdeth, that the popes pardons remit not onely penance imposed by the Priest, but also that which is taxed of God, marry this opinion hath one limita­tion, which forsooth is this; that the priest must be content therwith, or else the pope cannot worke his will.

opinion 7 The 7. opinion holdeth, that popish pardons forgiue and are worth so much, as the words of the pardons doe ex­presse, or sound; viz, that if the pardons containe an hun­dred thousand yeares, then the partie obtaining such par­dons at the popes handes, must haue remission of so many yeares. Thus gentle reader, standeth the doctrine of popish pardons, euen among the greatest Doctors of that faction. The bare rehearsal of these opinions, with the varietie and vncertaintie implyed therin, is a most sufficient confutation of the same.

In this Chapter, these speciall points are duly to be re­membred. 1 First, that the popes pardons can neither be pro­ued by the Scriptures, nor yet by the testimonie of the ho­ly Fathers. 2 Secondly, that in the dayes of Petrus Lombar­dus, (who liued 1163. after Christs glorious ascension in­to heauen,) the popes pardons were vnknowne vnto the world. 3 Thirdly, that the best learned papists cannot tell, what that is; which the pope beareth the world in hand, that he forgiueth by his pardons. See more in my book [...] of Alas, alas, how hath the Church of Rome seduced vs.

CHAP. VI. Of the Popes dispensations.

I Haue written else where at large,In the down­fall of Poperie of the popes impious and abhominable dis­pensations; where I haue proued per­spicuously out of his owne deare Doc­tors, that he hath dissolued holy matri­monie by his wicked dispensations, & hath licenced the brother to marry his owne sister. It shall here be enough to adde some memora­ble specialitie, for the edification of the thankfull reader.

Franciscus a Victoria that learned popish Fryer, and pro­fessor of Diuinitie in Salmantica, hath these expresse words:Vict, de potest. papae & concil. relect. 4. P. 139. ‘Videmus quotidie a romana curia tam largas, imo omnino tam dissolutas dispensationes profectas, vt orbis ferre non possit, non solum in scandalum pusillorum sed maiorum.’ Englished thus. ‘We see daily so large, yea altogether so dissolute dispen­sations come from the Church of Rome, that the world is not able to endure it; neither doth that tend onely to the scandall of the weake, but euen of those also who are strong and perfect.’

The same Doctor in another place, hath these words;Victor. vbi su­pra. pag. 151. ‘paulatim ad hanc intemperantiam dispensationum deuentum est, & hunc talem statum, vbi nec mala nostra, nec remedia pati pos­sumus, & ideo necesse est aliam rationem excogitare ad conser­uandas leges, da mihi Clementes, Linos, Syluestros, & omnia per [...] mittam arbitrio eorum, sed vt nihil grauius dicatur in recentio­res pontifices, certe multis partibus sunt priscis illis inferiores.’ Englished thus. ‘By little and little we are brought to these inordinate dis­pensations, & to this so miserable a state, where we are nei­ther able to endure our owne griefes, nor yet remedies de­signed for the same, and therefore must we perforce inuent [Page 22] some other way, for conseruation of the lawes. Giue me Cle­ments, Liues Syluesters, and I will commit all things to their charge and arbitrement.Loe poperie crept in by little, and little. But to vse no rougher wordes a­gainst these latter Popes: they are doubtlesse inferiour to Popes of olde time, by many degrees.’ I coulde alledge many other testimonies: but this Victoria, being of great cre­dit among the Papists, is a most sufficient witnesse in their owne proceedings. See the 12. Chapter, and note it well Alas, alas, how hath the late romish Church abused vs.

CHAP. VII. Of Popish auricular confession.

COncerning this subiect, I haue written so sufficiently thereof else where:In the suru [...]y of Poperie. as no Papist now for many yeres, durst frame any answere thereunto. There I haue proued by the verdict of best approued papists; that auricular confession was no article of popish faith, for the space of 1215. yeares: And I haue there in like maner, answered to all obiections which possibly can be made in defence ther­of as no papist will euer aduenture to reply vpon the same during my life. I haue reason thus to write; because I haue often challenged all English Iesuits, Seminaries, and Iesu­ited papists, as wel ioyntly as seuerally, to answere either all or some one of my books: and yet to this day, I can receiue Ne gry quidem at their hands. I compiled a very little pam­phlet, in way of merry disport and honest christian recrea­tion, terming it the hunting of the Romish foxe: concer­ning which booke, (though a small valuome in quantitie,) not one Iesuite, Seminarie, or Iesuited papist, euer durst hitherto, or dareth this day, publish any answere to the view of the world. This being so, I deeme it now enough to pro­pose before the eyes of the reader, how great learned pa­pists doe esteeme their auricular confession.

[Page 23] Beatus Rhenanus, a man of great credit with the papists, hath these memorable words: ‘Thomas Aquinas, & Scotus homines nimium arguti, confessionem hodie talem reddiderunt, vt Iohannes ille Geilerius granis ac sanctus Theologus, qui tot annis Argentorati concionatus est, apud amicos suos saepe testa­tus fit, iuxta eroum Deuteroseis impossibile esse confiteri.’ Englished thus. Rhenan. in annotat ad lib. Tert. de pae [...]t. Thomas Aquinas, and Scotus, men to much delighted with subtilties, haue brought Confesson this day to such a passe: that Ihoannes Geilerius, that famous, graue, and holy Diuine, who preached many yeares at Argenteratum, saide many a time vnto his friends, that it was impossible for a man to make his Confession, according to their traditions.’

Out of these words, I obserue these golden Lessons: 1 First, that the vaine curious distinctions of the popish Schoole-doctors, haue brought much mischiefe into the Church of God, Which thing if a papist had not spoken it, would neuer haue beene thought credible to the worlde: the truth will preuaile in time, Christs holy Gospel must haue the vpper hand. 2 Secondly, that it is impossible for a papist to make his Confession, according to the popish law: and consequently (marke well my words gentle Rea­der) that all by popish doctrine, must perish euerlastingly; I proue it, ponder well the proofe. Alas, alas, who will not defie Poperie. The papists teach vs, to hold for an Article of our beleife, that we are bound vp­on paine of damnation, to make our Confessions as the popes Lawes and Cannons doe prescribe. Viz. as Aquinas and Scotus, haue set downe the same. For sundry popes haue authorized the doctrine of Aquinas, and confirmed the same for authentical. And for all that, Geilerius a papist himselfe, a great Diuine, and a famous preacher, complai­ned often to his deare friends, that no man could possibly performe the same.

Now then, since on the one side, the popish confession must be made vnder paine of damnation: and since on the otherside none possibly can make the same, as is required [Page 24] by popish cānons; it followeth of necessitie by popish doc­trine, that all papists must be damned eternally. God of his mercy, conuert all papists to the truth. O misera­ble poperie, confounded and condemned by thine owne Doctors deare; thy selfe o poperie, hath bewrayed thy trea­cherie to the world. It is to vs Gods great mercy, for the merits of Christ Iesus; but to all papists his iust iudgement▪ for the punishment of their sinnes. If you will in time re­pent and embrace his holy gospel, his mercy is open to you all; but if you will still continue (o papists,) in your wilfull obstinacie; then doubtlesse, God will reuenge the blood of his innocents at your handes: for with your beggerly vn­written traditions▪ you deuour the soules of many thousāds

Many among the papists dare not vtter their mindes.Thirdly, that many liuing among papists, doe external­ly obay the popish law; who for all that doe greatly detest in their hearts, a great part of their late hatched Romish re­ligion. This is euident, by the secret complaint of this lear­ned man Geilerius; who told that to his trustie friēds, which he durst not disclose to others, and Beatus Rhenannus that famous papist, was of the same mind; or else doubtlesse he would not haue approued the complaint of Geilerius. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish church bewitched vs.

CHAP. VIII. Of the marriage of Priests.

I Haue written so sufficiently of this sub­iect else where,In the suruay of poperie. as no papists either haue made, can make, or euer will make any answere thereunto. I will onely for the present, set downe the iudgement of three or foure famous Papists, referring the rea­der for the exact decision therof, vnto my booke of suruey. The famous papist, Cardinall Panormitanus, giueth so wor­thy a testimony of this controuersie, as if it be well marked, it wil cōfound all papists in the world, These are his wordsPanormit▪ de cler. coniugal. cap. cum olim. [Page 25] Continentia non est in clericis secularibus, de substantia ordinis, nec de iure diuino; quia alias graeci peccarent, nec excusaret eos consuetudo: sequitur; & non solum credo potestatem inesse eccle­sia hoc condendi, sed credo pro bono & salute esse animarum, quod esset salubre statutum, vt volentes possint contrahere; quia experi­entia docente, contrarius prorsus effectus sequiturexilla lege con­tinentiae, cum hodie non viuant spiritualiter, nec sunt mundi, sed maculantur illicito coitu cum eorum grauissimo peccato, vbi cum propria vxore esset castistas.’ Englished thus. ‘Continencie in secular priests, is not of the substance of their orders, nor of the law diuine; because otherwise the Greekes should sinne, and their custome could not excuse them. And I doe not onely belieue, that the church can make such a lawe: but I also belieue, that such a lawe were for the good and for the saluation of mens soules, that such as would, might marry; because experience teacheth, that a contrary effect followeth of that law of continencie, seeing this day they liue nor spiritually, neither are they cleane, but polluted in vnlawfull copulation with their most grie­uous sinne, albeit they might liue chastly with their owne wiues.’

Out of this notable discourse of Panormitanus, (who was their renouned canonist, their venerable Abbot, their reue­rend Arch-Byshop, and their honerable Cardinall, for he had all these titles and degrees,) I obserue these most worthy and memorable documents. 1 First, that the prohibi­tion of marriage in secular priests, is neither of the substāce of the ministery, nor grounded vpon the law of God, but onely enforced by the law of man. 2 Secondly, that priests marriage would be honourable and honest chastitie, if the law of man did not prohibite the same. 3 Thirdly that the prohibition of priests marriage, is against their soules health,, and causeth them to sinne damnably. Fourth­ly, that Byshops, Priests, and deacons, were euer marri­ed in the Greeke Church, and did not thereby sinne at all.

[Page 26]Out of which obseruations, I inferre this golden and most memorable corollarie: Viz▪ That the prohibition of Priests marriage is against Gods law, against the health and saluation of mens soules, and against the good of the Com­mon wealth.

Polidorus another deare friend of popish Religion, shall tell the papists what he thinkes of the Pope, touching the prohibition of priests marriage. Thus doth he write:Polidorus lib. 5. cap. 4. ‘Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illā coniuga­lem vicerit, vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus, plus mali religioni, plus doloris omnibus bonis impresserit, inus­serit att ulerit, quam sacerdotum libidinis labes: proinde forsitā tam è republica christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset, vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimonij sacerdotibus restitueretur. Quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent, quam se spurcissime [...]iuscemodi naturae vitio turpificarent.’ Englished thus. ‘Yet this I will say, that this inforced chastitie (of priests) was so farre from excelling chastitie in wedlocke, as no crime whatsoeuer, hath brought greater shame to priest­hood, more harme to Religion, more griefe to all good men, then the vnchaste life of Priests. Therefore, perhaps it were no lesse necessarie for the publique weale of Chri­stendom, then for the order of Priesthood, that once againe Priests might marrie publikely, that so they might liue ho­nestly▪ and without shame, and not pollute themselues most filthily.’ Thus writeth M. Polidore, who being an Italian, knew best the Romish fashion. Out of whose wordes, I note these matteriall points.

1 First, that Priests were married in old time: Poperie is the new Religion.and conse­quently, that the late Romish religion, (which simple peo­ple terme the old Religion) is a false, new, wicked, & coun­terfeit religion, against Gods lawes, and the auncient cu­stome of the Church. 2 Secondly, that the prohibition of Priests marriage, hath brought not, onely great hurt and shame vnto the Church, but also great sorrow to all godly [Page 25] people. Thirdly, that it is expedient both for the Church and for the common weale: that the libertie to marrie may be again restored vnto priests, which assertion, if it did not proceede from the penne of a famous papist, no papist would geue credite thereunto. But for a most delicate postpast, I will adde the flatte and resolute iudgement, of a most famous and learned pope; and the same shalbe gar­ded with the testimonie of the popes owne decrees. Pope Pius the second of that name, (who beefore his popedome was named Aeneas Syluius, a very learned man and famous wryter) did deliuer his opinion in this manner;Platina in vita Pij. 2. pag. 342. ‘Indoctum Episcopum asino comparandum: corpora malos medicos, animas imperitos sacerdotes occidere, vagum monachum diaboli manci­pium esse. Virtutes Clerum ditasse, vitia pauperem facere sa­cerdotibus magna ratione s [...]blatas nuptias, maiori restituendas videri.’ Englished thus. ‘Hee vsed to say, that a Byshoppe without learning was like vnto an Asse: (and consequently, that there are many Asses in the popish Churches.) That euill physitians did kill mens bodies, and ignorant priestes their soules. That a vagarant Moncke was the deuills slaue and bondeman. That vertues had enriched the Cleargie, (in times past:) but that vices (of late dayes) doe make it poore. That there was great reason to debarre priestes of marriage, but greater reason to restore marriage againe vnto them.’

Thus writeth this Pope; a learned man indeede. Whose testimonie, (seeing hee was a most famous pope,) must needes be of highest credite with all papists in the worlde. Hee sheweth plainely, nay hee affirmeth absolutely; that there was in his time greater cause to restore marriage to the Cleargie, then euer there was to debarre them from the same. What that cause was in particular, wee haue heard allready out of Polydore and Panormitane: but Gra­tianus the compyler and collector of the popes Decrees into one volume, shall giue the vp-shotte of this game. [Page 26] [...]ist. 56. can. Osius.These are the expresse words of pope Damasus; Osius the pope, was the sonne of Stephanus the Subdeacon. Bonifa­cius the pope, was the sonne of Iocundus the priest, Dè titu­la faciolae. Agapitus the pope, was the sonne of Gordianus the priest. Theodorus the pope, was the sonne of Theodorus the Byshop. Syluerius the pope, was the sonne of Syluerius the Byshop of Rome. Densdedit the pope, was the sonne of Iocundus the priest. Foelix the third, a Romane borne, was the sonne of Foelix the priest: and Gelasus the pope, was the sonne of Ʋalerius the Byshop: and after this graue testi­monie, these expresse words follow immediatly, ‘Quam plu­res etiam alij inveniuntur qui de sacerdotibus nati apostolicae sedi praefuerunt.’ Englished thus. ‘There are also found many others, who being the sonnes of Priests, haue ruled the Apostolike seat, or Church of Rome. Well, what saith the popish glosse, to this Canon of pope Damasus? Truely it granteth freely, that all these aforenamed popes were bastards, and it addeth a very so­ueraigne remedie in these golden words; Tollitur. n. vicium per successionem. For the fault is taken away by sucession: and albeit I grant with S. Hieromie, that the fault of bastar­die is wholy in the parents, and not hurtfull to the soule of the child that liueth vertuously; yet pope Vrbanus answe­reth after an other manner. His wordes are these:Dist. 56. can. caenomanem se [...]. ‘Cum ergo ex sacerdotibus nati in summos pontifices legantur esse pro­moti, non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione, sed de legitimis con­iugijs nati: quae sacerdotibus ante prohibitionem vbique licita e­rant, & in orientali ecclesia vsque hodie eis licere probantur.’ Englished thus. ‘When therefore we read, that the sonnes of priests are made popes, we must not vnderstand bastards, but sonnes borne in honest marriages, which were euery where law­full for priests, before the (late) prohibition, and are also this day, holden for lawfull in the East Church.’ But of this point, see more at large els where.In the Suruey of Poperie▪ To this I cā not but adde mine owne knowledge; touching that which I both heard [Page 27] and saw, while I was at Rome. Viz. That pope Gregorie the 13. of that name, had a proper man to his sonne, whom hee made the Captaine of his Castle Pont-angelo, and afterward purchased a Barronrie for him, as report was made abroad. My selfe demaunded of a Iesuite a Ro­mane borne, if the pope had beene married before his priesthood, because hee had a sonne? Hee answered smi­ling, that hee could not so affirme; but (quoth he,) he was pope vndoubtedlie, before he was known to haue a sonne, as if he had said; I neither dare say all I thinke, neither all I know. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church de­ceiued vs.

CHAP. IX. Of Popish idolatrous vnwritten Traditions.

POpish vnwritten Traditions, hath brought flat Idolatry into the Church; teaching to adore them as saints, and Gods friends, who were known after­ward to be Heretiques, and professed enemies to God and his Church. This to bee so, their owne deare friend and brother Plaetina, will tell them:Platina in vita Bonifacij octaui. for hee affirmeth in plaine termes; that the dead corps of one Hermannus, was worship­ped for a saints relique at Ferrara, the space of 2. years toge­ther: who for all that was an Heretique, as the same Platina auoucheth. Appendix fuldensis, (which is added to the chroni­cle of Martinus Polonus) telleth vs, that inquisitores haereticae prauitatis, the maister of the popish Inquisition, caused the corps of the said Hermannus to bee taken out of the graue, and to bee burnt, as the corpes of a damned Heretique: where three speciall things are to be remembred, and seri­ously obserued. First, that popish vnwritten traditions, are [Page 28] most fallible and vncertaine. 2 Secondly, that it is a thing ve­ry daungerous, and too too preiudiciall to mans saluation, to giue credit to the same. 3 Thirdly, that the papists are most cruell and blood-thirstie fellowes: who after many yeares death, cannot suffer the dead corps to lye in the ground, vn­lesse they be taken vp and burnt in the fire. He that requi­reth a larger discourse thereof, may peruse the Downe-fall of Poperie. For this point, peruse the downefall of poperie. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church se­duced vs.

CHAP. X. Of the Popes manners.

POpe Christopher came naughtily to his pope-dome, and lost it as naughtily. For before the seuenth moneth expi­red fully, he was depriued of his ponti­fical dignitie, and inforced to become a monke, the sole and onely refuge of al distressed persōs. Thus writeth Platina and Carranza contesteth the same to be the truth.Platina in vita Christo. 1. Carranza in summa, Fol. 354.

Pope Boniface the 7. and pope Siluester the 2. did both aspire to their popedomes, by Necromancie and diabolical meanes. Siluester the 3. attained his pope-dome by sedition; and Damasus the 2. was made pope by violent means, with­out consent either of the Clergie, or of the people. This to be so, both Platina & Carranza, two famous popish writers, wil contest with me. Yea, Platina addeth, that pope-dome was now brought to that passe, that who so could be ye chief in bribes & ambition, (not in holy life and doctrine,) he on­ly should haue the degree of honour, and good men should be reiected.Platina in vita Syluest. 3.

Gregorie the first, was by sedition thrust out of his throne, and pope Iohn the 18. by tyrannie occupied the pope-dome. So say both Platina and Carranza. Carranza vbi super. fol. 355 Platina in vita. [...]oan. 18. Yea Platina addeth; that pope Iohn, was a theife and a robber, and entred not into his pope-dome lawfully.

[Page 29]Pope Stephanus the sixt persecuted the very name of Formosus, disanulled, and condemned all the orders which he had giuen. Martin, Polonus, an 898. Pope Romanus did abrogate all the acts of Pope Stephanus. Pope Sergius the third, did persecute the name of Formosus, whose body after it was interred he com­māded to be takē vp, & to be beheaded. Carranza in [...]ū ­ma, fol. 354. & Fol. 355. Pope Iohn the 13. was more addicted to hunting, then hee was vnto prayer; and many other vnworthy things, are reported of that Pope. This is the cēsure of Bartholomaeus, Carranza, a lear-Thomst and a Dominican Fryer; and therefore hath he not said more against the popes of Rome (whose vassal he was) then the very truth it selfe (which must in time preuaile) did enforce him to vtter and disclose.

Platina affirmeth no lesse against these Popes, then his Brother Carranza hath done.Platina in uita Rom. 1. & Ser. 3. Hee saith plainly▪ that they sought nothing but ambition and pleasure, and to extin­guish the dignitie of their auncestours.

The popes owne decrees tell vs, that though the pope be neuer so wicked, though he carry thousāds of soules with himselfe headlong into Hell, yet may no man take vppon him to iudge the pope, vnlesse he be an Heretick.Dist. 40. cap. si Papa. And what is the reason hereof, I pray you? It is alleaged already out of Gerson their owne deare Doctor, who is ashamed of popish dealing in that behalfe.Super. cap. 4. ex Gersone. viz. Because forsooth Christ hath written in his thigh, (the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, to whom no man may say, why doest thou so) but how the pope may be iudged, I haue else where disputed more at large.In the anato­mie of Popish tyranny. To which treatise I referre the gentle reader, as well for his better satisfaction how the pope may bee iudged, as concerning his double person, his errors per­sonall and iudiciall, and other things coincident.

Pope Iohn the twelfth, was made pope by violent meanes: For his father Albericus being a man of great power and might in the citie, enforced the nobles to take an oath, that after the death of pope Agapitus, they would promote his sonne Octauianus to the popedome. Which oath was ac­complished, [Page 30] and he was named Iohn. He was a great hun­ter, and a man of licentious life. He kept women openly, to the notorious scandall of the Church: in so much that some of the Cardinals wrote to Otto king of the Saxons, to come & besiege Rome, and so to redresse the licentious dealing of the pope. Martin. Polon· an. 959 Antonin. part. 3. Tit. 22. cap. 7. in [...]ine. Which the pope perceiuing, commaunded that Cardinals nose to be cut off, that gaue the counsell; and the Cardinals hand to be cut off, that wrote the letter.

Pope Syluester the second was first a Monke, a French­man borne Gilbertus by name, hee promised homage to the diuell, so long as he performed and accomplished his desires; and that in the end, the diuell should haue both his body and soule. Martin. Polon an. 1007. &. Platina in eius vita. This Syluester being very ambitious, did so often expresse his desire to the diuell, as hee made homage vnto him. Hee was first made Arch-byshop of Rhemes, then of Rauennas, at the length pope of Rome: for the di­uell knowing his ambitious minde, thought good to bring him to honour by degrees. Note wel this point. Being made pope, hee must needes knowe of the diuell, how long he should liue in his pontificall glorie: the diuell answered, that hee should liue l [...]ng, if he said not masse in Hierusalem. The pope receiuing this answere, was a very ioyfull man; hoping to be so farre from death, as he was farre in minde and purpose, from say­ing Masse in Hierusalem: as who thought neuer to goe so farre a iourney, much lesse to say Masse there. Well, it so chaunced, that in Lent the pope saide Masse in the Church Sanctae crucis, which they call in Hierusalem, my selfe know the place. It seemeth that the pope infatuated with pride and honour, had quite forgot the name: otherwise doubt­lesse, he would neuer haue celebrated there: while the pope was at Masse, he heard a great noyse of diuels, and so both remembred the place, and his death to bee at hand. Where­fore hee wept (although before most wicked) disclosing his offence to all the company, and nothing doubting of Gods mercy: withall he commaunded to cut away from his body, all the members with which he had done sacri­fice [Page 31] to the diuel. Thus writ two famous papists, Martinus Polonus, and Baptista Platina; whereof the one was an Arch-byshoppe, and the popes deare Paenitentiarie: and the o­ther, his Abbreuiator Apostolicus. So as their testimonies must needes bee of credite, especially amongst the pa­pists. Among the rest, Platina hath these expresse wordes;Plati in vita, 2. Syluestri, pag. 161. ‘Primo quidem archiepiscopum Rem [...]nsem, inde Rauennatem adeptus pontificatum postremo maiore conatu adiu­uante diabolo consecutus est: hac tamen lege, vt post mortem totus illius esset, cuius frandibus tantam dignitatem adeptus erat.’ Englished thus. ‘First hee was the Arch-byshoppe of Rhemes, then the Arch-byshop of Rauennas: and last of all by the helpe of the diuell, he was made the pope and By­shop of Rome; but vpon this condition, that after his death, hee should bee wholy his, by whole fraude hee had attained so great a dignitie.’ This is a most worthy historie, and for the berter credite thereof, (because papists vse to denie all things that make against them, I assure thee (gentle Reader) that not onely the two fa­mous papists afore named, Martinus and Platina, doe so affirme: but (which is much more to bee admired,) Iohannes Nanclerus a famous popish Chronographer and late writer, doth boldly and constantly auouch the very same.Nanclerus, an 998. pag 742.

Pope Benedict the eight was seene after his death, as it were corporally ryding vpon a black horse: the byshop that saw him, spake thus vnto him, Art not thou pope Benedict, whom we know to be lately dead? Martin, Polon. an. 1020. Plati­na in vita illius. I am saith he, that vnfor­tunate Benedict. But how is it with thee o father, saith the Byshop? I am now in great torment, saith the pope, and therfore wuld I haue some mony to be giuen to the poore, because all that I gaue to the poore before, was gotten by robbery and extortion.

Pope Boniface the seuenth, robbed Saint Peters Church of all the treasure and pretious things therein, (which [Page 32] doubtlesse was of exceeding great value,) and then fledde to Constantinople at length, he returned to Rome with a great summe of mony; & when he could not preuaile, he pluckt out a Cardinall Deacons eyes. Here note by the way, that some Cardinals are Deacons, some Priests, some Byshops: yet he that is but a Deacon, is of greater authoritie then a­ny Byshoppe or Arch-byshop whosoeuer in the Popish seate.

Pope Boniface the eight shall sound the Trumpet for all the rest: who made a constitution and flatte decree, in which he called himselfe Lord spirituall, and Lord tempo­rall of the whole world. A.D. 1302 Appendix ful­densis. Whereupon he required Philip the French king, to acknowledge that he held his kingdome of him. Which thing when the christian king refused to do, the cursed pope tooke vpon him to giue his kingdome to the Emperour of Rome. Of this pope, thus write his deare Vassals, Platina and Carranza, Carranza, fol. 369. ‘Intrauit vt vulpes, regnauit vt lupus, mortuus est vt canis.’ Englished thus. ‘He entred as a Fox, he raigned as a Wolfe, he dyed as a dog. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church bewitch­ed vs.’

CHAP. XI. Of the Popes bloody tyranny.

IT were enough for the manifestation of this Chapter, to ponder well the con­tents of the Chapter next afore going. But something I haue thought meete to be added thereunto, for the better instruction of the indifferent and well affected reader. Iohn Husse a Bohemian borne, a famous, eloquent, and very learned man, came to the councell holden at Constance: there to defend the Doc­trine, [Page 33] which he had preached against the late vpstart Ro­mish religion. The councel required of Vuenceslaus the king of Bohemia, that hee would send maister Hus vnto them. The king acquainting maister Hus with their request, found him very willing, to vndergoe the iourney: by rea­son of the great confidence which he had in the truth of his cause, neuerthelesse the wise, carefull, & prudent king Vuen­ceslaus, for the better securitie of his safe going and cōming home againe, procured him the Saluum conductum and free pasport, of the Emperour Sigismundus. Well, one Hieroni­mus of Praga, a famous citie in Bohemia, an other most elo­quent and learned man, accompanied onely with one clarke, came voluntarily vnto the said councel of Constance: Where after much disputation, when both the said vertu­ous and reuerend men, remained constant in the doctrine of truth and Christs Gospel, and would in no case yeeld vn­to the erroneous and superstitious Romish religion: the councell decreed most cruelly and tyrannically, (notwith­standing the free Charter, the Letters Patents, free pas­port, or safe-conduct of the Emperour,) that maister Hus should bee burnt with fire and faggot, which Decree was with all speede effected accordingly. But maister Hierome of Praga remained after that burning, a long time in pryson. And at the length, when they found him most constant in the truth, and in nothing flexible to their humours, their charitie was so great, that they decreed him to be burnt in the same manner. The papists after their wonted manner, will perhaps deny this to be so: but assure thy selfe (gentle reader) that all the papists in Europe shall neuer be able to touch me, for any vntrue report, assertion, or relation made against them, in any one of all the bookes which I haue written.If the Papists could haue touched me, they would not so long haue bene silent in that behalfe. The reader therefore may boldly giue cre­dit, to euery thing that I haue reported of them: not onely in this treatise now in hand, but in all the rest which I haue written. I thanke God, I make a conscience to belie the Diuell: and consequently, it is not my meaning, [Page 34] to publish any vntruth against any man. Iohannes Nancle­rus a very famous popish Historiographer, after hee hath made mention of the Emperours saluus conductus a free Charter, (as I haue already related,) addeth these expresse words;Nanclerus an. 1415 pag. 1045. ‘Lata est in consessu patrum aduersus pertinaces senten­tia, cremandos esse, qui doctrinam ecclesiae respuerent; condem­nataque simul est haeresis Wicleff. Prior itaque Iohannes Hus combustus est, sexta feria post festum Vdalrici: Hieronimus diu post in vinculis habitus▪ cum resipiscere nollet, pari supplicio affec­tus, sabbatho ante exaltationem S. crucis, Anno. 1415. pertu­lerunt ambo constanti animo necem & quasi ad epulas invitati, ad incendium properabant▪ nullam emittentes vocem, quae miseri animi posset facere indicium: vbi ardere caeperunt, hymnum ceci­nere, quem vix fl [...]mma & fragor ignis intercipere potuit cineres exustorum ne raperentur a Bohemis in lacum proiecti sunt dis­cipuli vero eorum ex eo solo terram abstulere in qua ignis fuit, e­amque veluti sacram secum attulere in patriam, Iohannes ac Hieronimus apud Bohemos martyrum honores meruerunt, nec minores quam Petrus & Paulus apud Romanos.’ Englished thus. ‘Sentence was giuen in the assembly of the fathers against the obstinate, that they should be burnt, who refused the doctrine of the church; and withall, the heresie of Wiclif was condemned. First therefore Iohn Hus was burnt, vpon the six ferie after the feast of Vdabricus. Hierome being kept in prison a long time after, when hee would not recant, was burnt in like maner, on the Saboath before the exaltatiō of the holy crosse, in the yeare of our Lord, 1415. they both suffered death with a constant & stout courage, they made hast to the fire, as though they had been inuited vnto a ban­quet; they vttered not a word, which could giue any signe of a sorrowful heart. When they began to burne, they sang an hymne: which the flame & noise of the fire, was scarse a­ble to stint, when their corpes were burnt, their ashes were cast into a lake, least their countyemen the Bohemians shuld carry them away, their Disciples tooke away the earth [Page 35] (though the ashes were gone,) wher the fire was made▪ and carried the same with them into their countrey, as an holy relique. Iohn & Hierome deserued no lesse honour of mar­tyrs with the Bohemians, then Peter and Paul with the Ro­mans. Thus writeth Nanclerus. Out of whose words, I ob­serue sundry very memorable points of Doctrine: wishing the reader to ponder them seriously, for his godly instruc­tion and Christian edification. 1 First, that this Nanclerus was a great papist, highly renowned in the church of Rome; and consequently, that hee will testifie no more against the Papists, then the truth it selfe doth extort from his penne. 2 Secondly, that the Papists most cruelly con­demned Maister Hus to the fire: albeit hee had the Em­perours free pasport and safe conduct, freely to goe, and freely to returne. 3 Thirdly, that the godly Martyr Hie­ronimus de Praga, came boldly of his owne accord vnto the councell: and they stoutly defended the truth, mau­gre the malice of the pope & all his popish vassals. 4 Fourth­ly, that the burning of Maister Hus could not terrifie Mai­ster Hierome of Praga, nor make him deny the truth of Christs Gospell. 5 Fiftly, that both Maister Husse and Maister Hieronimus de Praga, went as merily and as ioy­fully to the fire to bee burnt, as if they had beene inui­ted to a royall banquet. 6 Sxtly, that in the midst of the late fire, they ioyfully and Christianly sang an Hymne, to the honour and praise of the euerliuing God. 7 Seuenthly, that the furie and rage of the hote burning fire, (O most wor­thy and constant Martyrs of Iesus Christ,) coulde not stay them from singing, and from praysing our mercifull God. 8 Eightly, that the cruell papists, after they had burnt the blessed Martyrs, and consumed their bodies and their bones to ashes, did cast their ashes into a deepe poole of wa­ter. 9 Ninthly, that these two blessed men, (Iohn Hus and Hie­rome of Praga) were no lesse honoured for martyrs in Bohe­mia, then Peter and Paul were in Rome. Yea, their death was [Page 36] so pretious with God, and so honorable with the godly in their countrey: that mauger the Pope and all his Romish tyrannie, the Gospell hath euer since their bur­ning continued there: which is for the space almost of two hundred yeares, euen within the kingdome and dominion of that Empire, a thing impossible to bee done by man, if God did not support the same.

The like crueltie was extended vppon the body and bones of Maister Bucer, that holy man, profound Doctor, and stout champion of Gods eternall truth. For after the blessed man had beene dead, and a long time couered with earth in his graue: his body was taken vppe, fast bound with an yron chaine to a stake, and burnt with a great fire vpon the market day in open place. At Cambridge in the dayes of Cardinal poole A▪ D, 1556. Insomuch, that some of the market-folkes, when they perceiued the wonderfull affaires in hand, saide merily one to an o­ther, what neede is there of yron chaines and Armed men, against dead bodies that haue beene a long time in the graue? for they can neither resist, nor yet flye away, but the late popes are so bent to brutish cruelty, that the like tyranny hath beene by one Pope to an o­ther. For pope Sergius the third, caused the corps of pope Formosus, (who now had beene dead almost ten yeares,) to bee taken out of his tombe, and to bee set in a chaire with the pontificall attyre vppon him, (O braue gallant!) and that done, hee commaunded his head to bee cut off, and to bee cast into the riuer Tyber. He disanulled the actes and orders giuen by pope Formosus, insomuch as all were enforced to take orders a­gain, (O holy romish priesthood! ô indelible characer) who had bin ordered by pope Formosus. And all this was done forsooth, because Formosus had kept this Sergius from the Pope-dome. Thus write Martinus Polonus, & Baptista Platina, two famous popish doctors: whereof the one was the popes Poenitentiarius, and the other, his Abbreuiator A­postolicus. [Page 37] Thus much for a taste, of popish more then sa­uage tyrannie: who so listeth to know more thereof, may peruse my booke of Suruey. What a thing is this? we be­leeue many of vs, that the popes are Christs Vicars vpon earth, and yet we see they are most cruell tyrants, euen the catch-poles, and bond-slaues of the maister Diuel of hell. What shall I say of reuerend Cranmer, graue Latimer, lear­ned Ridley, zealous Bradford, and of 500. more, most wor­thy men, who in the yeare 1555. were burnt with fire and faggots for the testimonie of Christs Gospel? Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church bewitched vs.

CHAP. XII. Of the abhomination of popish proceeding.

THe villanie and abhomination, where­with the popes Religion is vnderprop­ped and maintained, is such and so no­torious: that the truth it selfe hath in­forced the popes owne dearest vassals, to declame in printed bookes, against the same. The famous popish canonist Nauarrus, hath these expresse words:Nauar. de in­ditijs notab. 3· P. 275. ‘papa potest despensare cum monacho iam professo, vt contrahat Matrimonium: imò de facto multi papae dispensarunt, consen­tit ipse Caietanus, Antoninus, & Paludanus.’ Englished thus. ‘The pope may dispense with a Monke already profes­sed, that hee may marry: for many popes haue De facto, so dispensed. Caietanus, Antoninus, and Paludanus, are of the same opinion.’

Franciscus a Victoria the popish famous Schooleman, and religious Fryer, lamenteth the popes dealing, but dareth [Page 38] not plainly vtter his minde. Thus doth he write:Vict de potest. papae, relect. 4. ad 3. arg. ‘Multi te­nent, quod papa non potest dispensare in votis, quia dispensatio proprie est relaxatio iuris: vnde cum sit de iure diuino, dispensa­tio erit iuris diuini relaxatio, quo [...] sane ad papam non spectat: & vtinam haec opinio non sit vera.’ Englished thus. ‘Many hold, that the Pope cannot properly dispense in vowes, because dispensation properly is the relaxation of the Law: wherefore seeing a vow is of the law diuine, dis­pensation must also be remission of the law diuine: which thing doubtlesse, belongeth not to the pope: and would to God this opinion were not true.’ Loe, this religious Frier is so zealously affected, and to carefull of his popes credit: that he wisheth the opinion were not true, because it con­trowleth the popes abhominable dealing.

The popes famous Canonist, & most reuerēd Archbyshop Covarruvias, deliuereth the case in most plaine termes, and blushed no whit thereat. These are his expresse wordes;Covarruvias tom. 1. cap. 20. par. 11. in med. [...]ol. 1. ‘Nec me latet D. Thomam praeuia maxima deliberatione assere­re, Rom. pontificem non posse propria dispensatione continentiae so­lemne votum monachorum tollere: & paulo post, oportet tamen primam opinionem defendere; ne qua passim fiant, evertantur omnino.’ Englished thus. ‘Neither am I ignorant, that Saint Thomas affir­meth after exceeding great deliberation, that the Byshop of Rome, can not by his owne proper dispensation, take away from Monkes their solemne vowe of chastitie. This notwithstanding, the former opinion must bee defen­ded; least those things which are vsually done by the pope in euery place, be ouerthrowne and turned vp side downe.’

The popes doings must be defended.Thus writeth this famous papist. Out of whose wordes, I note many very profitable Lessons, for the benefite of the thankfull Reader.

1 First, that the papists can not agree, concerning their [Page 39] popes authoritie: this is a point of great consequence.

2 Secondly, that great learned Papists, among whom Aquinas is one; (whose Doctrine sundry Popes haue confirmed,) doe roundly controwle the Popes vsurped authoritie.

3 Thirdly, that their opinion, must perforce bee de­fended, which agreeth with the Popes vsuall practise and dealing: because otherwise, all the popes doings would soone bee ouerthrowne, and poperie it selfe turned vp­side downe. This is a memorable obseruation: wherein my bare relation would neuer carry credite, if the truth thereof proceeded not from the pen of a famous popish writer.

4 Fourthly, that the Popes Doctrine, and popish Religion, is most miserable: which must bee vnderprop­ped and maintained, by such poore, sillie, and beggerly shifts.

5 Fiftly, that the papists haue no cause to exclaime against Priestes Marriage, seeing the pope dispenseth at his pleasure, with his owne Monkes in that behalfe.

6 Sixtly, that the Doctrine of Aquinas, (which sun­dry popes haue approued) confuteth the popes Religion. So then, the popes doings must needes bee defended, be­cause otherwise poperie can not stand.

Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Religion seduced vs?

CHAP. XIII. Of popish false forged purgatorie.

COncerning this point of doctrine (gen­le Reader) whosoeuer shall marke at­tentiuely, what I shall sincerely (God willing) deliuer euen from the pen of a famous popish writer, M. Doctor Fisher, late Byshop of Rochester, about 22. Miles distant from London: can not doubtlesse but haue, beare, and con­ceiue, in euerlasting hatred, alienation of minde, and re­solute detestation, not onely against popish purgatorie, but also against all the rest of late hatched popish doctrine. These therefore are the expresse words of this famous po­pish writer.Roffensis, con­tra assert. Lu­ther. art. 18. prope initium. ‘Sed & graecis ad hunc vsque diem, non est credi­tum purgatorium esse. Legat qui velit Graecorum veterum com­mentarios, & nullum quantum opinor, aut quam rarissimum de purgatori [...] sermonem inveniet. Sed neque latini simul omnes, at sensim huius rei veritatē conceperūt: sequitur; non absque maxi­ma sancti spiritus dispensatione factum est, quod post tot annorum curricula purgatorij fides, & indulgentiarum vsus ab orthodoxis generatim sit receptus: quamdiu nulla fuerat de purgatorio cura, nemo quaesiuit indulgentias. Nam ex illo pendet omnis indulgen­tiarum existimatio: si tollas purgatorium, quorsum indulgentijs opus erit? his. n▪ si nullum fuerit purgatoriū nihil indigebimus: con­templantes igitur aliquandiu purgatorium incognitum fuisse, deinde, quibusdam pedetentim, partim ex reuelationibus, partim ex scripturis fuisse creditum, atque ita tandem generatim eius fi­dem ab orthodoxa ecclesia fuisse receptissimam, facillimè ratio­nem aliquam indulgentiarum intelligimus; quum itaque purgato­rium tam serò cognitū ac receptum ecclesiae fuerit vniuersae, quis iam de indulgentijs mirari potest, quod in principio nascentis ec­clesiae nullus fuerat carum vsus? caeperunt igitur indulgentiae, [Page 41] postquam ad purgatorij cruciatus aliquandiu trepidatum erat.’ Englished thus. ‘The Greekes to this day, doe not beleeue that there is a purgatorie. Read who list the Commentaries of the auncient Gretians, and hee shall finde either very sel­dome mention of purgatorie, or none at all. For nei­ther did the Latin Church conceiue the truth of this mat­ter at one and the same time, but by leisure, and by little and little. Neither was it done without the great dispensati­on of the holy Ghost, that after so many yeares, Catholi­ques both beleeued there was a purgatorie, and also recei­ued the popes pardons generally: so long as there was no care of purgatorie, no man sought for pardons. For of it dependeth all that estimation and credite, which is ascri­bed vnto pardons. If thou take away purgatorie, to what end shall pardons be needfull? For if there be no purgato­rie, we shall haue no need of pardons, Considering there­fore, how long purgatorie was vnknowne: then, that some beleeued it by little and little, partly by revelations, and partly by the Scriptures, and so at the length the whole Church receiued it, wee doe easily vnderstand the cause of pardons. Since therefore, purgatorie was so lately known and receiued of the vniuersall Church, who can now ad­mire, that there was no vse of pardons in the Primitiue Church? pardons therefore then began, when the people (being bewitched,) stoode in the feare of purgatorie-paine, and torment.’

These are the expresse words of this famous popish Byshoppe, when hee writing against M. Luther, did with might and maine to the vttermost of his power, (and hee was able to say & write as much as any papist in the world) defend the popes authoritie, and his late hatched Romish Religion, which the vulgar sort of people being pitifully seduced: (Alas, alas, that they will not hearken vnto the truth, which the maister-papists are enforced to confesse,) [Page 42] doe zealously embrace, humbly obey, wonderfully ad­mire, and terme it, (but most falslie and ignorantly,) the old religion. I would gladly doe thee good (gentle Rea­der,) and take any paine to my selfe to profite thy soule: perswade thy selfe, that I deale faithfully with thee: and that I doe in none of my bookes, which I either haue writ­ten, or shall by Gods permission write in time to come, charge the papists with any thing but the meere truth. For I doe assure thee, that my proceeding in the discouery of popish superstiōs, vanities, enormities, falshoods, dissen­tions, schismes, crueltie, tyrannie, errours, heresies, & blas­phemies, is such & so sincere, as vppon a saluo conducto (as they terme it (granted from any king Christian, & licence procured of my gracious dread souergaine, I am & will be most willing to repaire into any prouince in Christendom, there to giue an account, and to make tryall of the same. This offer (gentle Reader, I made aboue ten yeares agoe, when I published my booke of Motiues, as the Reader may easily find in peruse thereof;In the Pre­face especially. but to this day no papist euer durst accept the same, or answere either that booke of Mo­tiues, or any other that I haue written. I therefore here make the same offer againe, and I adde thereunto (which is a shorter course;) that if any English Iesuite, Seminarie, or Iesuited papist, will send me in print, a direct answere to any one booke which I haue published against them, and that vppon licence, and securitie graunted, he will ap­peare with an halter about his necke, ready to receiue ac­cording to his deserts, if hee faile in the defence of his answere and cause: and for the performance thereof shall put downe his name in the printed Booke: I pro­mise herewith vnder my hand, that if GOD graunt mee life and health, I will fall downe vppon my knees before the most mightie, learned, wise, and religious Mo­narch, Iames the King of great Britaine, and my most gracious Soueraigne, humbly to intreate a free Charter, and safe conduct, or princely licence, for the safe com­ming [Page 43] and safe departure of that Iesuite or Iesuited papist, and also with another halter about my necke accordingly, to meet & encounter that mighty Goliah, whosoeuer he be: nothing doubting but that I shall preuaile, in my humble suite to his most excellent Maiestie: if any of our English papists shall be of courage to send me his answere, in man­ner already specified. If none of them dare this performe, in the defence of poperie: then doubtlesse may all silly pa­pists be fully resolued, that there is no truth on their side.If this Chal­lenge be not accepted, now at the last: then doe the papists distrust their religion; it cannot be denyed.

One foul-mouthed Swaggering Iesuite, (in his detecti­on against M. Sutcliffe, and M. Willet,) seemeth desirous of such an offer, as I here doe make: let him therefore or any other of his brethren, prepare himselfe with the ad­uise and help of all the rest: to accept the challenge, and to fight the combat valiantly with mee. I challenge them all ioyntly, and euery one of them seuerally: and I take God to witnesse, that I am fully perswaded as I write, and doe most heartily desire, that this offer and challenge may bee accepted at the papists hands, and accordingly performed, as is already said.

Now, to let passe this digression, and to returne to the matter in hand: I note, out of the free graunt of this fa­mous popish Byshop, (who was a learned man indeed▪) these excellent and worthy Lessons.

1 First, that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued popish grossely imagined purgatorie: no, not to the time of this popish Byshop, who liued 1517. yeares after Christs glo­rious Ascension into Heauen.

2 Secondly, that the Latin Church, and Church of Rome, did not beleeue the said purgatorie, for many hun­dred years after S. Peters death: whose Successor for all that, the pope boasteth himselfe to be.

3 Thirdly, that this imagined purgatorie, was not be­leeued of all the Latin Church, at one and the same time; but that it obtained credit, (Alas poore purga­torie,) by little and little. Where note by the way, [Page 44] (gentle Reader,) that poperie crept into the Church by little and little, and not all at one time. This is a point of great importance, which woundeth the papists euen at the heart.

Fourthly, that purgatorie was not wholy and soundly knowne by the Scriptures, but parlty by the Scriptures, and partly by Reuelations. Where I wish the Reader, to marke well two things, which I shall vnfold vnto him: the one, that by this popish doctrine of purgatorie, Gods works are made vnperfect: contrarie to the Doc­trine of holy Moses, who telleth vs: that, ‘Dei perfecta sunt opera.Deut. 32. [...]. 4. Englished thus. ‘Gods workes are perfect.’ I proue this, because (as the Byshop auoucheth,) the Scriptures made purgatorie knowne to the Church of Rome, but vnperfectly. For doubtlesse if God made purgatorie knowne by the Scrip­tures, then is purgatorie either made perfectly knowne by them, or else Gods workes, that is, the holy Scriptures, are vnperfect. But I wil rather beleeue Moses, the holy Pro­phet of God, then my L. our Fisher, though he be the popes cononized martyr. The other, that the Church hath no new reuelations, touching matters of Faith. For the most learned popish Schooleman, their religious Fryer, & reue­rend Byshop Melchior Canus, hath these expresse wordes:Canus in locis, lib. 3. cap. 4. pag. 101. ‘nec vllas in fide novas revelationes ecclesia habet.’ Englished thus. ‘Neither hath the Church any new reuelations, cōcerning matters of Faith.’ Loe, poperie is contemned by her owne deare doctors: for M. Fisher, saith plainly, that purgatorie was not knowne at the first, but after many 100▪ years by revelations. Yet M. Canus, his popish brother & fellow by­shop, (a man as learned as hee,) saith as plainly, and more truely,) that the Church hath no new revelations in faith. So then, either purgatorie is no matter of Faith, or else it came not by late revelations.

[Page 45]Let the papist answere what he can and wil, he must needs here be caught by the heele. Fiftly, that pardons came not vp, till purgatorie was found out: the reason whereof is said to be this: because the life of popish pardons, resteth wholy in the life of popish purgatorie, and consequently, when the pope could get no saile for his pardons, it was high time for his holinesse to inuent his purgatorie. And therefore wisely saith his Byshop, and our Fisher of Roche­ster, that when the silly ignorant people, were put in feare of the paines of popish purgatorie: then began the popes pardons to florish, and to bee of high esteeme: as being thought able to preserue and defende their receiuers, from the paine and flame of purgatorie fire. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish church bewitched vs.

CHAP. XIIII. Of the Popes double person.

COncerning the popes double person, I haue written at large thereof in a peculi­ar treatise, which is intituled, (ye hunting of the Romish Foxe.) Now it shall suf­fice, to say a little in that behalfe. William Watson that popish traytour, hath these words:Quodl. 6. art. 10. as the prudent Greeke appealed from Alexander furious, to Alexander sober; and Byshop Crostate from pope Adrian priuate, to pope Adrian publique, and as summus pontifix in cathedra Petri: so may the seculars appeale from the pope as Clemens, vnto his holinesse as Peter. For the full answere vnto Watson, see my anatomy of popish tyranny Thus writeth Watson, and all the papists generally, (who are learned) are of this opinion herein, I say (who are learned,) because the multitude and vulgar sort of papists, (being as blinde as beetles in popish affaires,) know not, what the popes double person meaneth. They are taught to beleeue as the pope beleeueth, iumpe with the collier. [Page 46] viz. the Church, that is, the pope belieueth so, therefore doe I belieue so. The truth of this question standeth thus: that the pope or Byshop of Rome may erre personally, speake erroneously, preach erroneously, write erroneously: yet all this must be done, as he is a priuate person onely. This notwithstanding, he can neuer erre, say our papists, when he defineth a matter of faith or manners iudicially, and as hee is pope or a publique person: so hold the papists ge­nerally of late dayes, as the Iesuiticall Cardinall Beller­mine, the mouth of all papists, telleth vs. These are his expresse wordes;Bellarm libt. 4 cap. 7. de [...]om. pont. ‘Multi canones docent, pontificem non pos­se iudicari, nisi inveniatur a fide deuius, ergo potest deuiare a fide, alioqui frustra essent illi canones: sequitur: respondeo istos omnes canones loqui de errore pontificis personali, non iudiciali.’ Englished thus. ‘Many canons teach, that the pope cannot be iudged, vnlesse hee bee an Heretique: therefore he may bee an Heretique, otherwise those canons should be all in vaine. I answere, that all those canons speake of the personall, not of the iudiciall error of the pope.’ This is the clarkly resolution of our Iesuite, and consequently of the Pope himselfe.

Vignerius a very learned and famous popish Fryer, hath these expresse wordes;Vignetius de potest. cōdendi symbolum pa. [...]37. ‘Si dicatur, summus pontifex errare po­test, & in animo suo concipere aliquem articulum orthodoxae fidei contrarium, & etiam privatim proferre, vt legitur de Anasta­sio secundo; si ergo posset novum symbolum edere, fides ecclesiae vnius hominis periculo sub [...]aceret, dicendum, quod summus ponti­fex, vt privata persona errare potest, non tamen vt est summus pontifex, ideo si vt privata persona symbolum edere tentaret, non esset symbolum, maxime vbi a vera fide deviaret.’ Englished thus. ‘If any say, that the pope may erre, and conceiue in his heart any article contrarie to the Catholique Faith, and also vtter the same priuately, as we reade of pope Anastasius the second; if therefore he could make a newe Creed, the faith [Page 47] faith of the Church should be subiect to the hazard of one man; wee answerre, that the pope may erre as a priuate person, but not as pope or the high Byshop. There­fore if hee should make a Creede as a priuate man, it should bee no Creede at all; especially, when hee swarued from the right Faith. O braue an­swere. Thus writeth Ʋigne­rius, beholde here (gentle Reader,) vppon what rotten stuffe, the papists would haue vs to builde and ground our Faith. Wee must belieue that the Pope cannot erre, and yet are wee sure that hee can erre, and that he hath al­ready erred in very deede. We must likewise belieue,In my booke of mo [...]ues. that he cannot but teach the truth: and yet must wee also be­lieue, that he both can teach heresie, and bee an Heretique himselfe. We must yet further belieue, (as I haue proued else where) that it is sacriledge to dispute of the popes pow­er: and all this notwithstanding, wee must perforce both dispute of his power, and straitly examine his doctrine, as also knowe assuredly, whether hee speaketh pub­liquely as a publique man, or priuately as a priuate man, and neuerthelesse, when wee haue done all that possibly we can: wee knowe no more what to thinke or say of his doctrine, preaching, or writing, Popes of late dayes vse not to preach.(but with preaching popes now adayes doe not trouble men,) then when wee haue an Eele by the taile. For when the pope shall tell mee, that I must beleeue this and that: if then he speake as a pri­uate man, where is my faith? it is no faith at all, and why? because forsooth, the pope spake as a priuate man. Ah syr, here is both fast and loose, here is legerdemain indeed. For if wee charge the pope with heresie or errour, answere will bee made with speede: that hee spake or wrote personally, as hee was a priuate man: not iudicially, as he was a publique man. Truly, this is a very lage preroga­tiue, which the papists ascribe vnto their pope: and a ve­ry hard matter it is, to gainsay or withstand the same. Adrianus a ve­ry learned pope.Yet by the popes good fauour, a verie famous, and as learned a pope as euer was pope, Adrianus by name, doth constantly & roundly controwle & confute the same.

[Page 48]These are his expresse wordes, as the zealous, religious, and learned papist Alphonsus de Castro, reporteth and re­hearseth them.Alphonsus Libr. 3. aduers. haeres. prope [...]inem. ‘Sexta haeresis docet nullam animam ante diem iudicij esse beatam, quum vt ait, nulla anima ante illum diem videt deum, huius haerefeos authores sunt Armeni, ean­dem etiam tuentur Graeci: post istos surrexit Iohannes, 22. huius nominis pontifex, Sed ne verbis meis aliquis in hac parte dero­get, verba Adriani papae referam, qui in suo quarto sententia­rum, in calce cuiusdam quaestionis de sacramento confirmationis, ita ait novissime fertur de Iohanne, 22 quod publice docuit decla­ravit, & ab omnibus teneri mandavit, quod animae purgatae ante finale iudicium non habent stolam, quae est clara & facialis visio dei: & vniversitatem Parisiensem ad hoc induxisse dicitur, quod nemo in ea poterat gradum in theologia adipisci nisi primitus hunc errorem iurasset se defensurum, & perpetuo ei adhaesurum, haec Adrianus.’ Englished thus. ‘The sixt heresie teacheth, that no soule is in eternall blisse before the day of Doome: because as it saith, no soule before that day seeth God, the Armenians are the Authors of this heresie, & yet the Greekes hold the same. After these rose vp pope Iohn the twelfth of that name. The pope commandeth his vassales, to swea [...]e vnto false doctrine. But least any man distrust my wordes in this point, I will rehearse 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 twelfth: that he publiquely taught, declared, & cō ­manded all men to hold (this opinion,) that the soules of the iust haue not the stole before the day of Doome, wh [...]ch is the cleare and faciall sight of God. And it is said, that he in­duced the Vniuersitie of Paris to this: that no man should take any degree in the same, but he that first did sweare to defend that errour, & to maintaine the same for euer. Thus saith pope Adrian, the most excellently learned Byshop▪ that euer was at Rome: and the famous religious Fryer Al­phonsus a Castro, doth constantly defend his Doctrine. Out [Page 49] of whose words I note first, that pope Adrian saith of Pope Iohn (Docuit) he taught. Secondly, he saith, (Publice) publi­quely. Thirdly, he saith (Mandauit) he commanded all to hold it? Fourthly, hee saith none could be made graduate in theologie, saue onely he that held this opinion. Fiftly, hee saith euerie graduate did sweare to defend it for euer. So then, the pope may erre, not onely personally as a priuate man, but also iudicially as a publique person, and pope of Rome, and that euen by the flat testimonie of Adrianus, who himselfe was also pope of Rome. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish church bewitched vs.

CHAP. XV. Of popish generall councels.

THat generall popish councels in these our daies, are as a nose of waxe flexible to the popes owne good liking, & the decrees therof, as vncertaine as the wind and weather-cocke: I haue proued at large else where,In my booke of motiues. by the testimonie of best approued popish writers. Now I will onely touch in generall words, the principall heades thereof: referring the reader for the proof of this discourse, vnto my booke of motiues. 1 First, no popish councell is of any force, power, or authoritie, vnlesse it be holden with the popes good liking, as also in which place, and at what time his holinesse shall appoint or aproue. 2 Secondly, if the popes legates doe not agree to the resolution and Decrees of the councell: or if any thing bee decreed with the con­sent of the lagates, which the pope liketh not, and therefore will not aproue the same: all such decrees (be they many, be they few) are cassiered, disanulled, frustrate, and of none effect. 3 Thirdly, all the Byshops (who onely haue defini­tiue voyces in all popish councels,) are solemnly sworne to [Page 50] be true vnto the pope, and to defend his canons, and vsur­ped papall soueraigntie, not onely against Turke & Iew, but also against all persons without exception, euen also against their owne soueraigne Lords, Princes, and Mo­narches, to whom they owe most sacred obedience: which decree and most execrable constitution, was published in the yeare 1228. after Christs most sacred Incarnatiō.A.D. 1228 The Author and commaunder of that cursed decree, was pope Gregorie, the ninth of that name. 4 Fourthly, the pope will not be present in person, but sendeth messengers or Le­gates in his place to the councell; who haue in charge to do nothing contrary to that instruction, which they receiued from his mouth.Vide super, Cap. 1. 5 Fiftly, whē the fathers of the councel haue fasted long, praied much, cōsulted grauely, deliberated ma­turely, decreed soberly, commaunded strictly, and anathe­matized seuerely, and that euen with the consent & assent of the popes owne Legats; yet can neither others nor themselues, tell vs or themselues, what shall be of force therein, or be holden for a lawe. No, no, the popes holinesse sitting stately in S. Peters chaire at home, must bee certified what the councell hath done, and consider well of the matter, least any thing be cōcluded against himselfe, or against his late Romish religion. And consequently, he allowing no­thing but what is to his owne good liking; it followeth of necessitie, that his generall councells in these dayes, are as the Wethercocke, as vncōstant as the wind, and as flexible as a nose of waxe. For when we shall alledge the decrees of the most famous councells of Chalcedon, of Constance, and of Basil, for the equalizing of the Byshop of Con­stantinople, with the Byshop of Rome, or for the autho­ritie of a generall councell aboue the pope and Byshop of Rome.

The popes parasites will answere [...]oundly and arro­gantly (though neither modestly, nor clarkly) that such decrees and Canons were neuer confirmed by the Pope, and presently, if any replie vpon that answere, (so it be done [Page 51] where popery beareth the sway) he shalbe cast into the holy Inquisition, where he shall abide vntill he haue paid the vt­most farthing: and after all other tortures bee burnt with fire and faggots, if he doe not condescend vnto the Popes minde. For whatsoeuer the Pope defineth, that must bee holden as true as the Gospell: and whosoeuer withstandeth the same, must be condemned for an Heretique, Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church seduced vs?

CHAP. XVI. Of popish succession in the Romish Church.

THe Succession of Romish Byshops is not so certaine, as the Papists would beare the world in hand it is. 1 For first, S. Clement, (whose Epistles the papists magnifie, when they seem to make for their purpose,) testi­fieth for him selfe, that S. Peter appointed him to bee his successour.Clemens epist. 1. Ir [...]n. lib. 3. cap. 3. Epiphan haer. 27. Eusebius, lib. 3. cap. 12.

Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Eusebius, and the Canon of the po­pish Masse, doe all with vniforme assent, place Linus and Cletus before Clemens. Yet Sophronius Metaphrastes, and the popish pontificall which can not lie, affirme roundly and peremtorily, that S. Peter liued after Linus. This vari­etie so troubled Nanclerus, a famous popish Historiogra­pher, that he was inforced to coyne this new and vntimely hatched distinction.Nanclerus, pag. 438. Viz that Saint Peter, did indeed or­deine and appoint Clement to bee his successor: Loe, the pope controuleth S. Peter, if this be true. but Cle­m [...]us perceiuing that it would bee a thing pernicious vn­to the Church, if one Byshoppe should choose an o­ther to bee his Successour, yeeldeth vp his right, and so Liuus was elected in his place. The receitall of [Page 52] this imaginarie solution, is a sufficient confutation of it selfe.

Secondly, many Schismes, haue beene in the Romish Church amongst our Romish byshops, and that for very many yeares together, so that the latter can neuer be proued constantly, to haue descended successiuely without inter­ruption from the former. The great papist Onuphrius Pan­vinius, reckoneth vp thirtie Schisimes in the church of Rome. Onuphrius in chronico. The first schisme was betweene Carnelius the good Byshop and Novatus the anti-pope, in the year of our lord 252.A.D. 252 the 2. was betwixt Liberius and Felix, in the yeare 355.A.D. 355 the third was betwixt Damasus and Vrsicinus, in the yeare 366.A.D. 366 the fourth betweene Bonifacius and Enlalius, in the yeare 420.A.D. 420 the fift schisme was betweene Symmachus and Laurentius, in the yeare 428.A.D. 428 the sixt schisme was be­tweene Bonifacius and Dioscorus, in the yeare 530.A.D. 530 the sea­uenth was betweene Syluerius and Vigilius, in the yeare 538.A.D. 538 the eight was betweene Petrus and Theodorus, in the yeare 685.A.D. 685 and here by the way. The Byshops of Rome were for the space of 684. yeares, subiect to the Emperour. I wish the reader to obserue seri­ously out of this famous papist Onuphrius, that the Byshops of Rome for the space almost of seuen hundred yeares after the sacred incarnation of Christ Iesus, acknowledged the Emperour for their superiour and Lord▪as without whose Letter patents they could haue no iurisdiction, nor be re­puted lawfull Byshop. Of which point, I haue else where writtē more at large:In the suruey of poperie. the 9. schisme was between Theodorus and Paschalus in the year 687 A.D. 687 the 10. schisme was between Theophilactus and Paulus in the yeare 757.A.D. 757 the eleuenth schisme was betweene Constantinus & Philippus in the yeare 767.A.D. 767 the twelfth was betweene Zinzinus and Eugenius, in the yeare 827 A.D. 827 the thirteene schisme was betweene Ana­stasius and Benedictus, in the yeare 855.A.D. 855 the 14, was between Formosus & Sergius in the year 891.A.D. 891 the 15. was between Leo the first, and Christopherus, & Sergius the 3. in the year 903.A.D. 903 the 16. schisme was between Benedictus the first, against Leo the eight, in the yeare 963.A.D. 963 the 17. schisme betweene Bo­niface the 7. and Bennet the sixt, in the yeare 974.A.D. 974 the 18. was betweene Iohn the 17. and Gregorie the fift, in the [Page 53] yeare 996.A.D. 996 the 19. was betweene Bennet the 7. and an o­ther namelesse aduersarie, in the yeere 1012.A.D. 1012 the 20. was betweene Siluester the 3. and Bennet the eight, in the yeare 1045.A.D. 1045 the 21. betweene Bennet the ninth, and Iohn Min­cius the aduerse competitor, in the yeare 1058.A.D. 1058 the 22. was betweene Honorius the second and Alexander the second, in the 1061.A.D. 1061 the 23. betweene Clement the third, and Gre­gorie the seuenth, in the yeare 1080.A.D. 1080 the 24. was betweene Gregorie the eight, and Gelasius the second in the yeare, 1118.A.D. 1118 the 25. was betwene Celestinus the second, and Hono­rius the second, in the yeare 1124.A.D. 1124 the 26. was betweene Innocentius the second, and Victor the fourth, in the yeare 1138.A.D. 1138 the 27. was betweene Victor the fourth, Paschalis the third, Celestius the third, Innocentius the third, and Alex­ander the 3. in the yeare 1177.A.D. 1177 this schisme endured, for the space of 16. years. The 28. was between Nicholaus the fift, and Iohannes the 22. in the yeare 1327.A.D. 1327 the 29. was be­tweene Clement the seuenth, Benedict the eleuenth, and Cle­ment the eight, in the yeare 1378 A.D. 1378 this schisme continued for the space of fiftie years. the 30. schisme, was betweene Iohn the 24. Gregorie the 12. & Benedict the 13. in the year 1466 A.D. 1466 These three striuing and grinning as dogges for a bone, I would very gladly learne, how our papists can de­riue from them, their holy so supposed succession.

3 Thirdly, a woman (as Saint Paul teacheth vs,)1. Tim. 2. vers. 11.12. is not ca­pable of holy orders, and ecclesiasticall function: and con­sequently, the popish succession which is deriued from our holy Mistresse Ioan Pope, cannot possible be of force.

Now, to this, the papists can answere nothing, saue on­ly it is a fable, and of no credit. But (gentle Reader,) ma­ny papists highly renowned and of great esteeme in the Churrh of Rome, doe with vniforme assen [...] confirme it to be true:Lo [...], eight fa­mous popish writers agree to this story of Pope Ioan. Viz. Segeberius Gemblacensis, Mar [...]us Scotus, Mathaeus Palmerius, Martinus Polonus, Philippus Bergo­mensis, Baptista Platina, Barthol. Carranza and Iohannes Nan­clerus, who after he hath told a long tale to s [...]lue the matter [Page 54] after his fashion concludeth in these wordes:N [...]cleru [...] Pag. 713. ‘Sed etsi fait verum, nulli tamen ex hoc salutis emersit periculā, quia nec Ec­clesia tunc fuit sine capite quod est Christus, ait Antoninus, nec. [...]. vltimi effectus sacramentorum quae illa conferebat, deficiebant, eis qui deuote accipiebant, scilicet gratia: licet mulier non sit sus­ceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis, nec conficere encharistiam, etiam de facto ordinata, possit, nec absoluere a peccato: vn­de ordinati ab ea, erant iterum ordinandi, graetiam tamen sacra­mentorum Christus supplebat, in recipientibus dignè, ignorantia facti invincibili eos excusante.’ Englished thus. ‘But although it were true, no man for all that sustei­ned any losse of his saluation, because the Church euen then had still a head which is Christ, saith Antoninus. Neither did they, who receiued deuoutly the Sacraments which she ministred, want the last effects of them, which is grace: al­beit a woman bee neither capable of any character of or­der, neither able to celebrate the eucharist, or to absolue from sinne. Whereupon such as receiued orders of her, were to be ordered againe: yet Christ supplyed the grace of the Sacrament, in those that receiued them worthily, in­vincible errour of the fact excusing them.’

Thus witeth this famous popish Historiographer: who imployeth his whole industrie and all his wits, to defend the pope from shame and dishonour, if it possibly could bee done. Out of whose words, I obserue: 1 First, that he can not constantly denie the matter, but feareth the truth of the Historie.

2 Secondly, that Antoninus their reuerend Archbyshop, and cononized Saint, is of his opinion.

3 Thirdly, that the pope is neither of necessitie the Vicar of Christ, as he pretendeth, no [...] yet the head of the church.

4 Fourthly, that popish succession is vncertaine, and of no account at all.

5 Fiftly, that it is doubtfull, which of their Romish Cardi­nals [Page 55] and Byshops be rightly ordered, and whether they bee mere Lay-persons or priests.

6 Sixtly, that then many papists, both of the Clergie, and of the Laitie, committed most grosse, palpable and flat ido­latrie. I proue it because none but priests canonically or­dered, can make Christes body, and change the bread into flesh, as popish religion holdeth. To which I adde, that none of them which receiued orders of our holy Mistris the pope, were or could be priests, but meere Lay-men, and therefore were to be ordered againe, as Nanclerus truely writeth. Marke well this discourse. To which I must adde this also: that all the peo­ple both priests and lay-persons, were bound to adore as God Almightie, that which the Priests so supposed made by Mistrisse Ioan pope, did elevate & hold ouer their heads at Masse: which for al that, was but a piece of Bakers bread, as popish doctrine teacheth vs, neither wil invincible igno­rance serue the turne, as Nanclerus would haue vs beleeue.

4 Fourthly, (and this reason woundeth the heart, and striketh dead,) the generall Councell of Basil, deposed pope Eugenius for his contumacie, and chose Amadaeus, Amadaeus o­lim Dux sub­bandiae. who was named Foelix the fift, who liued pope nine years, fiue monthes and odde dayes, in which time, hee consecrated and made many Cardinals, Priests, and Dea­cons. Carranza, N [...]nclerus, Platina. Pontacus An. 1439. This notwithstanding, Eugenius crept againe into the popedome, without any Canonicall election, and con­tinued in the place as Pope: and consequently, all Cardi­nals, Byshops, Priestes, and Deacons who afterward sprang of him, that is, of the Church of Rome, are illegi­timate, irregular, vsurpers, schismatiques, and not lawfull gouernours of the Church, and it will not helpe the Pa­pists to aunswere, that the councell could not depose the pope. Coficilium est supra Papam. Victor. rel. 4. For most famous and best learned papists, Cardinalis Cameracensis, Abbas Panormitanus, Nicolaus Cusa­nus, Adrianus papa, Cardinalis Florentinus, Iohannes Gersonus, Iacobus Almainus, Abulensis, and many others, doe all constantly defend as an vndoubted trueth, that a [Page 56] generall councell is aboue the Pope, and hath power to de­pose the pope.Depot. papae, pag. 149. in the Ano­tamie of po­pish tyrranie, pag. 137. This case is so cleare, that the Councell of Constance did De facto, depose two popes Iohn the 12. and the 23. as I haue prooued at large in an other booke, neither will it suffice to say, that the Councell of Basill was not a lawfull Synod, because it neither had the presence of the pope, nor of his Legats. Concilium ob pest. Senas Translatum. For first, the councel was called by Pope Martin the fift to be holden at Papias, from whence by reason of the pest it was remooued to Senas. Aterward, it was translated by Alphonsus the king of Arragon, & conti­nued at Basill: where were present both Sigismundus the Em­peror, and Iulianus the popes owne Legate, and after him Ludovious the Cardinall of Arles, supplyed his place. A­gaine, not onely the councell of Basill, but the councels al­so of Constance, of Florence, and of Lateran, did all constantly and vniformely define for an vndoubted truth: that a ge­nerall Councell is aboue the pope, and hath authoritie to cite him, to controle him, (and if the cause so require) to de­pose him. And for due proofe hereof, the councell of Con­stance, de facto, deposed three popes, Viz. Iohn 23. Gregory the 12, and Benedict the 13. and chose Martin the first, and made him pope, M. Gerson addeth that the councell deposed also Iohn the twelft.Gerson vbi supr.

Pope Sergius the third, (as is already proued) disanulled the actes of Pope Formosus, and caused all such as had been made Priests, Byshops, or Deacons by the said Formosus, to take orders againe.Supr. cap, 11. Behold the certaintie of golden excel­lencie, of popish so highly esteemed succession. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish church bewitched vs.

CHAP. XVII. Of Popish Excommunications.

IF I should relate verbatim, the huge Masse of popish Excommunications▪ time would sooner faile me then mat­ter to write. A fewe of them I pur­pose in God to rehearse, by which the indifferent Reader, may easily esteeme the nature and qualitie of the rest. But before I come to the depth of the My­sterie, I haue thought it good to admonish the Reader of these speciall points.

First, that by popish proceeding, none can excommuni­cate himselfe: and consequently, when either the Pope, or other inferiour Byshops shal excommunicate al adulterers, fornicators, drunkards, Symonists, and such like: then nei­ther the Pope nor such Byshops are excommunicate, albeit they be drowned vp to the eares in the selfe same sinnes.

Secondly, that the Pope himselfe can not bee excommu­nicated, neither by any lawe, nor yet by the power of any man: vnlesse it bee for heresie, for which he may both bee iudged and deposed.Dist. 40. cau. si papa.

Thirdly, that the Pope, may graunt and giue Commis­sion to meere Lay-persons, euen vnto women, to thunder out excommunications against supposed offendors.Panormit. in cau. decer­nim. sumu [...]. pag. 301. These Preambles being seriously pondered, let vs viewe the sub­stance of the Text.

The 28. Excommunication in number, is against al such as shal appeale to a future generall councell, from the sen­tence, decree, constitution, or mandate of the Pope.Fumus. pag. 328. Caietan. Pag. 185. This Law was made vpon great pollicie, for the maintenance of the Popes vsurped primacie. First by pope Pius the 2. in the yeare 1458. and after that confirmed and extended by [Page 58] Pope Iulius the second, in his extravagant in the yeare, 1503. ‘Materia inquit Caietanus, est sacrilegium contra sedis a­postolicae primatum.’ Englished thus. ‘The matter of the Decretal or extravagant, (saith our Cardinall Caietain,) is sacriledge against the primacie of the Apostolique seate.’ If I should recite all that the Cardinal saith, in defence of this execrable excommunication: I should be tedious to the Reader, and he reape small or ra­ther no commoditie by the fact. This is enough for the Reader to know herein: that the generall Councell of Constance, (which was holden in the yeare 1439.)A.D. 1439 did de­cree flatly and constantly, that the Byshop of Rome, (now adayes called Pope,) was subiect to a generall Councell, and that it had authoritie to summon him, to punish him, and to depose him. Which power they manifested practi­cally, when they deposed three popes, and placed a fourth man in the pope-dome. Yea, the Councell auoucheth con­stantly and most christianly, that the councell is aboue the pope, as is already proued. To countermaund which de­cree and Constitution, Pope Pius the 2. & Iulius the 2. pub­lished their decrees, with a terrible excōmunication annex­ed therunto. For this purpose also did pope Boniface the 8. publish his antichristian extravagāt,A.D. 1297 in which he callenged both the spirituall and the temporall sword. But the wor­theist, the wisest, and the best learned papists, doe this day make small reckoning of such thunderbolts.

The 29. Excommunication in reckoning, is against the Colledge of the Cardinals of the Romish Church: who by Symonie or Symonicall pacts, procure themselues to be aduaunced to the pope-dome: by vertue of which Excommunication, all such as are made Popes by Symony or Symonicall pacts, doe ipso facto, incurre the sentence of excōmunication: frō which they can neuer be absolved, but by one that is pope in deede, and canonically elected there­vnto. Vpon which Excommunication, one of the popes [Page 59] Inquisitors, Bartholomaeus Fumus a very learned Dominican Fryer, and consequently a man of high esteeme in the Church of Rome, hath published this Commentarie for the true sense and meaning of that axtravagant, which pope Iulius the second devulged in that behalfe.A.D. 1503 These are his expresse words: ‘Nota hic, & bene, papa simoniacè electus, non est vere papa.’ Englished thus. ‘Note heere, and that to good purpose, that the Pope which is elected by Symonie, is not the true Pope indeede.Fumus in ex­travag. [...]l. 2. Marke (gentle Reader) for Christs sake, euen as thou tendrest thine owne saluation: for this doc­trine with the circumstances adiacent, is Prora & puppis: for thine instruction and for the euerlasting detestation, of the late vpstart Romish religion. We see here most euident­ly by the popes owne constitution and flat decree, which no man may withstand or gaine-say: that whosoeuer is chosen pope by Symonie, is no pope in deed.

Now sir, let vs proceed, and let vs looke circumspectly into this matter: as which is of so great importance, as no­thing can be more.

Baptista Platina, a man both very neere and very deere vnto the popes, (as who was by office Abbreviator 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 giftes, bribes, and Symonie. These are his expresse words:Platina, in vit [...] Sylvestri. ‘Eo. n. tum pontificatus devenerat, vt qui plus largitione & ambi­tione, non dico sanctitate vitae & doctrina valeret, is tantummo­do dignitatis gradum bonis oppressis & reiectis obtineret: quem morem, vtinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora.’ Englished thus. ‘For to that passe was popedō now brought, that whosoe­uer was able to preuaile most, in giuing bribes & in ambiti­on, (I say not, in good life & doctrin,) that man only should [Page 60] haue the degree of honour, and good men should be reiec­ted. Which custome, would to God our dayes had neuer knowne.’

Againe in another place, the same Platina hath these words;Platina, in vita Damas [...], 2. ‘Adeò. n. inoleverat hic mos vt iam cuique ambi­tioso liceret Petri sedem invadere.’ Englished thus. ‘For this custome did so increase, that now euery ambiti­ous fellow might invade Peters seate, or Chaire. Gregorie the fift, was by sedition thrust out of his throne, and pope Iohn the 18. by tyrannie, occupied the popedome.’ So write both Platina and Carranza. Yea, Platina proceedeth further, and saith thus;Platina, in vita Ioh. 18. Carranza, in summa, fol. 355. ‘qua quidē beatitudine Iohannes caruit, fur certè in pontificatu, & latro, non. n vt par fuerat, per ostium intravit.’ Englished thus. ‘Which happie life pope Iohn wanted, as who was a theefe and a robber: for hee entred not in by the doore, as hee ought to haue done.’ To be briefe, pope Bonifacius the 8. may sound the Trumpet for all the rest. Of him Carran­za the popish Fryer writeth in this manner:The holy Fry­er Carranza, vbi sup. fol. 369. Intravit vt Vul­pes, regnavit vt Lupus, mortuus est vt Canis. Hee entred as a Foxe, he raigned as a Woolfe, he dyed as a Dog. See more to this effect, in the tenth Chapter afore-going.

Thus (gentle Reader,) two things are cleered: which are of so great importance, weight, and moment, as they are a­ble to batter downe poperie, and to draw it vnder foote.

For first, what Byshop soeuer is made pope, by giftes, bribes, and Simonie: that Byshop is not pope indeed.

Secondly, the Byshops of Rome, for a long time haue been very wicked men, & haue aspired to the pope-dō by bribes and Simonie. To which 2. things thus cleered, this 3. is con­sectarie: viz. that the Byshops of Rome now for many years, are neither the true Byshops nor Popes of Rome in very deede: [...] visible by po­pish doctrine. And consequently, by popish doctrine, there are no true popish Byshops in the world. This point can neuer be truely answered, by al the Iesuits, & Iesuited papists in this land.

[Page 61]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 commander of all people. This excommunication was thundred out, for the establishing of the popes tyrannie throughout the christian world.

The 71. excommunication, is against all such as shall boldly affirme, either that the blessed virgin Mary was con­ceiued in originall sinne, or not so conceiued; and therevp­on shall 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 yeare 1474. By which we may see the vncertaintie of the popes doctrine, as also his ignorance in the high my­steries of his owne religion. For, though he cannot erre iu­dicially in matters of doctrine, as the papists holde and be­leeue; yet can he not decide and determine this easie questi­on, whether the virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne, or not. And yet Aquinas the popes angelicall Doc­tor (whose doctrine two popes,Vrbanus and Innocentius. Vrbanus the fourth, and In­nocentius the fift, haue confirmed to be sound and true) af­firmeth resolutely, that she was conceiued in original sin. So then, one pope cannot tell what to say or think of an others resolution; and much lesse can many sillie papists tell, what to holde or beleeue concerning the popes decrees in matters of faith. Alas, alas, how hath the late church of Rome deceiued vs?

CHAP. XVIII. Of adoring Popish Images and Reliques.

ALbeit the making of Images for a ciuill vse may be permitted, as a thing not reproued, but approued, both by the holy scriptures, and by the testimony of the ho­ly Fathers, whereof I haue written elsewhere more at large;In the suruey of Popery. yet the adoration done to Reliques and Images, is [...] [Page 62] cōdemned euen by the best popish writers. Gr [...]gorius Mag­nus (whom the papists repute a saint, & he was an holy By­shop in deed) being Byshop & Pope of Rome himselfe, and consequently, a man of sufficient testimony against the pa­pists, shall be vmpire and Iudge in this weightie controuer­sie. These are his expresse words;Gregorius Se­reno episcopo, libr. 7. epist. 109. cap. 109. ‘Praeterea, indico dudum ad nos pervenisse, quod fraternitas vestra quosdam imaginum ado­ratores aspicien [...], easdem ecclesiae imagines confregit at (que) protecit. Et quidem zelum vos, ne quid manu factum adorari possit ha­buisse laudavimus; sed frangere easdem imagines non debuisse iu­dicamus. Idcirco. n. pictura in ecclesus adhibetur, vt hi qui [...]tera [...] nesciunt saltem in par [...]etibus videndo legant, quae legere in codi­cibus non valent. Tua ergo fraternitas & illas seruare & ab ea­rum adoratu po [...]ulum prohibere debuit; quatenus & literarum nescij habe [...]ent▪ vnde scientiam historia colligerent, & populus in pictura adoratione minimè peccaret.’ Englished thus. ‘Furthermore, I am to tell you, that relation was made to vs a while agoe, that when your fraternitie beheld some who adored and worshipped Images, then you brake in pieces the Images of the church, & hurled them away. And truly, I commend your zeale therein, least any thing made with hands should be adored. Yet I iudge, that you should not haue broken the same Images. For Images are placed in churches to this end, that they which cannot read stories in the booke, may read them by sight on the walles. There­fore your fraternity should not haue broken them, but haue forbidden the people to adore them: that so the vnlearned might haue gathered the knowledge of the historie, & the people not haue sinned in worshipping the picture.’ Thus writeth the holy, learned, and auncient Byshop, or Pope of Rome. Out of whose words, I obserue these worthy & gol­den lessons. First, that Images may not be worshipped. Secondly, that Saint Gregorie commendeth the zeale of the good Byshop Serenus, who brake the images in pieces, [Page 63] which the people worshipped. Thirdly, that though Images were in those dayes permitted for instruction-sake: yet were the people neuer permitted to worship them, but sharpely reproued in that behalfe.

To which I adde, that this Gregorie, who was Byshop of Rome, and this Serenus, who was Byshop of Massilia, did both of them liue more then fixe hundred yeeres after Christ: at which time, the worship done to Images, was deemed a very heynous crime. And therefore the godly Byshop Serenus did breake those images, which the peo­ple worshipped. Yea, Gabriel Biel a religious popish Fry­er, and a very learned Schoole-doctor, who liued long af­ter Gregorie and Serenus, euen one thousand, foure hun­dred eightie, and foure yeares after Christ, doth sharpely in­veigh and reprooue the worship giuen to images. He hath a large discourse of this subiect, in which the Reader may finde these expresse wordes:Biel in ca [...]. missae lect. 49. in line. ‘Quod vero Chistiana religi [...] imagines sustinet in ecclesia & oratorijs, non permittit eo fine, vt ipsae adorentur▪ sequitur: neque adore imagi [...] ̄ Christi, quia [...]ig­um, nec quia imag [...]: sed adoro Christum coram imagine Chri­sti: quia scilicet image Christi excitat me ad amandum Chri­stum.’ Englished thus. ‘Whereas Christian Religion tolerateth images in the Church, and in oratories: it doth not permit them for this ende, that they may bee adored. Neither doe I a­dore the Image of Christ, because it is wood, neither for that it is an image. But I adore Christ before the I­mage of Christ, because the image of Christ doth allure me to loue Christ.

Loe, this famous and learned popish Doctor, agre­eth with the good Byshops Gregorie and Serenus: and affirmeth plainly and constantly, that images may not bee worshipped.

[Page 64]And for this ende hee telleth vs, that when himselfe beheld the Image of Christ, he did not worship the Image, but Christ represented by the Image. So then, the worship­ping of Images is not the old, but a very new religion; as which was detested and abhorred of the learned and wiser sort, for the space of fourteene hundred▪ fourescore, & foure yeares,Florint Biel, An. do. 1484 after Christs ascention into heauen. But some will say, that S. Gregorie allowed Images in the church, and re­proued Serenus, because he brake them in pieces. To which I answere, that Gregorie commended the zeale of Serenus, and approoued his opinion, they both agreed in this, that Images may not be worshipped. Serenus thought it time to breake them in pieces, when the people began to adore them: but Gregorie thought, they might still remaine in the church; so the people were instructed howe to vse them, and prohibited to worshippe them. And of his opinion are some reformed Churches in this age, who still retain Images in their Temples. I dare condemne neither those, who still keepe them in their churches; nor those who haue abolished the same. But this I boldly a­uouch, that Serenus had for his example, both the fact of the good King Ezechias, who breake in pieces the brazen Serpent, when the people began to adore it, albeit God himselfe had appointed it to be set vp;2. Reg. 18. v. 4. Epipha in E­pist. ad Io. Hie­ros. and also the practise of S. Epiphanius, who seeing the Image of a Saint hanging in the church, rare the same asunder, and aduised the war­ders to burie some poore body with the vaile, and to see, that thenceforth no such vailes should be hanged vp in the church. Some againe will say, that many myracles haue bene done by Images; and that such as adored & worship­ped them, haue thereby receiued their health. To whom I will answere, euen as their owne deare Doctor Grabriel Riel doth. His expresse words are these:Grab Biel, vbi supra. ‘Quod si aliquando miracula fiunt, hominibus etiam ad eas confluentibus adiutoria aut sanitates praestantur; non haec virtute imaginum, sed virtute dei ministerio bonorum angelorum ad intercessiones sanctorū con­tingunt, vel etiam non nunquā operatione daemonum ad fallendum inordinatos cuitores deo permittente, exigentem taliū infidelitate.’ [Page 65]Englished thus. ‘If miracles be sometime done, and men also resorting to thē, be holpē or receiue their health; yet are not these things done by vertue in the Images, but by the power of God, & ministry of the good Angels at the intercessiō of the saints. Yea sometime by the operation of the d [...]uels, to deceiue the inordinate (and superstitious) worshippers by Gods per­missiō, their infidelitie so requiring.’ Thus writeth Frier Bi­el; out of whose words I obserue, 1 first, that myracles are somtime done, when the people worship & adore Images. 2 Secondly, that such myracles are done by the power of the diuel. 3 Thirdly, that God permits them to be done for the punishment of their infidelitie, who are polluted with the superstitious worship of Images. The same reason yeeldeth an other famous papist, M. Gerson, sometime the Chancellor of Paris ▪ of an other different subiect in deed, but wholy & plainly to the same effect. These are his expresse words▪ Iohan. Gerso­nus, cont. me­dic. mōuspess. in dicto, 3. in part. prima. ‘Arguunt iterū, & nos in similem causum trahere [...]atagum. No [...] ­ne inquiūt, talia similiter fueriut, aut tolerantur ab ecclesia, in pe­regrinationibus certis, in cultu imaginum, in cereis, in aquis be­nedictis, & in exorcismis? nonne dic [...]tur quotidie si nouem diebus perdurat in hac ecclesia, si ex aqua illa perfundatur, aut si tali se v [...]veat imagini, aut si aliquid talium faciat, ipse mox sanabitur, vel op [...]ato potietur? fateor, abnegare non possumus multa inter Christianos simplices sub sp [...]i [...] religionis introducta esse quorum sanctior esset omissi [...]: tolerantur tamen; quia neque [...]ut fundit [...] erus.’ Englished thus. ‘They obiect againe▪ and labour greatly to draw vs in­to the like cause: doth not the church say they either prac­tise in like maner such things, or at least permit such things to be done, in going on pilgrimage, in worshipping Ima­ges, in Torches, Tapers, and Candles, in holy Water, and [Page 66] in exorcismes? Is it not daily sayd, if one abide nine dayes in this church, if he be sprinkled with that water, or if he make vowes to such an Image, or doe any such thing, hee shall presently bee healed, or haue his desire, I graunt wee can it not denie, that many thinges are practised a­mong Christians, vnder colour of religion, which to o­mit and leaue vndone, were a more holy thing: neuerthe­lesse the Church doth tolerate them, because she cannot vtterly abolish the same,’

Againe, the same Doctor hath these wordes;Gerson vbi supra. ‘At ob [...]jci­unt; quare non possumus daemonem cogere ad pr [...]standum humana quadam obsequia, cum sacerdotes hoc facere ten­tant ordinarie? responde [...], si coactio daemonis aliter ex­pectetur, quam per miraculum, Deo specialiter cooperante, [...]stud falso creditur, & pericul [...]è quaeritur: falso quid [...]propter libertatem daemonibus▪ insitam, quae nec ab istis corpo­ralibus quibus perfectior est, nec a carminibus cogitur: is [...]d antem periculose quaritur, quia hostis est dolosissimus, & tunc fingit se compelli per tales ritus impios, quibus hono­rari quaerit, & animas perdere.’ Englished thus. ‘But they obiect; why may we not compell the diuell to doe humane duties, seeing the Papistes doe dailie take in hand to doe it? I aunswer▪ if the compulsion of the diuell bee otherwise expected, then miraculouslie by Gods speciall handy-worke; it is both fa [...]ly bel [...]e­ued, and dangerously assayed: falsly, by reason of the natu­rall power of diuels, who neither can bee forced by verses, nor yet by any corporall creatures of lesse perfection then themselues: dangerously, because the diuel is a most subtile enemie, who then faineth himselfe to bee compelled by those impious rites, with which he seeketh to be honoured, and to destroy our soules.’

[Page 67]The same learned writer, in an other place hath these word [...]Gerson. cont. superst. med. part. 1. [...] ab­seruat. diorum, concl. 6. ‘Sicut vera & Christiana fides mirabilia operatur in bo­ne oradeutibus, sic & fals [...] & mal [...] creduli [...] deo permittente [...], vel [...], dominus [...] adharere a [...]quibus vanis observantijs, permittit aliquos eventus contingere, & ita eos plus consequenter firmari in ta [...]i opinione, vt maior fiat cacitat corum, & in laqueum cadant quem sibi fecarunt. Quicquid. n. mali eve­nit t [...]li die, imputant malitiae [...]iri, & [...] aspeciunt ad ea, quae be­n [...] & prosperè successerunt tali die a deo. Vnde merito deus per­mittit tales deci [...]i, & in laqu [...]s su [...] credulitatis v [...]n [...] incidere.’ Englished thus. ‘As the true Christian faith, worketh myracles in the true beleeuers; so doth a wicked false credulitie by God [...] permission, worke sometime, or rather demerite euill e­vents. Yea, while the Lorde perceiueth them to be too much giuen to vaine and fond obseruations and superstiti­ons, hee permitteth suche euents (or myracles) to hap­pen, and consequently, them by that meanes to be more confirmed in such an opinion, that their blindnesse may be the greater, and they catched in their owne snare. For whatsoeuer euil chaunceth such a day, they impute it to the wickednes, malice, and ill fortune incident to the day; and they regard not those things, to which God hath giuen good and prosperous successe vpon such a day. Where­fore God doth worthily suffer such to be seduced, and to fall into the snares of their vaine credulitie.’ Thus writeth Maister Gerson, a verie famous papist, and a learned man indeed. Out of whose doctrine I obserue sundry impor­tant documents, as well for the instruction of the indif­ferent Reader, as for confusion of the obstinate pa­pist.

[Page 68] 1 First, that many things are done in the popish chur­ches, like vnto things done by Art-magicke by the power of the diuel.

2 Secondly, that the popish vsage in gadding on pilgri­mage, in worshipping Images, in Tapers, Torches, Can­dles▪ Exorcismes, and other like popish superstitions, may well be resembled to the practise of Sooth-sayers, Coniu­rers, and Magicians.

3 Thirdly, that the learned papist could not excuse such superstitions vsed in poperie, and therefore was hee enforced to vse this sillie, sillie euasion, viz. that the church doth tollerate them, because it cannot altogether abolish the same.

4 Fourthly, that God doth suffer myracles or strange euents, to bee done by the power of the diuel; that so the wicked for their iust deserts, in regard of their for­mer sinnes, may be more confirmed in their superstitious dotage, and receiue due punishment for their vaine credu­litie.

5 Fiftly, that not to take a [...]ourney, or not to doe such a thing on such a day (which many Papistes ob­serue most superstitiously) for feare of some misfor­tune or ill successe, is heere condemned for superstition, by this famous Papist.

6 Sixtly, that popish priestes, which daily and vsually take vppon them by their exorcismes to cast out diuells, are by this learned Papist accused and condemned, both of infidelitie and of temeritie. And his reason is this, because that the diuell cannot bee compelled to doe anie thing, vnlesse it bee by the speciall and myraculous worke of God.

7 Seuenthly, that the diuel therefore faineth himselfe to be compelled by such wicked rites & superstious dealing, th [...] his worshippers may thereby, be the more deeply confir­med in their superstitious dotage and vaine credulitie.

[Page 69]To which I must needs adde as a delicate p [...]st-past, for all the Iesuits and Iesuited papists: that the supposed myra­cles done by papists, are often counterfeit, and plaine Le­gerdemaine. This I wil not barely say, but after my wonted maner proue it: euen by the testimonie of their owne po­pish writers▪ Marke well (gentle Reader▪) what I shall truely deliuer thee in this behal [...].) The papists in their booke intitulted the Iesuits Catechisme, haue these expresse words.Lib. 3 cap. 16. fol 174. The kingdome (of Portugall) being fallen to Sebastian, the holy Apostles, the Iesuits conceiued a hope, that by this meanes it might descend vnto their Familie, and dealt with him many wayes, that no man might from thence forward be capable of the crowne of Portugall, except the were a Ie­suit, and chosen by their societie, as at Rome the pope is chosen by the colledge of Cardinals. What a cou­zenage is this? And for as much as he, (although as superstitious as superstition it selfe,) could not, or rather durst not condescend therevnto, they perswaded him, that God had appointed it should bee so, as himselfe should vnderstand by a voyce from heauen neere the sea­side. Insomuch as this poore prince thus carryed away, re­sorted to the place two or three seuerall times: but they could not play their parts so wel, as to make him heare this voyce. Thus write the learned papists of France, in their booke called the Iesuits Catechisme. Which booke vpon the good liking thereof, the English Secular priestes haue translated into our vulgar language: to which storie, I adde this for explication sake, that this yong king [...] vp vnder the Iesuits, & therefore they thought to ha [...]e drawne him to their lure and bate. And when they could not pre­uaile that way, they disswaded him from marriage, and to goe personally to the warres, in such sort as they designed him. By which vnchristian meanes he was cut off, and the kingdom devolued to the King of Spaine. For their onely intent was this, to maintaine poperie, and to suppresse the Gospel.

I haue proued this else-where: where I haue made [Page 70] euident demonstration, that poperie is inseperably lincked with treason, and cannot consist without the support of the Spanish king. There may the Reader finde at large,In the anato­me of popish tyrannie. many other like miracles wrought by the Iesuits, as also their se­ditions and traterous dealing euery where. It were expe­dient for all simply seduced papists, and for all such as are by any meanes carryed and led into errour by the Iesuits (of which faction, there is too great plentie in this Realme) to prouide my Anotomie, and to read it againe, and againe: for in so doing, I am perswaded and fully resolued, that all carefull of their saluation, would vtterly abhorre and de­test all popish faction. The Iesuitical religion, (which is the Popes owne doctrine) is nothing els but an hoge-poge of Omnigitherum [...] as the secular popish priests haue constant­ly avouched, in their printed books divulged to the whole world. Alas, alas, how hath the late Romish Church be­witched vs.

CHAP. XIX. Of Popish adoration, and invocation of Saints.

COncerning this controuersie, I haue written else-where at large: [...]n the Survey of poperie: Where euery thing is an­swered, that the papists can possibly ob­iect for them­selues. I deeme it here to be enough▪ to vnfold that great superstition and grosse idolatrie, which the papists commit in this behalfe. The popish invocation of Saintes this day vsed in the Romish Church, is the selfe same, which the Gentiles vsed in olde time, when they did invocate false gods. I proue it, because they haue pecular saints for their seuerall necessities: viz. Saint Loy, for their horses, S. Anthonie, for their Pigges, S. Roch, for the pestilence: S. Steuen, for the night: S. Iohn for the day: S. Nicholas, for their studies, Saint George, for their warres: S. Cosma, and S. Damian, for their sores: S. Appolo­nia, [Page 71] for their teeth: S. Agnes, for their Virginitie: and o­thers innumerable, for the like ende and effect: they errect Church [...] to their saints: they frame images to them: they carry their images about in Procession: they consecrate al­ters to them, they dedicate Holy-dayes to thē, they make vowes for the honour of them, they offer presents to their altars and images: they put Lampes, tapers, torches and lights before their images: they kneele downe before their images: they touch them: they embrace them, they speake to thē: they intreat them, as if they were yet liuings yea, they seem to surpas the folly & impietie of the Gentiles. For they ascribe their saluation to their saints: euen to such saints, as of whose saint-hood wee may well stand in doubt. They invocate Campion, Sherwin, Ballard, Hart, Nelson, and the rest of that seditious faction.

Alphonsus, the Iesuit [...], and late Rector of the English Colledge at Rome, caused the Organs to be sounded, and all the Students to come to the Chappell: where himselfe hauing on his backe a white Surplesse, and the stole a­bout his necke, sang a Collect of Martyrs: so after his ma­ner, canonizing Campion the Traytor, for a Saint. Such is the seditious impudencie, of newly hatched R [...]mish Ie­suits, of which cursed broode, I haue written at large in my Anatomie.

And least any Iesuit or Iesuited Papist, shall bee able to denie, that they ascribe their saluation to saints: (for they vse to say, they make them but Mediators of intercession, and not of saluation or redemption▪) I will proue it flat­ly, out of their owne Bookes: yea, euen out of their Church-seruice, which I wish the Reader to marke atten­tiuely. In the Prayer of the Church of Rome vpon Tho­mas B [...]kets day, some-time the Arch-byshoppe of Can­terbury, I finde these expresse words:In Rom. [...]re­viar. in festo Tho. B [...]cke [...] ‘Deus pro cuius ecclesia gloriosus pontifex Thomas gladijs impierū occubuit, prasta qua­sumus vt omnes qui [...]ius impl [...]rant [...]xili [...], petitionis su [...] [...]alu­tarem consequantur effectum.’ [Page 72]Englished thus. ‘O God, for whose Church, the glorious Byshop Tho­mas, was put to death by the swords of the wicked: grant we beseech thee, that all which desire his helpe, may attaine the effect of their petition to saluation.’

This mysterie is deliuered yet more clearely in an other place, in these expresse wordes:In Hymno Tho. Cant. ‘Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro te impendit, fac nos Christe scandere quò Thomas ascendit.’ Englished thus. ‘By the blood of Thomas, which hee for thee did spend, make vs, O Christ, to clime, whither Thomas did ascend.’ Loe, Thomas Becket, dyed for vs, and shed his blood to bring vs to heauen, as the papists teach vs. It is therefore true by popish doctrine, that he is a Mediator, not onely of Intercession, but also of redemption.

In their Latin Primers deliuered to the vulger people to pray vpon, (which God wote they vnderstood not) they teach the people thus to pray:Orat. ad S. Paulum. ‘Paule Apostole, [...]e deprecor, vt ab Angelo Sathanae me eripias & a ventura ira liberes, & in caelum introducas.’ Englished thus. ‘O blessed Apostle Paul, I pray thee, that thou wilt deli­uer me from the Angel of Sathan, and defend mee from wrath to come, and bring me into heauen.’

To S. Iames in this maner:Orat. ad S. [...]acobum. ‘O faelix Apostole magne mar­tyr Iacobe, te colentes adiuv [...], peregrinos vndique tuos clemens protege, ducens ad caelestia.’ Englished thus. ‘O happie Apostle and mightie Martyr Iames ▪ helpe thy worshippers, defend courteously thy pilgrimes on e­uery side, and bring them to heauenly ioyes.’

Much other like stuffe I could alledge: but for breuitie sake, I will wittingly and willingly superseed many parti­cular [Page 73] prayers made to meaner saints, and come to the bles­sed Virgin Marie. ‘Maria mater gratia, mater misericordia, tu nos ab hoste protege, & hora mortis suscipe.In concept. B. Virg. Englished thus. ‘O Marie, the mother of grace, the mother of mercy, defend thou vs from our (ghostly) enemie, and receiue vs at the houre of death.’

‘Solve vincla reis, profer lumen caecis, mala nostra pelle, bona cuncta posc [...], monstra te esse matrem, sumat per te preces, qui pro nobis natus, tulit esse tuus.In Annuntiat. B. Virgin. Englished thus. ‘Loose the bands of the guiltie, bring light to the blind, driue away our euils, require all good things for vs, shew thy selfe to be a mother: let him receiue thy prayers, who being borne for vs, suffered to be thine.’

‘Veni regina gentium, dele flammas r [...]atuum, dele quodcum­que denium, da vitam innocentium.In visitat. B. Virg. Englished thus. ‘Come, O Queene of the Gentiles, extinguish the fierie heat of our sinnes: blot out what is amisse▪ and cause vs to lead an innocent life.’

Againe in the old Latin Primars, the people are thus taught to pray:Orat. ad B. Virg. ‘In tuo sancto, tremendo, ac terribili iudicio: in extremis diebus meis esto mihi auxiliatrix & salvatrix, & animam meam, & animam patris mei, & matris meae, fratrum, sororum, parentum amicorum, benefactorum m [...]orum, & [...] ­nium fideliū defunctorum ac vinerum [...] aetern [...] mortis enligin [...] libera: ipso auxiliante quē portasti, D. nostro Iesu Christo filio tuo:’ Englished thus. Behold here most intolera­ble blasphe­mie, against the sonne of God. O Glorious Virgin Marie, bee thou my helper and sa­viour in thine holy, fearefull, and terrible iudgement, euen in my last dayes, and deliver from the mist of eternall death, both mine owne soule▪ & my fathers soule, & the soules of my mother; brethren, sisters, parents, friends, benefactors, and of all the faithfull louing and dead: by his helpe whom thou didst beare, our Lord Iesus Christ thy sonne.’

[Page 74] Behold here most intoller­able blasphe­my, against the sonne of God. Loe gentle Reader, these prayers (if they be well marked) doe containe euery iote of power, right, maiestie, glorie, and soueraingtie, whatsoeuer is or ought to be yeelded vn­to our Lord Iesus Christ; yea, the two last prayers make the Virgin Mary, not onely equall with Christ, but farre aboue him. For first, the Virgin Mary is desired to defend vs from the tortures of hell. Secondly, to bring vs to the ioyes of heauen. Thirdly, the last iudgement is called her iudgement. Fourthly, she is called our Sauiour. Fiftly, she is requested to saue father, mother, brother, sister, friends, benefactors, the liuing and the dead; and all this must be accomplished by the helpe of Christ her sonne. Now by the former prayers, she is made equall with Christ: and by the last, farre aboue him. 1 For she is made the Sauiour, and he the intercessor: which I gather out of these wordes, 2(ipso auxiliante, by the helpe of our Lord Iesus Christ) for by these wordes and the rest aforegoing, 3 the Vir­gin Mary doth saue vs, 4 and Christ is but the Instru­ment that helpeth her: in the worke of our saluation. Which, what intollerable blasphemie it is, let the reader iudge.

For the complement of this present subiect, let the Reader obserue seriously with mee, what a famous Do­minican Frier Iacobus [...] V [...]ragine hath divulged to the whole world in this behalfe. These are his expresse words: ‘Quidam sancti adiuvant in principio tentationis, quidamin medio, quidam in fine, sed B. Maria semper adiuvat; & in principio, dando Vonstantiam: & in medio, dando perseverantiam: & in fine, dan­do gloriosam coronam. Iacob. de vorag. in assumpt. B. virg. serm▪ 4. Englished thus. ‘Some Saints doe helpe in the beginning of temtation, some in the midst, some in the end. But blessed Mary doth helpe at all times: both in the beginng, while she giueth constan­cie, and in the middest, while she giueth perseuerance, and in the end, while she giueth the crowne of glorie.’

[Page 75]Againe, in an other place, he hath these wordes,Vbi supra. serm. 5. ‘Nos au­tem debemus reginae caeli sacrificare corpora nostra, per mortifica­tionem vitiorum: sequitur, vnde legitur in vita. B. Dominici, quod cum christus contra mundum duram sententiam proferre vellet, occurrit mater Christi gloriosa▪ & dixit: bone fili, non secundum [...]orum maliciam, sed secundum tuam misericordiam agere de­bes.’ Englished thus. ‘But wee must sacrifice our bodies in mortifying our fleshly desires, vnto (the blessed Virgin) the Queene of heauen. Wherefore wee reade in the life of Saint Domi­nick, that when Christ was resolued to pronounce an hard sentence against the worlde, then his glorious mother came vnto him, and saide. O my good sonne, thou must not doe according to their malice, but after thine owne mer­cie.O intollerable blasphemy,

In an other place, the same learned Fryer and professor of Diuinitie, hath these expresse words: ‘Animas nostras sem­per custodit, haec. n. est illa gallina, de qua dicitur Mat. 23. quae pul­los suos custodit sub alis suae pietatis, ab insidijs daemonum.’ Englished thus. ‘She alwaies keepeth our soules. For she is that Henne, whereof mention is made in Matthew: which keepeth her Chickings vnder the wings of her pietie, from the snares of the diuell,’ in another place thus;Vbi. supra serm. 7. fol. 2.17. ‘Virgo autem Maria est thronus misericordiae gratiae, & gloria est. n. thronus misericor­diae peccatoribus: gratiae iustis, & gloriae beatis.’ Englished thus. ‘But the Virgin Mary is the throne of mercie, of grace, and of glory. For she is the throne of mercie vnto sinners, the throne of grace to the iust, and the throne of glory to the saints in heauen.’

[Page 76]In an other place thus:De annuntiat. B. Virgin. sern. 5. ‘Obviat ipsa nobis auxilijs oportu­nis, dando nobis. s. panem gratia, virtutē perseverantiae, & exal­tationem gloriae.’ Englished thus. ‘Shee comes to vs with helpes in conuenient time, giuing vs the bread of grace, the vertue of perseuerance, and the exaltation of glorie.’ Thus writeth this Iacobus de Ʋoragine, who was a famous Thomist, a Dominican Fryer, and a pro­fessor of divinitie. Out of whose doctrine, (which he prea­ched openly in the popish Church to the people,) I gather plainly and euidently, most palpable idolatrie, and intol­lerable blasphemie, inseparably linked and necessarily im­plyed, in popish invocation and adoration of Saints.

1 For first, the blessed Virgin, is invocated and adored of the Papists, (as their owne deere Fryer teacheth vs,) as the giuer of constancie in the beginning of tentation, as the giuer of perseuerance in the midst, and as the giuer of the crowne of glory in the ende.

2 Secondly, the Papists are taught to sacrifice their bodyes to her, as to the Queene of Heauen.

3 Thirdly, they are taught to beleeue, that the Virgin Marie controwleth Christ, telleth him what he ought to doe, and causeth him to alter hi [...] determination in iudge­ment, according to her pleasure.

4 Fourthly, that the Virgin Marie hath the custodie of mens soules, and defendeth them from the snares of the deuill.

5 Fiftly, that shee is the throne of mercie vnto sin­ners, the throne of grace to the iust, and the throne of glory to the elect.

Which things being thus taught, beleeved, and practi­sed by the papists: I see not what remaineth for them to doe, but pull GOD out of his holy throne.

[Page 77]And yet this impious Idolatry and execrable blasphemie, is very currant in the Romish church. For besides that, which is already aleaged out of the Romish church-ser­uice, wherby the same is proued sufficiently; the vsual prac­tise of the papists, especially of the Iesuits, doth euidently confirme the same. The proofe is at hand, because in the ende of their absolution, which they impart to euery one that maketh his auricular confession to them, they adde these words;Polanchus de modo [...]udiē di confessioner. ‘Passio D. N. I. Christi, merita B. Virg. Mariae, & omnium sanctorum, & quicquid boni feceris vel mali susti­nueris, sit tibi in remissionem peccatorum tuorum, in augmentum gratiae, & in praemium vitae aeternae.’ Englished thus. ‘The passion of our Lord Iesus Christ, the merites of the blessed virgin Mary, and of all Saints, be vnto thee for re­mission of thy sinnes, for increase of grace, and for the re­ward of eternall life.’ Behold here, the daily practise of the Romish church. For first, we see the merits of Saints ioy­ned as a fellow-commissioner, too and with the holy pas­sion of our Lord Iesus. Then, we see remission of sinnes and eternall glory, ascribed not onely to the merites of the blessed virgin Mary, (whom I honour and reuerence in mine heart, as the dearest childe of God, and most blessed Saint in heauen) but also to the merits of all Saints. Yet not onely the blessed virgin, but God himselfe is by this means, most highly dishonoured, his holy name blasphemed, and his proper glory giuen to his creatures. And for this ende did the most blessed virgin, make this answere to the An­gell; Behold the seruant of the Lorde; be it vnto me, accor­ding to thy word.Luke 1. cap. ver. 38. Ibid ver. 4 [...]. And this vnto her cozen Saint Elizabeth; My soule doth magnifie the Lord, and my spirit reioyceth in God my sauiour. Alas, alas, how hath the Romish church seduced and bewitched vs?

Pantòte dòxa tô Theô.


A Table, containing the principall con­tents of all the Chapters.

  • CAp. 1. of the originall of popish primacie.
  • Cap. 2. of the meanes of aspiring to the same:
  • Cap. 3. of kissing the Popes feete.
  • Cap. 4. of power ascribed to the pope.
  • Cap. 5. of the antiquitie of popish pardons.
  • Cap. 6. of popish dispensations.
  • Cap. 7. of popish auricular confession.
  • Cap. 8. of Priests marriage.
  • Cap. 9. of popish vnwritten traditions,
  • Cap. 10. of the popes manners.
  • Cap. 11. of the Popes tyranny.
  • Cap. 12. of the abhomination of popish proceeding.
  • Cap. 13. of popish purgatory, and of a challenge withall to all the papistes.
  • Cap. 14. of the popes double person.
  • Cap. 15. of popish generall councels.
  • Cap. 16. of popish succession, &c.
  • Cap. 17. of popish excommunications.
  • Cap. 18. of popish images and reliques.
  • Cap. 19. of popish inuocation of saints.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.