CHAPTER I. This Chapter tendeth to resolue all men, that notwith­standing both Protestants and Papists professe but one God, one Faith, one Baptisme, and one Lord Ie­sus Christ, that yet there is so great a difference in the manner of their profession, that it is not possible that they should be combined and conioyned together to make one and the same true Church of Christ.

1 IT hath beene imagined (Christian Reader) that for­asmuch as the Papists and wee professe one and the same God, &c. there might well be an vnion betweene vs and them, to make one and the same Vniuersall Church: but I trust through the helpe of Gods spirit, it shall be made manifest to the whole Church of God, that it is no more possible, then by mixing with the puritie of the Gospell, the Abomination of desolation, (by which Saint Hierome saith, Hierome in his booke vpon th [...] 24. of Saint Matth. w. We may vnderstand all manner of peruerse and [Page 2]false doctrine,) there can bee made one and the same true Christian Religion. True it is, that many notable Heretikes of former times, haue professed one and the same God with the Church; and as Saint Chrysostome saith, Chrysostome of the Worke vp­on Matth. Had got­ten the notes and markes of the true Church, to wit (sayth he) Churches, the Scriptures of God, Bishops, and other orders of Clarkes, and likewise Baptisme, and the Sacrament of Thankes­giuing: and to conclude, Christ himselfe: but yet (as he shew­eth) that the true Church of Christ, would not admit them into the fellowship thereof, nor take them for true mem­bers of the same: The reason was, for that with their pro­fession, they mingled such erronious opinions of God, as made him no God, according to that which Saint Hilary saith, Hilary in Ps. 1. To deuise fancies of God, is as horrible as to say there is no God.

2 For wee beleeue and professe but one diuine God, ac­cording to Deuter. 4.35. and one mediatour betweene God and man, Euen the man Christ Iesus; according to Saint Paul, 1. Tim. 2.5. The Papists professe that the Lord he is God, but not God onely; and that Christ is mediatour, but neither wholly nor only, as this first Chapter shall plainly demon­strate from their owne Doctors; for one writeth thus, Fel. in cap. ego N. de iureiur. The Pope hath the place vpon earth, not of a pure man, but of a true God. The Bishop of Aeix saith, Contr Bassinet. vt Hist. Gallica. Our holy Father the Pope, is an vndoubted and true God on earth. In their Extrauagants, he is termed, Extra coment. in glossa. Our Lord God the Pope: besides, their Councell of Trident Trident. in sex­to de lect. decreed him to be God. In the Councell of Late­raine, one saluted the Pope with this title; Latr. sess. 4. Thou art ano­ther God on earth; which the Pope accepted as his due: e­uen as Pope Nicholas seeking authority whereby he might claime that dignitie, found these words treasured vp in the Popes Library: Nicholas Dist. 96. satis euiden­ter. It is well knowne that the Pope, of the godly Prince Constantine, was called God. To which words Augu­stine Steuche (the keeper of the Popes Librarie) added, Steuche libr. Donat. Constant. pag. 141. Dost thou not heare that the highest Bishop was called of Constantine, God, and that he was taken for God, and worshipped as God with diuine honour? Whereby it plainely appeareth, that this title is not giuen him of flatterers, against his will; neyther fell [Page 3]it out of their fingers, rashly, or by chance, but with good consideration: and therefore they ascribe also vnto him the great power and authority, not of a terrestiall God, but euen of a celestiall, and that in foure respects.

3 First, in graunting to him as large commaund as to God himselfe; for thus they write, Extrauag. De translat-Episcopi Quinto Hostin. Sinne excepted, the Pope in a manner may doe all that God may doe. Againe, Counsel. Lat. Leo. 10. In the Pope there is all manner of power aboue all power, as well of hea­uen as of earth. Also Extrauag. De Constitu. lib. Statuta. The Pope hath power ouer the Angells both good and bad. And Agrippa de vanitat. Scient. The Pope hath power to command the Angells, and hath power ouer the dead. Againe, Baldus in li. Barbarius, De officio praetoris. The Pope is all, and aboue all. Furthermore, L. Sacrilegij c. de crim. sacril. ind. c. Ecclesia. vt tit. pend. It is sacriledge to doubt of the Popes power,* for he is the cause of causes, therefore we must make no question about his power, seeing there is no cause of the first cause. Lastly, In Bull. Clem. 6. & in Ant. Flo. The Pope hath so great power both in Purgatory and also in hell, that he may deliuer by his Indulgences, & place in the heauen and habitation of the blessed, as many Soules as he will. So that in his power of commaunding, hee is made equall with God, as if hee might be bold to say with our Sauiour, Matth. 28. All power is giuen to me in heauen and in earth.

4 Secondly, they match him with God, in giuing him priuiledge and exemption from all censure, saying, Dist. Satis lib. Don. Constant. pag. 141. The Pope cannot at all be eyther bound or loosed by the Secular power, who as appeareth euidently, was called of the most godly Prince Constantine, God, seeing it is manifest God cannot bee iudged of men. Another saith, Baldus in c. Ec­cles. vt tit. pend. The Pope may doe all things aboue Law, contrary to Law, and without Law. Moreouer, Bonis. Distinct. 40. Si Papa. If the Pope be found to neglect the saluation of his brethren, vnprofitable, and slacke in his office, silent in that which is good, hurtfull to him­selfe and all others: yea though hee leade with him innumerable soules by heapes to the diuell of hell, yet may no mortall man finde fault with him, or presume to reprooue him for so doing: For as an­other saith, C. inter in cor­por. de translat. Praela. car. Paris in conc. 63. num 162. vol. 4. Those things hee doth, hee doth them as God. So that they say little lesse of him, then what Saint Paul Rom. 9. saith of God. Who art thou that pleadest against God? Or that which Iob saith of God. chap. 9. Who shall say vnto him, What dost thou?

5 Thirdly, in authorising his Decrees equall with Gods, [Page 4]saying thus; Alexander to Philip King of France. That which the Pope doth, is to be receiued as Canonicall. Againe, Adrian caus. 25. q [...]st. i.q. genera [...]. It is not lawfull to adde or diminish any thing the Pope hath done. Also Ibidem. Whosoeuer shall violate or break the Popes Decrees. shall be accursed. Againe, Ibidem. Who so offendeth in breaking the Popes Lawes, shall neuer be forgiuen. And last­ly, Her [...]ans de po­ [...] papa cap. 23. The Pope is by power and vertue the whole Church; wee may not swarue from his iudgement, neyther to the right hand, nor to the left. Iara in Deut. cap. 17. Though hee tell thee that thy right hand is thy left; or that thy left hand is thy right hand, such a sentence must bee held for good. Thus are his Lawes (in their account) like those of which Christ speaketh in the Gospell, Matthew 5. Whosoeuer shall breake one of these least commaundements, and teach men so, hee shall bee called the least in the Kingdome of Heauen.

6 Fourthly, in subiecting Gods word and holy Scrip­tures vnto his censure, as thus; Summa An­gelan Dist. Pap. The Pope may dispence for any Commaundement of the Old or New Testament; 6. q. 1. Qui­cunque. in glossa. The Popes priuiledges may be graunted against the Lawe of God: Nicola Cusan. ad Bohaemos. epist. 2. There be no commaundements of Christ in the Gospell, but such onely as are taken and holden by the Church: Syluester Prie­rias contra Lu­therium. The doctrine of the Scriptures take their force and authority of the Pope and his doctrine: Ibidem. The authority of the Church of Rome, and of the Popes, is aboue the authority of the Scriptures. Lastly, Pighnus in con­tro. De Ecclesia. The Scriptures are a nose of waxe, a dead letter, and dumbe Iud­ges: Whereupon another sayth; John Maria verracties. Edi­tius est. Anno 1561. Wee most humbly confesse, that the authority of the Church is aboue the authority of the Gospell.

7 So that by all these testimonies out of the mouthes of their grauest Writers, wee see plainely, that the Romish church holdeth and esteemeth the Pope to be, not a terre­stiall Good, but rather a celestiall God: For in that they will haue him called God in a diuine sense, and taken, not for a pure man, but for a true God: and will haue him to be worshipped with diuine honours as God: and to haue power in heauen, earth and hell; ouer Angells, Diuells and men: and to be able to deliuer from hell, and to giue the kingdome of heauen; and free him from all censure and controlement of any, and make his Decrees, not onely [Page 5]equall with Gods, but aboue them; they will haue him to bee a celestiall god, euen in the highest degree. For it is cleare, that his Lawes and decrees that are the most highest aboue all lawes and decrees, is the most highest aboue all gods. And heerein they prooue him to be indeede, that great Antichrist, The man of sinne, mentioned by Saint Paul, 2 Thes. 2. 2. Thessal. 2. That should sit as God in the temple of God, shewing himselfe that hee is God, and exalting himselfe aboue all that is called God, or that is worshipped. That is, not onely aboue all Princes and Maiestrates, (which in some sense are called Gods) but aboue the three persons, vnto whom all diuine worship and honour is only due, and so we may conclude; but they say no, and who then shall be Iudge betweene vs? that shall these sixe vnpartiall Iudges; Ioacham Abbas, Iraeneus, Anselmus, Saint Hierome, Gregory the Great, and Erasmus. Ioacham saith, Joacham Ab­bas. Hee it is that exalteth himselfe a­boue all that is called God, or that is worshipped, which is called Holy Lord and most Holy Pope. Iraeneus sayth, Iraeneus lib. 5. lest chapter saue one. Antichrist, notwithstanding he be but a slaue, yet he will be worshipped as if he were God, and proclaimed as a King. Anselmus sayth, Anselmus. 2. Thessal. 2, An­tichrist shall faine himselfe to be holy, that hee may deceiue men vnder the colour of holinesse: Yea, and hee shall call himselfe God, and shall cause himselfe to be worshipped, and shall promise the Kingdome of heauen. Saint Hierome sayth, Hierom. in Zachar. 11. This shepheard is so wicked, that hee is not called a worshipper of Idols, but an Idol it selfe, because he calleth himselfe God, and will be wor­shipped of all men. Gregory the Great sayth, Gregory in his 25. booke vpon the 34. & 14. chapter of Iob. Whereas hee is a damned man, and not a spirit, liuing, he faineth himselfe to be God. To conclude, Erasmus sayth thus of the Pope; Erasmus vp­on the 16. hap. of the R [...]u. lat. 2. Sect. That beast at Rome of whom we spake before, is the very right Anti­christ, which worketh against the Gospell of Christ. And yet for a more full resolution, that the Pope is the same great An­tichrist which Saint Paul calleth, The man of sinne, and sonne of perdition, that should exalt himselfe aboue God: their Saint Hildigard, a Nunne, Hildig. in her third [...]ook, the 11. Vision. giueth the Pope these very same titles. The man of sinne, and sonne of perdition. And their proph [...] Paracelsus in his twelft figured Prediction, directed to the Pope, prooueth him also to be the same: For (saith [...]e) [Page 6] Paras. 12. Prediction. Thou hast lifted thyselfe on high. And a little after, Thou hast exalted thy selfe aboue God, and he shall returne vnto thee the re­ward thou hast sought. Now then, whereas some haue doub­ted whether the Pope be that great Antichrist; (for that the great Antichrist should come vnto such an exceeding great height of pride and vaine-glory, as that none before him could, neyther after him should euer possibly attaine vnto) heere, by this plaine demonstration, they may bee resolued: for that they find not any-where in all the Scrip­tures, nor by any auntient Writers, that any man, nay that Lucifer himselfe, euer aspired to mount vp to that great height of dignitie, as they see here the Pope hath done. And therefore it is, which their Saint Bridgit in the person of Christ, sayth thus to the Pope, Bridget in her first booke, 41. chap. Thou art worse then Luci­fer. Wherefore, to professe one God after this Antichristi­an manner; namely to haue the Pope, and euery Pope in his time and place to be, Not a pure man, but a true God. To be the cause of causes, and consequently an eternall God. To haue power to fetch out of hell as many soules as he will, and place them in heauen, and consequently to be an almightie God. To haue power ouer the Angels in heauen; and his Lawes and Decrees aboue the Lawes and Decrees of God: and to be said of him, The Pope is all, and aboue all; and conse­quently the highest God of all; is as Saint Hilary sayth, Hilar. in Psa. 1. To deuise fancies of God, and as horrible as to say, there is no God: and doubtlesse, as in plaine and expresse termes, to deny God: For it is cleare, that if there be any more celestiall Gods then one, there is iust none at all. And thus much to shew how little the Papists agree with the Protestants in the profession of one God; now let vs see how they doe agree in the profession of one Sauiour and Mediator Iesus Christ.

8 VVe Protestants professe (as is sayd) one onely Sa­uiour and Mediatour both of redemption and intercession, euen Christ Iesus. Diuers of the Popish writers seeme to holde the letter of the Scriptures, that there is none other name whereby we are saued, but onely by this name Iesus. But as Saint Hilary foretold of Antichrist, ^s that Hee should be contrary to Christ, vnder a colour of preaching the Gospell, so [Page 7]that our Lord Iesus Christ shall then be denyed, when a man would thinke he were preached: Euen so falleth it out with the Romish profession, whereby hee is as plainely denyed, as he was of the false Apostles in the time of Saint Paul, who taught Christ to be the Sauiour, but not truely: partly, by denying some vertue of his passion, and partly coupling others with him as fellow-Sauiours, in like manner as the Popish writers doe. For they distinguishing sinnes into ori­ginall and actuall, hold, and write, Thó. of Aquin. de Venerabil. sacra. Alter cap. 1. & Catharinus De Jn [...]ruento sacri­ficio Noui. that Christ saued one­ly from the guilt of originall sinne; that is, of that one trans­gression of Adam, which we our selues neuer committed in act, and left vs guilty of all our transgressions, which through our whole life we commit: which is as much as if one had payed a penny for his friend, which lay in prison for more then he was euer able to pay.

9 The holy Apostles Saint Paul and Saint Iohn (vnpar­tiall Iudges in this question) teach otherwise. Rom. 5.16. Paul in the 5. to the Romaines, sayth plainely, that Adams transgression was one, and spread ouer all, to condemnation, but the gift of God through Christ, is in iustification of many offences vnto life eter­nall. And vnto Titus thus he writeth: Tit. 2. vers. 14. Christ gaue himselfe for vs that he might redeeme vs (not from originall sinne on­ly, but) from all iniquitie. And so Saint Iohn: 1. Iohn 1.7. The bloud of Iesus Christ cleanseth vs from all sinne. By which it is most euident, that the Romish Doctors are worthy to bee ac­counted among the false Apostles; which for their world­ly gaine, and filling their bellies, avowe in writing, Card. Allen. in Fulk. pag. 154. That by the great wisedome of God, the power of Christs death was limited, and full power left to the Church and principall Pa­stours thereof to release sinne: and that Ibidem. the death of Christ doth not discharge vs of satisfaction for our owne sins, and of pro­curing our owne saluation by good workes. Hereupon they haue found out, and doe openly professe many Sauiours for actuall sinnes, whose number may bee reduced into fiue heads.

10 The first is of the Saints, whereof some are truely Saints, but abused by them, and set vp to be Sauiours, o­thers are counterfeit, and of their owne canonizing; of [Page 8]whom we may well doubt, whether they themselues be sa­ued or no, seeing Pope Gelasius sayth; Gela. in the 2. Canon de co [...]secra. dist. 1. cap. Placu. Churches are built in their names, who for ought I can learne, were not altogether good and faithfull men. Of the true Saints, they haue specially abused the blessed Virgine, whom they thus extoll; Lipomanus pag. 289. Be­hold, how mighty is the Mother of God, and how no man can be saued but by her. Againe, z O happy Mother, which doest purge vs from our sinnes. Yea more abusedly; a Wee must flee from the court of Gods iustice, to the court of his Mothers mer­cie: For no mercie commeth from heauen to the earth, but what passeth through the hands of Mary: shee is the mediatour of our saluation, iustification, reconciliation, and participation. Againe, In a prayer. Thou art the mediatour of God and man. Also, In a prayer. Our hope and trust is in thee, O blessed Virgine Mary, defend vs euerla­stingly. And againe, d Thou art the Lady of Angells, thou art the Queene of heauen, commaund thy sonne, shew thy selfe to be a Mother. To conclude, the Scriptures and Prophecies spoken of Christ, are by them applyed vnto her. e Come vnto me all yee that are weary and laden, & I will ease you, Math. 11. I am the doore, Iohn 10. &c. The rest of the Saints are lesse mentioned, or not so often in their Liturgies, but no lesse extolled. In Liturgie. They call Mary Magdalen, The purchaser of their saluation. They say, In a prayer. By Saint Swithen our sinnes are done away. And of the whole multitude in generall, how they beleeue, it appeareth in their Masse booke; first, where they pray In the Masse booke. That by the merits of all Saints they may receiue remission of sinnes. Secondly, in their Iesus psalter, where they desire the Patriarkes, Prophets, Apostles, Euangelists, Martyrs, Confessours, Virgines, Widdowes, Matrons and Innocents to offer them their merits. And that by the merits and interces­sion of Peter, Paul, Iohn, Augustine, Anne, Katherine, Bar­bara, and all other Saints that hath bin, or yet are to come, they may obtaine Gods mercie.

11 Concerning their new coyned Saints, Founders of certaine Sects among them, Augustine, Dominicke, Francis, Becket, Swithen, and others, they write so honourably of them, pray so confidently vnto them, extoll them with such prayses, and seeme to beleeue so certainely in them, [Page 9]that not onely all the other Saints, but euen Christ him­selfe, seemeth to giue place to these: and these mens rules and orders be preferred aboue the Gospell. Dominike, say they, Anth. bishop of Florence in hi [...]. Par. 3. tit. 23. & 24. shead his bloud daily, both for those that were conuer­sant in earth, and for those that are in Purgatory: and there­fore it is that they also say, their church singeth thus of Dominike, Pag 187. O wonderfull hope that thou hast giuen. Of Fran­ces thus, Conformities Frances, whom typicall Iesus wee call, the Captaine and Ruler of Minorities all, graunt vs in heauen places perpe­tuall. And they say, that whereas Christ endured the tor­ment of nayles in hands and feete but a few houres, hee en­dured nailes in his hands and feete for vs, full two yeares. Of Becket thus, Becket in a prayer booke. By the blood of Thomas, which for thee he did spend, make vs, O Christ, to climbe whither Thomas did ascend. Of Swithen they say, In Liturgy. By him our sinnes are done away.

12 Thus doe they make many mediatours of Redemp­tion, vnto whom may be added their faith in the Pope and his pardons: For he whosoeuer for the time being, is in the second ranke or order, of whom they write and beleeue that he is a Sauiour: as Simon Begnius, Bishop of Modrusia, sayd thus to Pope Leo, Concil. Later. Sect. 6. pag. 601. O blessed Leo, we haue looked for thee to be our Sauiour. Neither is this pressed vpon him, but wil­lingly receiued as his due, as may appeare in that the Pope himselfe suffered the Ambassador of Cicilia to lie prostrate on the ground before him, and to pray, Paulus Aemi­lius lib. 7. O thou that ta­kest away the sinnes of the world, haue mercy vpon vs; Thou that takest away the sinnes of the world, giue vs peace. And to proue that the Pope is of sufficient power to saue, an other wri­teth thus, Bull of Cle­ment the 6. and Anthon. of Fle [...]. The Pope hath so great power, both in Purgatory, and also in Hell, that hee may deliuer by his Indulgences, and place in heauen, as many soules as he will. Thus they avowe, not onely, that euery soule must be saued vnder the Pope, but, that the Pope must be their Sauiour: Neither hee him­selfe alone, but those also that he will authorize. For as one saith, Cardinall. Al­len in Fulby an­swere to a false catholike. p. 71. The chiefe and principall Pastors, by their soueraigne au­thority, may wholly discharge offenders from all paines to come. And yet further, that Christ might bee quite shut out, and there might be many Aberrations, they haue set vp for Me­diatours [Page 10]and helpers vnto saluation, Images, prayers to Ima­ges, Dirges, Almes-deedes and Purgatory. Vnto the Image of the Crosse, thus they pray, In a prayer booke. All haile, O Crosse, our one­ly hope in this time of thy passion, in faithfull people grace increase, and graunt of sinne remission.

13 Also, notwithstanding hee whom they faine to be their Founder, 1. Pet. 1.18. Saint Peter, sayth: Wee are not redeemed with corruptible things, as siluer and gold, but with the pretious blood of Christ: Directly contrary, they teach and say; Allen in Fulke pa. 202. & 174. By almes we may redeeme our sinnes, and theirs that are in Purgatory also. And againe, In th [...] same booke. pa. 239. Good workes cleanseth before hand, deliuereth. the soule from death, and lifteth it vp to eternall life. And lastly, Ibidem. Regard not the iangler, that will say good works do not purge sin, and winne heauen.

14 Last of all, to the intent that we should finde more sufficiencie else-where then in Christ, they further write,Allen in Fulke pag. 202. The Sacrifices done by vs that are aliue, do wipe away the sins of those that be dead. Againe, The Popish Doctors. The sacrifice of the Masse, doth take away the sinnes of the quicke and dead. And againe, Allen in Fulke 92. Pur­gatory paynes doth not onely serue Gods iustice for the punishment of sinne, but also cleanseth and quallifieth the soule of man defiled. Moreouer, Allen pag. 133 In Purgatory we must be holden from life and li­bertie, till we haue payed the vtmost farthing, the toleration of which bonds shall recompence the debt. And to knit vp all in a word: to the Image of Christ, they haue intituled a pray­er, beginning thus, In a prayer booke. O Maker of heauen and earth, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords: which of nothing diddest make mee to thine owne similitude and likenesse, and diddest redeeme mee with thy owne bloud, whom I a sinner am not worthy to call vpon: I desire thee, &c. And so forwards for all things needefull both for soule and body.

15 Wherefore then, if the doctrine of the Church of Rome be true, namely, that Christ, by his death and bloud­shedding, saued vs but from the guilt of that one sinne of Adam, and that wee are saued from the malediction of the multitude of all our transgressions, by the Popes and their principall Pastours, and by the infinite number of true and false Saints, and so many names of other means: How [Page 11]doe they truely hold that which Saint Peter saith, Acts 4.12. Acts 4.12. That among men there is giuen none other name vnder hea­uen, whereby we must be saued, but onely by the name of Iesus? Or which the Prophet Esay in the person of Christ saith, 63.3. Esay 63.3. I haue troden the Wine-presse alone, and of all people there is none with me? Or if Christ cannot, or doth not saue with­out all other, or other helpes, why then said the Authour to the Hebrews, 1.3. Hee hath purged our sinnes by himselfe? Hebr. 1.3. Acts 13.39. Or why said Saint Paul thus of Christ? Acts 13.39. By him, euery one that beleeueth, is iustified. Or, why did the An­gell commaund the Virgine to call her Sonne, Iesus, but because as he said, Math. 1.21. Matth. 1.21. He should saue his people from their sinnes? If he, then he alone, and why then should wee seeke for so many he, and she Sauiours? Wherefore, how­soeuer they seeme in the outward letter of the Scriptures, to confesse Christ to be the onely Sauiour; yet wee see it is none otherwise, then they confesse God to bee the onely God; which is, instead of one, to haue many. To conclude, it is a true consequent, that so many Sauiours, so many Christs; so many Christs, so many faiths; so many faiths, so many baptismes: Therefore, whether professing one God, one Lord Iesus Christ, one Faith, and one Baptisme after this Antichristian manner, be to hold the foundation sound, or not soundly and vtterly to ouerthrow the foun­dation, let the Christian Reader iudge, as also, whether there bee so neere a coniunction in our profession, that they and we may be combined and conioyned together, to make one and the same true Church of Christ: as also, whether this be not fully sufficient, to proue the Pope that great Antichrist, foretolde by Saint Hierome, Hierome ad Algasia. Quest. 11. that should sit in the Church, as if hee were Christ the Sauiour. But for asmuch as they deny it, and that the whole Church of Rome, at this day, dependeth vpon Bellarmines iudgement, out of whose workes, as it is verily supposed, Parsons hath published to the view of the world, and deluding of ma­ny, tenne seueral Obiections for the clearing the Pope from being Antichrist: it resteth, that in the next Chapter we an­swere those obiections, that so all doubts may be remoued. [Page 12]And heerein as the originall Authour, I will vse onely the name of Bellarmine. In the meane time, I demaund what hope of comfort we can looke to haue at these Popish Gods and Sauiours, seeing their owne Saint Bridget, whom Boni­face the ninth Pope of that name, canonized, saith, Bridget in her first booke, c. 41 All their followers and fauourers, shal be cut off, dis-ioynted and pulled in pie­ces, like vnto a wall that is a casting downe, where is not left one stone standing vpon an other; neyther shall my loue and mercie euer warme them, nor build them vp againe into eternall mansion. And as we see the question resolued, what will be the end of those that depend vpon these Gods and Sauiors, so shall wee see heereafter what will bee the end of those Gods and Sauiours.

CHAP. II. Contayning tenne seuerall Obiections, for the clearing (if it had beene possible) the Pope from being An­tichrist, set forth vnder the letters N. D. with answeres thereunto.

THou shalt vnderstand (Christian Reader) that whom Saint Iohn in his first Epistle chap. 1 Iohn 2.22. 2. cal­led Antichrists, in the 22. verse hee declared to haue meant certaine Disciples, which were fallen from the fellowship of the Apostles: and others that by their meanes went abroad teaching doctrine, whereby Christ was denyed to be the true Messias. So that because such Antichristian teachers were then crept into the church by whom the great mystery of iniquity was begunne; which when the great Antichrist should come, should be fully per­fected, hee did not sticke to say, but that Antichrist was then come, whereas notwithstanding the great Antichrist was not then come. 2 Thess. 2.7. For as Saint Paul declared to the Thes­salonians, Epist, 2. cha. 2. there was then an impediment that [Page 13]did stay his comming, which said, He shall let till hee be ta­ken out of the way: Which, as Tertullian, Saint Augustine, and Saint Chrysostome expoundeth, was the Roman Emperor; and likewise Saint Hierome in these words: Hierome to Algasia. The Romaine Em­perour, which now keepeth all Nations in subiection, must first be ouerthrowne, and then shall Antichrist come, the fountaine of in­iquity. By which it is cleare, that by Saint Iohns Antichrists, we cannot vnderstand the great Antichrist: therefore the question is, who the great Antichrist should be: we say he is the Pope of Rome, they say he shall be a Iew of Ierusalem: but this is but our yea, and their nay; and how then shall it be tried who is in the right? Bellarmine (supposed) in his Wardword, the answere to Sir Francis Hastings Watchword, page 91.92. hath set downe tenne seuerall Obiections, to prooue him a Iew, which God willing, by these our An­sweres shall be proued a Gentile.

CHAP. III. Tending to resolue all men, that Christian Rome (now in her latter daies) is that Babylon, the seate of Anti­christ, which the Angel in the 17. Chapter of the Re­uelation, calleth the Mother of Whordomes and abo­minations of the Earth: And which the other Angell in the 18. Chapter saith, is falne, and become the ha­bitation of Deuils, the hold of all foule spirits, and cage of euery vncleane and hatefull Bird.

1 WHosoeuer wil diligently pervse the thirteenth Chapter of the Reuelation, Reuela. 13.1, 2. shall euidently perceiue, that Romish Babylon is described by two manner of Beasts; the one corpo­rall, the other spirituall. The corporall Beast is disciphe­red by the similitude of an vgly Monster, beeing in shape like vnto a Leopard, his feet like Beares feete, and his mouth as the mouth of a Lyon. The spirituall Beast is onely said to haue two Hornes like the Lambe. Vnder the first Beast, Verse 11 was our Sauiour Christ, and all his Apostles put to death, as also many thousand Christians after them: and almost all the Bishops of Rome, for the space of neere three hun­dred yeares. This corporall Beast, was Heathenish Rome and Regiment, which the Papists would make the World [Page 40]to beleeue, the Angel in the seauenteenth Chapter onely called Babylon.

2 The first Beast wee see, is set forth in a visible shape, to our corporall eyes; the second, in no shape, therefore to be discerned with spirituall eyes: onely it is said to haue two Hornes like the Lambe: that is to say, to seeme to haue the two Testaments, the Law of God, and Gospel of Christ, to be the onely strength of his Kingdome, and Priesthood, as Christ himselfe had. By which it is certaine, that by this second Beast (so resembling Christ) is meant Christian Rome, and her Regiment. Now the first beast, they confesse was well worthie the name of Babylon; for that it did as well resemble old Babylon, (in tyranny, Idolatrie, and all man­ner of abominations) as if it had beene the verie same: there­fore, if wee can prooue that the second beast, became so liuely to resemble the first beast, as the first beast did the first Babylon, then the case will stand cleare, that the second beast is as well worthie the same name. Now for proofe hereof, what better Author can wee bring, then the Angel himselfe, who of the second beast saith thus, Some of our Writers haue doubted that, because it is said he did all that the first beast did be­fore him, or in his sight: that this cannot be meant of the Popes spirituall Regiment; but the 20. verse of the 19. Chap. will shew them it is. And he did all that the first beast could doe before him, and he caused the Earth, and them that dwelt therein, to worship the first Beast: that is, commaunded all vpon the earth within his Dominions, to lay to their helping hands with him, to bring the Chri­stian state into the first beasts forme and order: and also to bring all the inhabitants, within his iurisdiction, to con­forme themselues in reuerence and humble obedience vnto the same, and so to worship the first beast, in honouring his old Heathenish Ordinances, by which it is without all contradiction: the second beast is no whitlesse worthie the same name.

3 But yet for more plainer proofe, that by the second beast is meant the spirituall Regiment of Christian Rome, let vs heare how Erasmus doth interpret those words of the Angel in the thirteenth Chapter: his words bee these, Erasmus vp­on the 13. Chap. 5. Sect. When as the Roman Kingdome, after the time of Iulianus, be­gan to be diuided into East and West, and to diminish for a sea­son, [Page 41]then began a new Roman Kingdome and iurisdiction, namely, the Popes pompe: And a little after, Jbidem. This Kingdome of the Papists tooke vpon it all the power of the first beast, the Roman Emperour, and compelled the Christians to Idolatrie and seruice of false gods, vnder a pretence of honouring Christ and Saints. By which it is most apparant, that by the second beast is meant the Popish Christian Regiment of Rome. And this is very sufficient for the prouing, that by the two beasts in the thirteenth Chapter, is meant the Heathenish Roman Re­giment, and the Popish Christian Regiment. Now it requi­reth that we proue also, whether by the beast mentioned in the seauenteenth Chapter, which the Angel called, Babylon, the Mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth, bee meant Heathenish Rome, and her Regiment, vnder the Pagan Emperours, or of Christian Rome, and of her Regiment vnder the Popes.

4 Erasmus hauing discoursed at large, of the matters con­tained in the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth Chapters, comming to the seauenteenth Chapter, he saith thus, Erasmus vpon then 7. chap. Sect. 1. One of the seauen Angels, which spake of the second Kingdome, and of the iurisdiction of Rome, and of the beast with two Hornes, commeth now againe, and will speake more plainely. So that he giueth vs to vnderstand, The spirituall beast in the 13. chap. and that in the 17. chap. are one. that the same beast in the thirteenth Chapter, and that in the seuenteenth Chap­ter are both one. Now we heard before, by what suffici­ent arguments hee proued, that by the second beast was meant Christian Rome, and her Regiment; but let vs also see by what inducements he is lead, to affirme, that that beast in the seauenteenth Chapter is the same. The first motiue, I take to bee this; namely, for that the same beast, which the Angel in the fift verse called Babylon, the Mo­ther of whordomes and abominations of the Earth, in the 8. verse, he saw, he had expounded to Iohn to be a Citie; Euident notes to proue Chri­stian Rome Babylon. and in the ninth verse, to be that onely Citie, that compasseth within her seauen speciall Hills; which was sufficient to perswade him, that by the beast in the seauenteenth Chap­ter the Angel meant Rome. Secondly, to induce him to vnderstand, that the Angel meant Christian Rome, he saw [Page 42]the Angel spake of Romes estate in her latter daies: for that so soone as he had declared vnto Iohn, the beast to bee a Citie, and with one and the same breath to adde these words; which raigneth ouer the Kings of the Earth: And al­so, for that he saw him to preuent Iohn before in the twelfth Verse: for vnderstanding them of Kings in his dayes, in saying thus of them: Which yet haue not receiued a kingdome, but shall receiue power at an houre with the beast. As also, for that by these very words, he declared vnto him, that he did not speake of the first beast, because that beast was then in his full power, and raigned ouer both Iewes and Gen­tiles.

5 Thirdly, for that hee saw the Angell had declared vnto Iohn, that those Kings which afterwards should rise vp with the beast, should continue with her to the end of her dayes, and should grow into so great hatred against her, that they should pursue her to her vtter destruction. For as in the twelfth verse, he described those Kings, by the similitude of tenne hornes, so in the sixteenth and seuen­teenth verses, hee said vnto Iohn thus of those hornes: And the tenne Hornes which thou sawest vpon the beast, Reuelat. 17. are they that shall hate the Whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eate her flesh, and burne her with fire, for God hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to doe with one consent, for to giue their kingdome vnto the beast, vntill the words of God be fulfilled. Fourthly, the fourth verse of the seauen­teenth Chapter, inforced him to vnderstand the beast which the Angel there calleth Babylon, the Mother of whordomes and abominations of the Earth, to bee the Christian state of Rome, in her latter daies; for that the Angell there said, Shee offered to the World the abomination and filthinesse of her fornication, in a Golden Cup: that is (as the learned ex­pound it) her idolatries and whorish Doctrine and Religi­on, in the name of Christ: which cup Erasmus declareth, Heathenish Rome, disdayned once to handle, and abhorred what good soeuer was offered to her therein: therefore he could not otherwise vnderstand, but that the Angel meant the Christian Church of Rome, in her latter dayes; which [Page 43]vnder the glittering and golden shew of the name of Christ, poysoned a great part of Christendome, with that whorish filthinesse of her Heathenish Fornication, Reuelat. 17.2. Reuelat. 18.3. and the third verse of the eighteenth Chapter. And thus wee see the foure principall poynts, which fully resolued that most learned Erasmus, and may also as fully resolue all men, that by Babylon, the Mother of whordomes and abomi­nations of the Earth, the Angel meant Christian Rome in her latter dayes. Now let vs heare how Erasmus conclu­deth of Christian Rome; thus he saith.

6 This whorish Woman Erasmus vp­on the 17. chap. Sect. 1. hath decked and garnished her selfe, not like Peter and Paul, with diuers and many vertues, but with Siluer and Gold, and pretious Stones, and Pearles: And the Cup of Gold which she offereth to the World, is not the loue of Christ, the Christian Faith, nor the Law of God, but her owne Decrees and Ordinances, that she may play the Whore at her pleasure, with pompe, authoritie, and lust, without all shame or feare, beyond all measure, and all vnder the pretence and name of Christ. Againe, he saith, Erasmus vp­on the 16. chap. Sect. 3. The whole order of Bishops and multitude of Spirituaell Pastours, which by their office and calling, ought to maintaine and support the true Doctrine of God, haue bent themselues, their whole life and state, vtterly a­gainst the Doctrine of the Gospell, that nothing can bee more vn­like the state of the Apostles, in doctrine, religion, or life, then is their order and state. Againe, he saith, Erasmus vpon the 16. chap. Sect. 2. This second beast with his two hornes, is twice as had as the first; for as much as through her two hornes, it had power both of bodie and soule, ouer the Doctrine, and ouer the politique Lawes, with mouth and hand against God, the temporall gouernement, Christ and his Ministers. And againe he saith, Erasmus vpon the 27. chap. Sect. 1. The bloud of the holy Prophets, and Preachers, hath this Whore (the Papacie) shed without measure, till she was so drunke therewith, that shee tooke and esteemed her tyrannie for godly zeale. Therefore he con­cludeth with the very head of the Romish Church thus, Erasmas in the words go­ing before. For the name of the Christian Church, he hath deserued ano­nother name, euen to be called the Whore of Babylon, the Mo­ther of all abominations, idolatrie, and of falling into Heathenish [Page 44]superstition. And thus (Christian Reader) thou seest most apparantly proued, that by Babylon is meant the Christian Church of Rome, now in her latter dayes. Now let vs in­treat a little of the fall of Babylon, for that will make this matter yet more apparant.

7 This Angel in the seauenteenth Chapter hauing fini­shed his testimonie touching spirituall Babylon; Saint Iohn in the beginning of the eighteenth Chapter saith thus: And after these things, [...]euelat. 18.3. I saw another Angel come downe from heauen, hauing great power, so that the Earth was lightened with his glorie, and he cryed out mightely with a loud voyce, saying: It is falne, it is falne, Babylon the great Citie, and is become the ha­bitation of Diuels, and the hold of all foule spirits, and a cage of e­uery vncleane and hatefull Bird: for all Nations haue drunke of of the Wine of the wrath of her Fornication, and the Kings of the Earth haue committed Fornication with her. Now wee heard before by the other Angel, that Christian Rome is Babylon, therefore if this also be spoken of Christian Rome, then is Christian Rome so wonderfully falne, as that she may right­ly be called Babylon. And that it may appeare indeed, that this Angel did also speake of Christian Rome, let vs heare how Erasmus doth interpret his words, thus hee saith, Erasmus vpon the 18. chap. Sect. 1. This is spoken principally against the second Regiment of Rome, which vnder the pretence of the name of Christ, hath delt so re­belliously against all faithfull Christians. And a little after, Jbidem. Now is it knowne, that shee hath beene an Habitation for the wicked, vnfaithfull, and filthie Sodomites. And againe, Erasmus vpon the 18. chap. Sect. 3. With this Babylon haue Princes and Prelates, yea whole Kingdomes committed Whordomes. So that by this wee see most appa­rantly, that the same which is here spoken, touching the wonderfull great fall of Babylon, is spoken of Christian Rome.

8 True it is that some do vnderstand this to be meant of the fall of the first beasts power, the Heathenish Empire, which was ouerthrowne by Constantine the Emperour, when hee was conuerted to Christianitie, about three hundred yeares after Christ: but this cannot bee, for by Constan­tines meanes, the Romaines became Christians; therefore, [Page 45]if wee should vnderstand it of that time, and state, wee should vnderstand that the Angell called Rome Babylon, and the habitation of diuells, in respect that it was wholly become the habitation of Christians: and that the Christi­ans were those diuels, foule spirits, vncleane and hatefull birds; which were most ridiculous so to say. Againe, those words of the Text, which say, And is become, im­porteth a time when shee was not so, which could not be meant of that time when she was Impious and Pagan, for then she was no better; but of a time after, when she was risen and fallen. And that it may appeare, Rome risen and fallen. that Christian Rome (vnder the Popes) did so fall, as that shee became this hellish habitation, none can make it more of credite, nor more apparent, then the Romanists themselues haue done, as wee shall now see by these their owne testimonies following.

9 Their Bernard (which liued almost a thousand yeres after Heathenish Romes dayes) writing of the state and man­ner of the Romans (in his dayes) sayth thus, Bernardinus de considerat. ad Eugenium lib. 4. The Ro­maines are wise to doe euill, good they know not how to doe: they are irreligious towards God, presumptuous against holy things, they be Wolues, not Sheepe. And a little after, speaking of the Pope, and of his spirituall Pastours, hee saith, Jbid. Of such art thou Shepheard, if I durst speake all, they be rather the pastours of deuils, then of sheepe. And againe, complain­ing of the diue [...]lishnesse of his time, and the ripenesse of the Church of Antichrist, among the Romaines, he sayth further thus, Bern. Serm. 6. in Psal. 91. It onely remayneth that the man of sinne be re­uealed, the sonne of perdition, a diuell, not onely of the day, but also of the noon-day. Likewise their Writer Holcote, com­playning of the Romish Priests and Prelates in his dayes, sayth, Holcot in lib. Sapientiae lectro 182. They bee like the priests of Baall, they resemble the priests of Dagon, they are the priests of Priapus, and Angels of hell. So then heereby wee see, that the Pope and his Pre­lates, are the chiefe of those diuells, of whom the Angell sayth, Rome is become the habitation. Now let vs see also who be those foule spirits, vncleane and hatefull birds.

10 Their Writer Auentine sayth, Auent. analiū Boierum. lib. 6. I am ashamed to [Page 46]say what manner of Bishops wee haue; with the reuenues of the poore, they feed horses, hounds, I neede not to say whoores. Saint Bernard sayth, Bernard. sup, Cant. serm. 33. Sermo ad Cle­rum, &c. It is a shame to name those things which our Bishops doe in secret. Their Mantuan sayth, Mantuan. Ca­lamitatum. lib. 3 It is in euery mans mouth, Cities and Countries talke of it, and the very bruite thereof hath quenched all care of vertue. Also their Bishop Cornelius sayth, Oratio Cornelij Epist. Bitonti. 3. With what monsters of filthinesse, with what channell of vncleannesse, with what pestiferous contagion, are not both priests and people defiled, make your selues Iudges, and beginne at the Sanctuary of God. Also their Palingenius saith, Paling. Mar­cell. Paling. Zodiaci vita lib. 5. in Leon. Let no Frier, Monke, or any other Priest come within thy dores: take heede of them, no greater mischiefe, they are the dregges of men, the fountaines of Folly, the sinkes of sinne, Wolues vnder Lambes skinnes, deceiuing the simple with a false shew of honesty: and vnder the shaddow of Religion, hide a thousand of vnlawfull acts: Jdem lib. 6. in Virgine. Idem lib. 9. Sa­gittario. committers of Rapes, abusers of boyes: the Priests and Monkes that should be chaste, spend night and day, eyther openly with whoores, or closely with boyes. O shame (sayth hee) can the Church endure such hogges? Whereupon their Platine saith, Platine vita Marcellini. What shall we thinke will become of this our age, wher­in our vices are growne to that height, that they haue scant left a­ny place with God for mercy; how great is the lechery of all sortes among the priests, and especially among the chiefe Rulers? To conclude, Mantuan giueth the definitiue Sentence, and plainely affirmeth, that they of the Church of Rome, are onely those foule spirits, vncleane and hatefull birds: for sayth hee, Mantu. Cala­mitatum. lib. 3. They are hatefull to heauen, and loathsome with vncleane lusts; alas, in vaine attempt they sacred rites with ince­stuous hands, they rather kindle and prouoke God, then appease him: Therefore sayth he againe, Jbid. Neuer hope for helpe, so long as such pray for you. And thus as wee sawe proued be­fore, by their owne testimonies, who were those diuells; so heere also we see as plainely proued by their owne Wri­ters, who bee those foule spirits, vncleane and hatefull birds, whereof Rome and her regiment in her latter dayes, is become the habitation. And thus much for the prouing, that by the fall of Babylon, is meant the great fall of the Christian Church of Rome, vnder the Popes of Rome. Now [Page 47]let vs see the time when shee beganne to fall, and her full perfection whereunto she fell.

11 Touching the first point, Tertullian seemeth to be the first that maketh any mention thereof, (hee liued about two hundred yeares after Christ) who then bewayling the declined estate of the Christian part of Rome, thus exclai­med against it, Tertull. in A­pologitico. O Rome, how much art thou changed from olde Rome? thou which wast once the chiefe in all the World, art now become the chiefe in all naughtinesse. Also, about one age after that, Saint Hierome perceiuing how she beganne to be corrupted in doctrine, thus exclaimed against her, Hierom. idem aduersus Jouia­num lib. 2. Was there (sayth hee) none other place in all the World to re­ceiue this voluptuous doctrine, but that which Peters preach­ing had built on the Rocke Christ? Againe, hee sayd to the maintainers of this doctrine, To Pamma­chius. Thou that art a maintainer of this new doctrine, spare thy Romaine eares, spare thy faith which is so commended by the Apostles owne mouth; to this day the Christian world hath euer beene without this doctrine. And agayne hee sayth, Jdem praefact. in lib. Dydimi de spiritu sancte. Whiles I stayed at Babylon, and was an inhabitant of that purple whoore, and liued among the Romaines, Beholde, the pot which was seene in Ieremie, from the North beganne to seethe; and the Senate of Pharises, made an vproare: and the whole faction of rude and ignorant, as it were in defiance of learning conspired against me. Furthermore, hee crying out against the idolatry which was then crept into the Church, and also against the Idole-makers, saith: In his 11. booke 10. chap. vpon Ieremy. He adorneth his Image with siluer and golde, that by the shine and glittering of both mettalls, he may deceiue the simple: which errour (sayth he) is now crept in among vs. Also, within lesse then twenty yeares after that, Saint Augustine declareth, how their idolatrie was defended by the Idolaters, to be no Idolatrie; namely, because they tooke not their Image for God: but (sayd hee) Augustine in his sermon vp­on Matth. Let no man say to me, the Image is no diuine power, they know it is not God; I would to God (saith he) they so knew it as we know it; but what they haue, and in what sort they haue it, and what they doe about it, the Altar beareth witnesse. Therefore from hence it was which in another place he saith, Augustine in psal. 44. They haue made vs the Citizens of Babylon, [Page 48]we haue left our Creatour, and haue worshipped the creature; we haue left him that made vs, and haue worshipped that which we haue made our selues. Wherefore their Ambrosius Ans­bertus, thus concluded euen of Christian Rome, saying, Ambro. in A­p [...]calip. lib. 6. Rome is the second Babylon.

12 Furthermore, about some thirtie yeares after that, Saint Christostome, speaking of the decaying estate of the Christian Church, saith, Christ. in 1. ad Corinthi. Hom. 36. The Church at this day is like vnto a Woman that hath quite l [...]st her olde modestie: that is, her sober and chaste behauiour towards her Husband Christ, and doth begin to wax wanton towards new Lo­uers; with whom whiles she dalted, rose vp a spokesman, to make a match betweene Ancichrist and her; which was Iohn Bishop of Constantinople, whom Gregory the Great, therefore called, Gregorie in his 6. Booke Epist. 30. The fore-runner of Antichrist. But as Pe­lagius, before Gregories daies, stayed the marriage from be­ing solemnized, so did Gregorie during his dayes: who per­ceiuing that the Church was like to haue a new Husband, to wit, an Vniuersall Bishop to be made, and to become her head in stead of Christ: He confessed with teares, that the state of the Church, was like to fall to ground. For (said he) Gregorie lib. 4. Epist. 52. & 55. Seeing the order of Priesthood is falne within, it cannot now stand long without. And thus much concerning the fall of the Church, especially of that part vnder the Patriarke­dome of Rome, before there was an Vniuersall Pope establish­ed in Rome. Now it remaineth that wee see how it grew to perfection, vnder Vniuersall Popes, in these foure principall poynts, Doctrine, Faith, Religion, and generall Apostacie: Which God willing shall bee made euident by their owne Writers also.

13 Touching the first point, their Saint Ʋincent sayth, Vincent in his Treatise of the latter end. The religious orders are become vnto mens soules the way of perdition. And a little after, hee sheweth the reason to bee this. For (saith he) the most part of Preachers, preach now a­dayes, not the simplicitie of the Gospell, but the subtiltie of A­ristotle. Their S. Bridgit speaking in the person of Christ, saith, Bridgit lib. 4. cap. 133. They annull and make of no effect my Word, they affirme and teach their owne lies, and denie my truth, &c. In lib. 6. of her Reuelation, chap. 26. My Word [Page 49]is vnto them intollerable, and my wisdome and doctrine in their account but vaine. Therefore Lib. 4. cap. 132 They doe not preach and pub­lish to the people my Word, neither doe they teach my doctrine, &c. Lib. 6. of her Reuelat. cap. 26. They follow their owne fancie, so that their owne inuen­tions are vnto them a Law, &c. Lib. 6. Reue­lat. cap. 15. They say [...]nd doe boast that they vnderstand my Law, and yet it is but for the deceiuing of others, &c. Lib. 4.132. For of the vpright man they make a wicked man, of the simple they make a Deuill. And this commeth to passe as then Cardinall Beno sheweth because Beno de vita & ges [...]s Hudeb. They are led by the spirit of errour, and doctrines of D [...]u [...]ls. Whereby, as their Bi­shop Corn [...]lu [...]s saith, Cornelijorat. Trident. The sauour of life, is turned to the sa­uour of death: So as their Matthew Paris the Monke saith, Paris in Henrico 2. sub. 1160. Whence Christians were wont to fetch the water of Righteous­nesse, there they finde a poysoned puddle. And euen thereby doth their Abbot [...]oacham proue the Pope and his Clergie to be that Whore of Babylon, mentioned in the seauenteenth Chapter of the Reuelation, which offereth to the World the Abomination and Filthinesse of her Fornication in a golden Cup. Ioacham vpon the 37. chap. Jere. The moderne Vicars of Christ (saith he) doe neglect In­cense and Myrrhe, but they seeke after Gold, that they may with Babylon the great Ladie of the World, fill vnto men Wine in a Golden Cup, to infect their followers with their abomination. Now therefore I demaund of our Romane Catholickes, how it is possible for Doctrine to grow vnto any greater perfection of corruption, then to be squared by the spirit of errour, and Doctrines of Deuils, whereby good men are made wicked men, and simple men made Deuils?

14 Touching the second poynt, namely, Faith: their Saint Bridgit in her fourth B [...]oke, finding Rome to haue seduced the Romish Church from her primitiue puritie, calleth her a wretched and an v [...] happie Citie. And a little after shee saith, Bridgit lib. 4. cap. 30. Maruaile not that I called Rome an vnhappie and a wretched Citie, because of the aforesaid abuses, and others the like, much contrarie to the Statutes of the Primi­tiue Church. Wherefore it is to bee feared, lest the Catholike Faith doe shortly sayle. Their Saint Hildegard a Nunne, ha­uing in a vision seene the Pope in the shew of a great and vgly Monster, and other fearefull sigues ouer the Church [Page 50]of Rome, wrote thus of the head thereof: Hildegard in her second booke of her Sciuias. The sonne of per­dition shall endeuour through a most wicked deceipt, to seduce men for a time sweetely and smoothly, by making crooked the path-way of the Christian Faith. That Astrologian Ruth, speaking of the state of the Romish Church, when the Pope should be installed in his Seate, wrote thus, Ruth in his 3. chap. of his Booke. When as he shall enter into his House, then shall the Romans stumble in the Faith. Their Abbot Ioacham saith, Ioacham vp­on the first and second of Ierem. The Pope considereth not in how peruerse a manner the Lyon of Faith is throwne downe. And a little after he saith, The religious orders doe de­file the Faith by their errours, teaching peruersly. If in the head (saith he) is not the soundnesse of Faith, much lesse is there in the heart the sinceritie of hope, and yet further off from the foote is the diligence of doing charitable deedes. And albeit the Faith of Rome was of olde published through the whole World, yet afterward her Faith hath beene turned into perfidie and he­resie. Againe, speaking of the whole Church of Rome, hee saith, Jbidem. This is the Synagogue of Sathan, and his Seate: This is that Figge-tree which is dried vp in the Faith, by the meanes of the curse of transgression, &c. euen the latter Church, the Ship of Saint Peter. Their Bishop Cornelius saith, Oratio Corne­lij Trident. Would to God they were not falne with one consent, from Faith to Infidelitie, and from Christ to Antichrist. To conclude, Ioacham yet sheweth of a more admirable perfection of falling from the true Faith in Christ, in that he saith, Ioacham vp­on the first and second chap. of Ieremie. They haue cho­sen Antichrist for Christ, the Deuill for God, and Hell for the Kingdome of Heauen. Wherefore, whether it be possible for men to fall from the Faith in any greater measure, let the learned Reader judge.

15 Touching the third poynt, to wit, Religion. Their Saint Bernard, bewayling the desperate estate of Religion in his time, saith, Bernard. supra Cant. Ser. 33. & gest. Hildebrand. Behold these times very much defiled with the worke that walketh in darkenesse. Woe be to this generation because of the leauen of the Pharises, which is hipocrisie: If it may be called hypocrisie, which is now so rife, that it cannot, and so shamelesse, that it seeketh not to be kept secret. A rotten con­tagion creepeth at this day through the whole body of the Church. And a little after: The wound of the Church is inward, and [Page 51]incarable. Their Cardinall Beno saith, Beno Cardina­lis de vita & gestis Hildeb. Their Religion sa­uoureth nothing but of traiterousnesse and couetousnesse, beeing led by the spirit of Errour, and Doctrines of Deuils. Their S. Elizabeth thus cryeth out against the Romish Clergie, Elizabeth in her 2. booke of Visions, chap­ter 18. Woe be vnto you Hypocrites, which hide the Gold and the Siluer, to wit, the Word of God, and the Law of the Lord, which is more pretious then eyther Gold or Siluer; but howsoeuer yee seeme vnto men religious and innocent, you are full of craftinesse and vncleannesse. And lib. 3. cap. 14. Christ saith therefore, Your Religion doth accuse you before mee. Their Saint Kathe­rine saith thus also of the Romish Clergie, Katherine of Siene in a prayer of hers. The religious Orders are become the weapons or souldiers of the Deuill, cor­rupting Religion inwardly in themselues, and outwardly in the secular sort and Laitie. And a little after, she saith, The Laitie and secular persons are seduced and deceiued by their blinde guides, which are (alas) ignorant Idiots. Their Saint Hilde­gard, saith, Hildegard in her second booke of Sciuias. I saw in a vision a monstrous blacke Head in the Church, with fierie eyes, an Asses eares, a Lyons nosthrils, with a mouth breathing out the furie of vnlawfull fire, with the vn­pleasant noyse of contradiction among Men, whereby the white puritie of true Religion is obscured and diminished in the children of the Church. Abbot Ioacham saith, Ioacham vp­on the first and second chapter of Ieremie. The infancie of Sa­lomon representeth vnto vs the zeale of the Primitiue Church, and his olde age signifieth or shadoweth out the present corrupt state of the Church, and that as Salomon in his olde age fell into Idolatrie, so hath the Church of Rome done. Againe, vpon the seauenteenth chapter of Saint Iohns Reuelation, he saith, Vpon the 17, of the Reue­lation. The very Text it selfe doth teach, that the Woman begilded with Gold, and which committeth spirituall Fornication with the Princes of the Earth, is the verie Church of Rome, which Ba­bylon-like playeth spiritually the Whore with Stockes and stones. To be briefe, whereas their Robertus, a Dominican Frier, Robertus Gal­lus a Frier in his 5.6. and 8. Sermon. affirmeth the Pope to be the great and head Idol of the Romish Church, whom the first part of our first Chapter sheweth plainely, the Church of Rome holdeth to be a cele­stiall God, and that their Saint Bridgit saith in the person of God, Bridgit in her 4. Booke, chap. 133. They make an Idol of mee: What fall can [Page 52]possibly be in Religion, then to make the arch-Idol of the world, God; and the God of all worlds, an Idol.

16 Lastly, concerning the fourth poynt, which hath three diuisions. The first, concerneth the falling from God: The second, from Christ: The third, from the true Church. Which because the three former hath in part proued a generall Apostacie, I will but briefely touch. Their Saint Bridgit saith (as it were in the person of God;) Bridgit ibidem. Israel doth now neglect mee, that is to say, (saith hee) the Priests, and they loue another God. For they loue (as I said be­fore) the golden Calfe, &c. Moreouer, they make an Idol of mee, and shut vpon mee lest I should enter. In her 135. chapter. Thus doe these cur­sed Priests by mee. And a little after: I call them to mee as the Bridegroome doth his Bride, or the Husband his wedded Wife: I doe all I can, but the more that I call them, the fur­ther they goe from me. Ioacham sheweth, that the whole Clergie of Rome is so farre falne from God, that as he saith, Ioacham vpon the first and second chapter of Ieremie. They haue chosen the Deuill for God.

17 Touching the second deuision. Their Mathilde, a Prophetesse, thus exclaimeth against the Romish Clergie, say­ing, Mathilde in a Prophesie of hers. They are falne away from Christ, and become rauening Wolues, deuouring and cutting the throats of Christs Sheepe. Io­acham Abbas saith, Ioacham vpon the 1. and 2. chap. of Iere. The Church of Rome, like vnto ano­ther Tribe, hath departed from Christ; Hating all such (as their S. Bridgit saith, Bridgit in her 1. Booke, 56, chap. as walke in his wayes. Yea, and as in another place she saith of Pope Gregorie then, Lib. 4. cap. 142. Hee hateth Christ, hee robbeth him of his sheepe, hee plucketh them vio­lently out of his hand, and sendeth them to Hell fire. By which the case is made cleare, that all that are wonne to the Pope, are lost from Christ. And as Ioacham in that place be­fore cited, shewed the Church of Rome to be so farre falne from God, as that she chose the Deuill for God, so in the same place, he sheweth that she is so far falne from Christ, that she hath chosen Antichrist for Christ.

18 Now for the third deuision, concerning the falling from the true Church, their Robertus bringeth in Christ thus repr ouing the Romish Church, for falling away from [Page 53]the true and antient Christian Church, Frier Rober­tus in his 12. Sermon. Daughter of Ba­bylon (saith he) thou art estranged from thy mother, my Doue, that bare thee, and art gone after gold and siluer, and precious ornaments. Like an adultresse thou hast forsaken mee, and hast ioyned thy selfe vnto strangers: Thou liest prostrate, and such as are pleased to play the whoore, repaire vnto thee. And in the same Sermon in the person of Christ hee saith: Ibidem. Why haue the children of my Doue departed from mee, and are become blacke? They are become estranged by abandoning the simplicity of their mother. Againe, in the same Sermon, Ibidem. hee calleth the Clergie of Rome, A disloyall generation, and the adultrous sons of Christs Doue. And in his thirty two Sermon, the Lord saith thus vnto him: 2 [...]. Sermon. All the children of my beloued, sauing onely a few, shall play the Apostates. And in his twentie one Sermon, the Lord saith thus to the whole Clergy of Rome. This mine house shall be destroyed because of you which make the children of my beloued to play the Apostates. And this is it which Ioacham fore-tolde, where hee sayth, Ioacham vp­on the seauen­t [...]enth chapter of the Reu [...]la [...] ­tion. The Lord shall stirre vp (as it were) with an hissing voyce the French men and Germanes to conspire against the Church which hath played the Apostate in the person of the warrefaring Popes: who with their Clergie and their adherents (as a prophecie had out of the Abbot of Clunies Library sayth) In an olde booke. shall fight against the true Church. Also the Abbot Ioacham painteth out one most cruell Pope, which hee sayth, Ioacham in his 9. Prediction. Shall wound and scourge with most cruell stripes the most meeke Lambe, opening his mouth against Christ the Lord, and darkening the Starres of heauen. Wherefore saith Saint Bridgit to the Pope, Bridgit in her 6. booke of her Reuelation 26, chapter. The King for whom thou doest pray, ought to assemble and call a Councell of spirituall men, such as are wise through my wisedome. And a little after. And let him gather together the vpright and true kinde of Christians, that hee together with them, may repaire the spir [...]tuall breaches of my Church, the which verily hath departed too farre from me.

19 If the Church of Rome, were not cleane departed from Christ and the true Christian Church, then would not their Platina haue sayd thus of the vniuersall heads thereof, Platina in Ioan. 10. The Popes are cleane departed from Peters steps. [Page 54]Neither would their owne prophesie haue fore-told, In Clunies Li­brarie. That they would follow the footesteppes (not of Simon Peter, but) of Simon Magus. Neither would their Petracha haue said thus of the mother of their Church, Petracha in his 20. Epistle. Rome the whoore of Babylon, is the mother of all Idolatry and fornication, the San­ctuary of heresie, and schoole of errour. Neither would their Mantuanus haue giuen this councell to all true Christians, saying: Baptista Man­tuanus. All that will liue godly, be packing from Rome, for there all things else are lawfull, but to liue godlily it is not lawfull. Neither would their Bishop Cataldus haue sayd thus of Rome. Cataldus in his Prediction. Thou vnhappy Babylon, the damned pit of priests. Neither would their Abbot Ioacham haue said thus of the whole Romish Church: Ioacham vpon the first and se­cond chapter of Jeremy. This is the Synagogue of Sa­than and his seate. Neither would their Saint Katherine in her Prayer haue said thus of the Church of Rome: Katherine ibidem. O Ta­bernacle, but of the diuell. And also thus in the person of Christ to the whole Clergie of Rome; I haue chosen you to be like vnto Angels on earth, but yee are rather incarnate Di­uels. Neither would their Saint Bridget haue said, Bridget in her fourth booke 135. chapter. They are accursed, and worse then the Diuell, and therefore except they amend, they shall be drowned deeper then all the diuells in Hell. Neither would she haue sayd to the Pope thus of his whole Sea, Thy Sea like vnto an heauy stone shall go downe into the deepest deepe. I say, if the Church of Rome, had not cleane departed from the true and most auncient Aposto­like Church, then would not these most holiest of their Church, haue thus written. But forasmuch as the case is cleare, that she is departed from the most auntient Chri­stian Church, our Church must needes be that most an­tient Christian Church, because there are none other Christian Churches in all the world, but what are compre­hended vnder these two Titles, Christian and Antichristian: which wee now commonly call, Protestants and Papists. But yet for the better clearing of this point, namely, that our Church is the most auntient by 606. yeares next after Christ his incarnation, our fift chapter shal plainly demon­strate. And thus much for the prouing Christian Rome in her latter dayes to be that Babylon which the Angell in the [Page 55]seauenteenth chapter of the Reuelation calleth, The mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth. And which the other Angell in the eighteenth chapter saith, Is fallen, and become the habitation of dinells, the hold of all foule spirits, and eage of euery vncleane and hatefull bird. And as wee (in this our age) haue seene the spirituall fall of Babylon, (the Church of Rome,) so by the iudgement of some of the Learned, our young children shall see the corporall and finall desolation of the citie of Rome: After which time (as they write) she shall be the corporall habitation of foule diuells and diuellish spirits, as I haue shewed shee is now of incarnate diuells, filthy and hatefull birds.

CHAP. IIII. Tending to resolue all men, that as Saint Iohn in his 17. chapter of the Reuelation, declareth the Church of An­tichrist, to be a Church professing Christ, and yet an I­dolatrous Church; so the Popish Church must needes bee that idolatrous Church, because there is no more Churches in the World (professing Christ) but theirs which vse Images, and ours which vse none: which are now distinguished (therefore) by the titles of Pa­pists and Protestants.

1 THE Papists beare the World in hand, they are no Idolaters, and that for these three causes. First, for that notwithstanding they vse the Image of God, in the worship and seruice of God; yet they take it not for God. Yea, they say, they no more take it for God, then Dogges doe take a painted Foxe for a Foxe, or a painted Hare, for a Hare. Secondly, because (as they say) they worship not the I­mage, but God by it. Thirdly, because (as they also say) [Page 56]they receiued the same manner of worshipping, See Bilson 580. page. by traditi­on from the Apostles (who were no Idolaters,) therefore they are no Idolaters: to which three illusions wee an­swere.

2 It is euident by this first illusion, that God in his iust iudgement hath giuen them the spirit of slumbering eyes, that they should not see: for notwithstanding their great learning, they suppose that there are no Idolaters, but such onely, as outwardly worship the image for God: therefore touching this first point, we answere first by the 17. cap. of Iudges, Iudges 17.5. 1 Kings 15.13. 2 Chro. 25.14.15. 2 Chron. 33.1.2.3.10. 2 Kings. 7.33.34. which condemneth Micha for an Idolater. Second­ly, by the 15. cap. of the first booke of Kings, which con­demned Maachah for an idolater. Thirdly, by the 25. cap. of the second booke of Chronicles, which condemned Amaziah for an Idolater. Fourthly, by the 33. cap. of the same booke, which condemned Manasseh for an Idolater: and yet not any one of these, worshipped their image for God, but all of them acknowledged the true God. Lastly, we answere them by the 17. cap. of the second booke of Kings, which condemned certaine Samaritans for Idolaters, of whom the Text saith, They feared the Lord, and serued their images also. So that if our counterfait Catholikes did no more worship the image for God, then the Iewes did, but feared God, and serued their images as those Samaritans did, or that it were true, that they no more take their image for God, then dogges doe take painted Foxes and Hares, for Foxes and Hares, yet we see that euen by their affecting images, and vsing them in the spirituall worship and ser­uice of God, they are plainely proued Idolaters.

3 And now whereas they say, they no more take the image for God, then dogges doe take painted Foxes and Hares, for those liuing creatures, that will we further trie with them, euen by these two effects. For whereas dogges vse neither to runne, nor to open their mouths vpon those sencelesse pictures, they haue accustomably vsed to gad vnto them from Towne to Towne, and from Countrey to Countrey: As to the Lady of Walsingham, to the Lady of the Towre of Couentrie, to S. Mudwne of Burtone, to [Page 57]the sweet Rood of Chester, and diuers others, vsing be­fore them such holy, humble, and reuerend gestures, as to God himselfe: prostrating themselues at their feete, knee­ling vnto them on their bare knees; lifting vp both eyes and hands vnto them, and putting forth their voyces vp­on them, with many deuout prayers; amongst which this prayer to the Image of Christ, In a prayer booke. O maker of heauen and earth, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords: which of nothing diddest make me to thine owne similitude and likenesse, and didst redeeme mee with thine owne bloud, whom I a sinner am not worthy to call vpon: I desire thee, &c. And so forwards for all things needfull both for soule and body. And that indeed it may appeare, that this prayer is not made vnto Christ by the Image, but euen to the very Image it selfe; this Title ouer head (A prayer to the Image of the body of Christ) doth make it most manifest. Therefore, whether this be no more to take the Image for God, then dogges doe take those I­mages for the creatures themselues; or whether it be pos­sible for people to vse greater meanes, or to make a more manifest apparence, that by a consequence they take it for God: Let the vnpartiall Reader iudge. But it is cleare by their common practise, that they are of that sort of coun­terfeit Christians, who in Saint Augustines time, would haue cloaked their Idolatrie with cunning speeches, whom not­withstanding he thus reproued for Idolaters, saying, Augustine in his Sermon of the words of Christ in Mat. Let them not say to me they take the Image for no diuine power, they know it not to be God: I would to God (saith hee) they so knew it, as wee know it; but what they haue, and what they doe about it, the Altar beareth witnesse. Wherefore let them say what they will, and shaddow their damnable idolatrie, as close­ly as they can (vnder the mysterie of iniquitie here in this life) their practise shall sufficiently prooue (at the day of iudgement) whether they be Idolaters, or no; and whe­ther they be not of that sort which Epiphanius speaketh of, Epiphan. lib. 3. in oratione de Fide Catholica. Which abhorre the sight of Idols, and yet fall downe and wor­ship them.

4 The second reason whereby they would proue them­selues no Idolaters, wee heard to be this, namely: They [Page 58]worship not the Image, but God by it; to which wee an­swere: To worship God by an Image, is flat Idolatrie, and a breach of the second Commandement, which vtterly for­biddeth any at all to be vsed in any part of Gods worship, in that it forbiddeth any at all to be made for Spirituall vse. Therefore it is cleare, that if God had not accounted it Ido­latrie, to be worshipped by Images, hee would not haue said, Exod. 20.4. Exodus 20. Thou shalt make thee no grauen Image. Nei­ther would he haue said, Deut. 27.15. Deuter. 27. Cursed be the man, that shall make any carned or molten Image, which is an abomination vnto the Lord. Therefore seeing the Image maker is accur­sed, and the Image it selfe abominable; it must needes be an accursed and abominable Idolatrie to worship God by an Image. Also, forasmuch as the Lord accounteth the I­mage abominable, and the maker accursed; they must needes be abominable and accursed, that will compell him to be worshipped by it. Yea doubtlesse, and they also must needes be abominable and accursed, which allow accursed and abominable Images, to be holy monuments in the Church, and profitable, as true Teachers of the ignorant: seeing the Lord by the Prophet Ieremie chap. Ieremy 10.8. 10. hath said thus of those that make any such reckoning of them. They altogether dote and are foolish, for the stocke is a Doctrine of vanitie. And seeing also by the mouth of the Prophet Ha­bakkuk chap. Habak. 2.18.19 2. he hath said: What profiteth the Image; for the maker thereof, hath made it an Image and a teacher of lies? Nay, seeing he hath also by the same Prophet denounced an euerlasting woe against all those that desire such Tea­chers, saying: Woe to him that saith to the wood, Awake, and to the dumbe stone, Rise vp, it shall teach thee. As also seeing their owne Canonicall Scripture, the 15. of Wisedome, sayth thus of them and their Images. Wised. 15.5.6. Whose sight stirreth vp the de­sire of the ignorant, so that hee coueteth the forme that hath no life; euen of a dead Image: they that loue such wicked things, are worthy to haue such things to trust vnto; and they that make them, and they that worship them, and they that desire them, That is, Esay 57.13. they all are worthy to haue no better helpe in the great day of neede, then can come from those Images. [Page 59]Therefore the Lord by the Prophet Esay chapter 44. Esay 44.11. hath thus denounced the definitiue sentence against the whole fraternitie of them, saying: All that are of the fellowship thereof, shall be confounded. To wit, all that Esay 45.16. make Ima­ges for spiritual vses; all that vse them as Lay mens bookes, to stirre vp their deuotion; all that worship God by them, all that worship them for God, or that vse them in any part of Gods worship, or doth but desire them (liuing and dy­ing in the same minde) shall at the last day be confounded together in the Lake of fire burning with brimstone, Reuel. 19.2.20. and 21.8. and 22.15. as ap­peareth in the 19. chapter of the Reuelation; and also in the 21. and 22. chapter, and Psalme 97. Esay 45.16. verse.

5 This diuellish deuice (Christian Reader) of worship­ping one by another, was both the father and mother of the whole worlds Idolatrie; which, as the fourteenth chap­ter of Wisedome sheweth, came first vp in this manner, Wisd. 14.14, 15 When a father mourned grieuously for his sonne, that was taken away sodainely, he made an Image for him that was dead, whom now he worshippeth as a God: and ordained to his seruants ceremo­nies and sacrifices; thus in processe of time, this wicked custome preuailed, and was kept as a Lawe; and Idoles were worshipped by the commaundement of tyrants. So that hereby we see how Idolatry first crept in among the Heathen, which afterwards was imitated amongst the Iewes, and after them, among the new conuerted Christians (as we shall prooue heereafter. In the meane time, as we see by this first deuice, how Ima­ges came (in time) to be worshipped for God, among the Heathen; so let vs see also, what good effect the practise thereof hath wrought among the Papists; which we shall finde made manifest, in the tenure of the Doctrine of the Romish Church, in which it is thus written, In the false Councel of the Greekes, Citan­tur inlibro Ca­roli Magni. Hee that fea­reth God, adoreth an Image as hee would adore the Sonne of God. Againe, Tho. Aquin. part. 3. quest. 25. Since Christ is adored with diuine honour, it followeth that his Image must be adored with the selfe-same di­uine honour. And againe, Iacob Nan­clantus in Epist. ad Rom. cap. 1. Wee must therefore confesse, that the faithfull in the Church, doe without any quallification adore the Image with the same kinde of worship that is due to the ori­ginall. Moreouer, In the false Councel of the Greekes, Citan­tur in libro Ca­roli Magni. He that adoreth an Image, and saith, this [Page 60]is Christ, offendeth not; he offendeth that adoreth not an Image, he that refuseth to adore an Image, is an heretique: wee must a­dore an Image with the same kinde of worship and reuerence, wherewith we adore the holy Trinity. Now if this be onely to worship God by the Image (which as we proued before, is damnable Idolatrie) and not the Image also for God; let the discreete Reader iudge. As also, whether Idolatrie can be committed in any higher degree, then to pray thus to the image of the Crosse, A prayer to the Crosse. All haile, O crosse, our only hope, in this time of thy passion; in faithfull people grace increase, and grant of sinne remission. And thus also to say of it, Tho. Aquin. part. 3. quest. 25. The Crosse of Christ is to be worshipped with the same worship, that Christ is to be worshipped with. Yea, and whether this Doctrine of worshipping the very Image it selfe, may not truely be said to be the doctrine of the whole Church of Rome, seeing it was (as the Popes owne Decretall testifieth) established by the Pope, with the assent of many hundred Bishops, and see­ing also it hath beene maintained euer since, by Gregory the third, and by all his successours, let the Reader iudge. And thus much for the second point, to proue whether the Papists be Idolaters, or not.

6 Thirdly and lastly, they say they are no Idolaters, for they receiued their manner of worshipping God by Ima­ges, from the tradition of the Apostles: wherein wee may note, first their blasphemie; secondly, their shamelesnesse, that bash not to make those blessed Apostles of Christ, the authors of their most damnable idolatrie. But as in this, so in many other principles of their religion, do they deale with those holy ones; fathering all vpon their Traditions, be the things neuer so vile. But what will they answere? I suppose they will say, they are able to proue, that that same kinde of Doctrine was taught, and the same manner of worshipping practised euen by the very Christians, in the time of the Apostles, and we answere: We beleeue they are able, but withall, we beleeue also, that they are as well able to proue, how the same was approued of, among the Apostles. For albeit that Clement the first, and one of the seuenty Disciples, testifieth, that some of the new conuerted [Page 61] Gentiles did so, and that in the very time of the Apostles; yet the same Disciple testifieth also, how himselfe did ap­proue of it, when writing to Saint Iames the Apostle, for redresse, thus complained against it, Clement to James the Iust and Bishop of Ierusalem, wor­shipping God by Images, came from the Diuell. The diuell (said hee) by the mouth of others, vseth to bring forth these words; Wee to the worship of the inuisible God, worship the visible Image. Now in that he saith, the diuell, this maketh the matter mani­fest, how that doctrine of worshipping God by Images, was not approued of among the Apostles and Disciples of Christ: and also that it came from the diuells suggestions, and not from the Apostles traditions. Wherefore this o­penly conuicteth the Papists of most horrible impietie, in fathering this diuellish deuice vpon the holy Apostles of Christ. And the rather, because they cannot possibly be ignorant, that it was brought into the Church by those new conuerts, which were not then cleane remoued from their olde Heathenish superstition, and condemned by the Apostles and Disciples of Christ, for diuellish and dam­nable.

7 Furthermore, it is cleare, that if this argument could haue held good, namely, that because those new conuer­ted Christians, supposed, that as they had vsed to wor­ship their false gods by Images, so they should worship the true God by Images, and that this their practise be­gan in the time of the Apostles, that therefore it was a tradition of the Apostles: then might wee also conclude, that because certaine Israelites (in the time of Moses and Aaron, and others of the Prophets) vsed the like, it was a tradition of Moses and Aaron, and other of the Prophets: but how Moses, Aaron, and the Prophets did approue of their doings, all those iudgements which they haue de­nounced against them, for so doing, doth plainely de­clare, through out the old Testament, as we shall see anon, by the places which wee will cite: but in the meane while let vs see how the ancient Fathers approued of it, after the Apostles.

8 That auncient Father Eusebius, speaking of the manner of those new conuerted Christians worshipping, [Page 62]saith, Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 18. It is no maruell though the Heathen which receyued so great benefits by our Sauiour, did these things: for we haue seene the Image of Paul, of Peter, and of Christ, drawne in collours, and it is well to be thought, that men in olde time, beeing not yet remoued from their olde superstition of their Fathers, vsed after this manner to worship them by an Heathenish custome. Also that most notable Diuine Athanasius, in reprouing such superstitious Christians, as would be taught to know God by images, said thus vnto them, Athanas. a­gainst the Gen­tiles. If a liuing man cannot teach thee to know God, how shall a carued stocke or a stone doe it that is dead? Also that ancient Father Epiphanius, to reclaime some of that Sect in his time, thus dehorted them from their olde Heathenish superstition, saying, Epiphanius lib. 3. tom. 2. a­gainst Coll. 79. heresie. My deare Bre­thren, be yee mindfull that yee bring no images into the Chur­ches, and that ye erect none at the burials of the dead Saints, but euermore carrie God in your hearts: Nay (said hee) suffer not Images to be, no not in your Houses: for it is not lawfull to leade a Christian man by his eyes, but rather by the studie and exer­cise of his minde. Also Charles the Great, most sharpely re­prehended such, saying, Charles lib. 4. cap. 2. of Ima­ges. An vnhappie memorie is that, which to remember Christ, who neuer ought to depart out of the heart of the iust man, standeth in neede of a sightfull conceit, nor otherwise can haue the presence of Christ within him, vnlesse he haue his Image painted on the wall, or expressed in some other matter. And a little after; Most madnesse is that (saith hee) that our mindes, by the meanes of materiall Images, must be put in remembrance, lest we forget him. Likewise, that ancient Father Lactantius, thus reproueth their folly, and condem­neth their madnesse, saying, Lactant. lib. 2. cap. 2. They are afraid lest their Re­ligion be voyd, and to no purpose, if they see nothing that they may worship, and therefore they make them counterfeits. And a litle after he saith, What madnesse is this, either to frame those things which they may after feare, or feare those things which they haue framed. And then deriding them with the words of their common answere, he sayth, No forsooth (say they) we feare not that, but them after whose Image they be made, and to whose names they beconsecrated. Againe, whereas they doubted their religion to be void without Images, he thus resolueth their [Page 63]doubt, Lactant. lib. 2. cap. 19. Out of all doubt, where there is an Image, there is no religion. If then where an Image is, there true religion is not; and that in the Popes iurisdiction, euery Church is full of Images; it is cleare, that in all Churches within the Popes iurisdiction, true Religion is not, and consequently, no religion. And this is it whereof their Saint Hildegard thus foreshewed would come to passe, saying, S. Hilde gard a Nunne lib. 3. Vision 11. Sci­uias. In the A­postolicall Order, to wit, (saith she) of the Romaine Sea, no re­ligion shall be found. To be briefe, Saint Augustine (by ren­dering this reason, why that sort of counterfeit Christians were so addicted to Images, saying, Augustine in his booke a­gainst Adman­tus the 13. cha. They would seeme to fauour Images, to make the Heathen to thinke the better of their most miserable and lewd Sect) plainely proueth the Papists to be, not true Catholiques, but most miserable and lewd Sectaries, who wee see had rather ioyne themselues with the barbarous Heathen, in their damnable idolatrie and superstition, then with true Christians, in the sinceritie and puritie of the Gospell of saluation. And thus much tou­ching the third and last illusion.

9 But now, forasmuch as they haue induced the igno­rant, to beleeue, that in this their manner of worship, they please God well; it is our parts and duties, to make knowne vnto them, how it pleased God in them of olde time, that so thereby they may the better iudge, how themselues therein please God. Exo. 32.27.28. The thirty two chapter of Exodus plainly declareth, that the Israelites (who acknowledged the true God; for worshipping an Image, were slaine in one day, three thousand. The tenth chapter of Hosea, Hosea 10.1. to the 8. de­clareth as plainely, that because the peoples hearts, were diuided in affection betweene God and Images; the Lord caused the Prophet to denounce such, and so great deso­lation to come vpon them, as that they should wish the hilles and mountaines to fall vpon them. Also the first chapter of Zephaniah declareth, Zephan. 1. cha. 1. to the 5. that because Iuda and Ie­rusalem, had imparted the worship of God, to the Hoste of heauen, and his glorie to the idol gods; in swearing by the Lord, and by Malcham (as the Papists doe, By God and By the Roode, By God and By the Masse) the Lord [Page 64]threatned to destroy all things vpon the earth, all things in the Sea, the foules of Heauen, and the inhabitants of the Land: So then by this the most ignorant may euidently perceiue, how in this their manner of idoll worship they please God.

10 And now for that the Romanists are found Idola­ters in the highest degree, in that so directly contrary to the reuealed will of God, and knowledge of his expresse Lawe (which the Heathen had not) make a Stocke and a Stone God (in giuing vnto it the same diuine worship and honour, that is due to God himselfe, who hath sayd by the mouth of the Prophet Esay chap. Esay 42.8. 42. I am the Lord, and my glory will I not giue to any other, neyther my praise to grauen Images, and also in praying vnto it for all things needfull both for soule and bodie: and that also this idoll­worship, was established by Pope Gregorie the third, then head of their Church, and maintained euer since, by his successours Bishops of Rome) it is cleare that the Church of Rome, is that idolatrous Church professing Christ; which in the 17. Reuel. 17.4.5. chapter of the Reuelation, is said to be the Whore of Babylon, offering to the world in a golden Cuppe, to wit, in the name of Christ) the abomination and filthinesse of her for­nication. Reuel. 19.2. And in the nineteenth chapter to be condemned for corrupting the earth with her fornication. But lest for all this, they should with impudent and brasen faces, still face it out, and deny it; Let them heare how it is confir­med by their owne Writers. Ioacham Abbas, speaking of the corrupting of doctrine by the Priests of Rome, sayth, Joacham vpon the 37. chapter of Ieremy. They neglect Incense and Myrrhe, but they seeke after Golde, that they may with Babylon the great Lady of the world, fill vnto men wine in a golden Cuppe, to infect their followers with their abomination. And vpon the seuenteenth chapter of the Reuelation hee speaketh yet more plainly and saith, Vpon the 17. chapter of the Reuelation. The very Text it selfe doth teach, how that the woman beguiled with golde, and which committeth spirituall fornication with the Prin­ces of the earth, is the very Church of Rome, which Babylon­like, playeth spiritually the whoore with stockes and stones. A­gaine, hee saith of the whole Clergie of Rome, Vpon the 21. chapter of Ie­remy. They are [Page 65]Idolatrous Pastors and Prelates. Againe he saith, Vpon the 1. and 2. chap. of Ieremy. As So­lomon in his olde age fell into Idolatry, so hath the Church of Rome done. And therefore it is which Robertus the Domini­can Frier saith thus of the Romish Church, in the person of Christ, Robertus in his 12. sermon. Like an adultresse thou hast forsaken mee, and hast ioyned thy selfe vnto strangers. And of which their Paracel­sus concludeth thus, Paracelsus in his 4. figured Prediction. The whoore hath diuided her loue.

11 So that the Romanists and Papists, being thus so plain­ly proued Idolaters (in worshipping God after the manner of the Heathen, which he commanded his people the Iewes, they should not doe, if they would looke to continue in his fauour, and to auoide his iudgements, Deuter. 12.) this ma­keth that good, which wee affirmed in the beginning of our first Chapter, namely, that it is not possible, that they and wee should be combined and conioyned together in Religion, to make one and the same true Church of Christ. For as the Apostle Saint Paul saith, 2. Corint. 6. 2. Cor. 6.16. There can be no agreement betweene the Temple of God, and the Temple of Idoles. Therefore it behooueth vs to looke warily vnto our selues, that we be not deluded by their craftie and sub­tile arguments, to be seduced to their idolatrous religion. And thus much for the satisfying the Reader in this point also.

CHAP. V. Tending to resolue all men, that for the first 606. yeeres next after Christ, the Papists had no Church, neither could haue; because till then it had no vniuersall Pope to make it a Popish Church: Neither was that first Church of Rome (which Saint Peter planted) the Mother, but one of the Daughters of the Mother Church, in which Christ himselfe first planted that Faith and Religion, (which afterwards by meanes of his Apostles should be made Catholique) 14. yeeres before Peter came to Rome. So that hereby wee shall see the Antiquity of their Church ouerthrowne, and Ierusalem to be the most ancient, and true figure of the vniuersall Mother Church, to wit, heauenly Ierusalem, and not Rome.

1 THeir Cardinall Cusanus saith; Cusanus ad Behemos. Epist. 2. The members vnited to the Chaire, and ioyned to the Pope, make the Church. By which he granteth, that without an vniuersall Pope, there could be no Popish Church. Now that for the first 605. yeeres, next after Christ, there was no vniuersall Pope approued of, nor publikely allowed to be the head of the members of the body of Christ, these testimonies of Pelagius the second, and Gregory the first, will make it most manifest. Pelagius in his dayes, perceiuing that Mauricius the Emperour, went a­bout to make and establish an vniuersall Pope, very bitterly inueighed against it, and not onely so, but thus Decreed a­gainst it. Pelagi. Di­stin. 99. an. 580. No Bishop, no, not the Bishop of Rome himselfe ought to be called vniuersall Bishop. Gregory (the successour of Pela­gius) likewise finding the Emperour to persist in his enter­prise, wrote diuers Epistles vnto him, to let him vnderstand, [Page 67]that he went about an vnlawfull thing, amongst which, in one Epistle, he sought to disswade him by this reason; be­cause (said he) Greg. lib. 4. Epist. 32. Peter is not called vniuersall Apostle: inferring, that seeing Peter was not, none of the other Apostles were; and then how could it be lawfull for any Bishop to take that title vpon him? Againe, when as he perceiued the Em­perours Bishop (which was then Iohn of Constantinople) wil­ling to take that title and supreame authority vpon him, he thus inueighed against his arrogancy, and saide; Greg. lib. 4. E­pist. 38. What wilt thou answer to Christ the head of the vniuersall Church, at the last iudgement, that thus goest about by the name of vniuersall Bi­shop, to make all his members subiect to thee? Whom doest thou imitate, in this so peruerse a name, but Lucifer, that would haue beene singular, and alone ouer all his fellow Angels? Againe, he saith, Greg. lib. 6. E­pist. 30. I speake it boldly, whosoeuer calleth himselfe vniuersall Bishop, or desireth so to be called, is in the pride of his heart, the fore-runner of Antichrist, because he preferreth himselfe before all others, and would be alone without any equall. Now by the best Authours, we find that this Gregory, ended his dayes a­bout the yeere of Christ, 605. therefore we see this point standeth cleare, that during so many hundred yeeres (and odde, after Christ) there was not an vniuersall Pope appro­ued of, nor allowed by the Bishops of Rome themselues, to be head of the members of Christ, and therefore as yet there could be no Popish Church.

2 But now to cast a must before the eyes of the ignorant, they come in with this blinde distinction, and say. Notwith­standing, this be spoken (both by Pelagius and Gregory) a­gainst the hauing an vniuersall Pope, to be head of the vni­uersall Church; yet the question is, what manner of Popes, or vniuersall Bishops they meant; whether such as the Bi­shops of Rome (who allowed other Bishops vnder them) or such as the Bishop of Constantinople, The B. of Con­stantinople no more sought to exclude all o­ther Bishops, then the Bishop of Rome euer did. who would haue had none other in all Christendome but himselfe. I answer, this is but a deluding distinction; for that the Bishop of Constan­tinople no more sought to exclude all other Bishops, then the Bishop of Rome euer did: for had he of Constantinople, once attempted that, that had beene nuttes for Gregory: for [Page 68]then might he in some one Epistle or other, haue charged him therewith, but we finde not any such matter: neither in any of these Epistles doth hee charge him with any such thing; onely he condemneth him of arrogancy, for prefer­ring himselfe before all other Bishops, and for seeking to bring them into such subiection vnder him, as whereby he might haue raigned ouer them, as Lord and King. And euen herein onely was it, that hee charged him to imitate Lucifer. Therefore this distinction of titles, is but a meere misty matter. Yea, their owne records, and some of their owne English Doctors, plainely confesse, that the same title and dignity, which the Bishop of Constantinople sought to obtaine, was onely one and the same, which Boniface Bi­shop of Rome attained vnto by the meanes of Phocas the Emperour, two yeeres after Gregories death, and which they haue holden euer since. For in their Booke called Chroni­con Chroni. Euscbij. An. 607. they are proued both one. Also their Writer Sabili­cus Sabilicus En­nead. 8. lib. 6. affirmeth them to be one and the same. Likewise their Writer Vrspergensis Ʋrspergensis, in Phoca. acknowledgeth the same: And that which is more, the chiefe of their adherents here in England, in their answere returned to me, Page 4. in these plaine and expresse words confesse the same. The Emperour Phocas, defended the righteous and ancient title of the Popes su­premacy and iurisdiction ouer the vniuersall Church of Christ, and suppressed the arrogancy of the Patriarke of Constantinople, who challenged to be vniuersall Bishop. And thus we see how themselues haue confounded their subtile distinction of titles.

3 But yet for all this, they will proue that the Bishop of Constantinople, would haue had excluded all other Bishops, because Gregory wrote thus to some of the chiefe of them, Gregory lib. 7. Epist. 69. If one be vniuersall Bishop, it remaineth that you be no Bishops: Howbeit, it is very apparant, that Gregory meant by these words, that if one should be admitted to be vniuersall head ouer all Bishops, their powers then consisting onely in that one, they by a consequent should be as none. For to the ve­ry same effect are these his owne words, Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 36. If one Patriarke be called vniuersall, he derogateth from the other Patriarkes. And a [Page 69]little after; If this name may goe currant, honour is taken away from all the Patriarkes: But farre may it be from any Christian minde that any man should desire to take that vnto himselfe, where­by the honour of his brethren, should seeme in the least wise to be diminished. By which it is most manifest, that hee did not meane, that Iohn of Constantinople, would haue excluded all Bishops, neither his fellow Patriarkes; but that by dimini­shing their titles and honours, hee would make them as no Bishops: euen as all Bishops vnder the Popes are made, by tollerating an vniuersall head ouer them. For as their Car­dinall Sabarella saith, Sabarella Ci­tanture ad Illy­rico De Sectis. The Pope hath inuaded, and entered vp­on the right of all the inferiour Churches, so that all the inferiour Bishops may goe for naught: And vnlesse God helpe the state of the Church, the vniuersall Church is in danger.

4 But now notwithstanding, they come in yet with ano­ther obiection, and say that Gregory hath also these words. Gregory in their answer to me. Page 1. Whosoeuer he be that desireth to be Priest alone, or the onely Priest. By which they would inferre, that the Bishop of Constantinople, would haue beene Bishop alone, without any others: neuerthelesse, it is cleare by these his words that follow, (He exalteth himselfe aboue other Priests) he meant, that he whosoeuer exalted himselfe for to be vniuersall Bi­shop, or supreame head ouer all other Bishops, would be Priest alone, because hee would not admit any equall with him. And for this cause (in the words going before) hee compared Iohn of Constantinople to Lucifer, who he doth not say would haue had no Angels but himselfe (for that had beene more then hee could haue proued). And therefore we see it is onely this kinde of Priesthood which Gregory meant, that would admit no manner of equality, which we shall see anon, he said would be the downefall of the ancient order of Priesthood.

5 But now in the meane time, wee may not let passe, to answere another Obiection, which happily may arise out of our English Catholikes words, which before wee cited. For in that they say, The Title which the Bishop of Constantinople tooke vpon him, was the Bishop of Romes right and auncient Title: they would beare the world in hand, [Page 70]that Gregory condemned it for vnlawfull in the Bishop of Constantinople onely, but allowed it in the Bishop of Rome, for their right and lawfull Title: for to this effect indeed did they alleadge these very words: Howbeit we shall see plainely by Gregories testimonies following, that he con­demned the Title to be as vnlawfull in the Bishop of Rome, as in the Bishop of Constantinople. For hee writing to the Emperour against his Bishop, for his arrogant pride, in taking vpon him the Title of Vniuersall Bishop, said, Gregory lib. 4. Epist. 32. O my gracious Lord, doe I heerein quarrell for mine owne right? Lib. 6. & 30. Epist. I speake it boldly, whosoeuer calleth himselfe Vniuersall Bishop, or desireth so to be called, is in the pride of his heart, the fore­runner of Antichrist: and more then so, he saith, Gregor. libr. 4. Epist. 38. He is Antichrist that shall claime to be called Vniuersall Bishop, and shall haue a guard of Priests to attend vpon him. Yea, it is cleare, that he knew both the Title and Office to be odious, euen in the Bishops of Rome, else would hee not haue sought to haue purged all before his time from it, as from a Title of shame, setting downe the manner of his purgation thus: Gregor. libr. 4. Epist. 32. & 36. None of my predecessours, Bishops of Rome, euer consented to vse that vngodly name: no Bishop of Rome euer tooke vpon him that name of singularitie: wee the Bishops of Rome, would ne­uer receiue this honour, being offered vnto vs. Also, in that Eulogius his fellow Patriarke of Alexandria, seeing the Bi­shop of Constantinople so willing to haue taken the Title vpon him, would rather that Gregory (then Bishop of Rome) should haue had it, and therefore to vrge him to haue taken it vpon him (in the superscriptions of certaine Letters which he wrote vnto him) offered him the Title; but Gregory to declare his detestation thereof, not onely besought him to offer it him no more, but because he saw hee would not giue ouer vrging him, he thus flowted him for his folly: Gregor. lib. 7. Epist. 30. Ecce (saith he) behold euen the Title of your Letter, yee haue written the proud poesie, meaning mee the Vni­uersall Pope, notwithstanding I haue forbidden it, I beseech your Holinesse doe so no more: for whatsoeuer is giuen to any aboue reason, is taken from your selues. Also, when as he saw that such an Officer was like to be established in the Church, as [Page 69]should be made Prince of all Christian Priests, he counted that his rising to that dignitie, would be the deadly down­fall of the olde and auncient order of Priesthood: and therefore said, Gregor. lib. 4. Epist. 52. & 55 Seeing the order of Priesthood is fallen within, it cannot now stand long without. By which he plainely decla­reth, that it was contrary to the auncient order of Priest­hood, that one should be vniuersall head of all Priests. A­gaine, to declare how dangerous a thing it would be, if one should be made supreame head of the whole vniuer­sall Church, he said further thus: Gregor. libr. 4. Epist. 32. Ad­maueri. If we haue but one head, the fall of that head is the fall of the Whole Church: If any man presume to take vpon him the name of Vniuersall Bishop, the whole Church falleth downe from her estate, when hee falleth which is called Ʋniuersall; but farre may that name of blasphe­mie be from all Christian mindes.

6 So that hereby (Christian reader) we see the case to stand cleare, that notwithstanding Gregory, the great Bishop of Rome, allowed the order of Bishops in the vniuersall Church, yet did he acknowledge it vtterly vnlawfull for himselfe, or any other Christian Bishop to take vpon him the title of vniuersall Bishop, and to be supreame head of the vniuersall Church: condemning it for vngodly, blas­phemous, and Antichristian: and therefore dehorteth all true Christians to be farre from that minde. And here wee may further note, that forasmuch as himselfe would none of it, he condemneth that brag for a very fond fable, that the title and dignity of vniuersall Bishop, descended to the Bishops of Rome, by succession from S. Peter the Apostle. Gregorie con­demneth that for a fable, that the title of v­niuersall Bi­shop, des­cended to the Bishop of Rome from S. Peter. Also seeing he confesseth (as we heard before) that Peter himselfe was not called vniuersall Apostle, he doth acknow­ledge, it could not come from him. And thus much for the prouing that the Papists had no Church for the first 605. yeeres after Christ: For as no husband, no wife, so no vni­uersall Pope, no vniuersall spouse of the Popes. And therefore the most auntient and Apostolike Church (next after Christ) was the same true Catholique Church, yea, the very selfe and same whereof we are now; which as now, so then, it had no other vniuersall head but Christ Iesus, [Page 72]onely and alone: euen as Gregory also maketh it most ma­nifest, in that when as he reproued Iohn of Constantinople, for seeking to be head of the vniuersall Church, asked him (as we heard right now) how he could answere that point at the dreadfull day of iudgement, to Christ the head of the vniuersall Church, as did S. Augustine before his dayes, as appeareth in his booke of the vnity of the Church. cap. 2. cap. 3. cap. 16.

7 Now it remaineth that we speake of the other yeere, to make out our number of 606. Decretall. Know yee, that next after Gregory, succeeded Sabinianus, who continued but one yere, & then next after him, entered Antichrist, euen Boniface the third, who with an impudent face, fell to contend openly with the Bishop of Constantinople for his Antichristian ti­tle and dignity; and by the meanes of Phocas (the murthe­rer and Emperour) obtained it, and got to be established to him and his successours, to be called supreame head of Christs vniuersall Church, and father of all Christian Bi­shops, and Rome the mother of all christian Churches. And for plaine proofe hereof, the Popes owne Decretall saith thus of this Boniface. Decretall. This man by the meanes of Phocas the Em­perour, obtained against the Patriarke of Constantinople, that the Sea of Peter should be the head of the Church. As also Plati­na in these words, Platina of Bonifacius. Pope Boniface the third, obtained of the Emperour Phocas, that Rome should be called the head of all Churches, but with great contention and much adoe. And heere was now the first singular vniuersall Pope established, and marriage making, betweene Antichrist and the Church, which was no doubt in Gods iustice brought to passe, for that she was now become most corrupt in doctrine, and lewd in life: as not onely Gregory witnesseth, but also o­ther histories at large doe declare. But of the first begin­ning of their Church, wee shall haue occasion to speake more plainely in the next Chapter, in the meane time, we will satisfie the reader, what manner of supreame gouern­ment themselues affirme the Christian Church had, from the time of the Apostles to the rising of Boniface, which will also proue, that to his time, there was no singular vni­uersall [Page 73] Pope, allowed and established to be supreame head of the vniuersall Church.

8 Their great Doctor Master Harding saith, Harding A­pologie, chap. 4. diuision 2. In great Cities where the highest Courts for iustice were kept, and where the chiefe Pagan Priests of the Latines, named Primi Flamines, were resident before the comming of Christ, there after Christs comming, were Patriarkes or Primates placed: by whom the weightie matters of Bishops should be decided. Which if he will haue vs to beleeue, then must we also beleeue, that the first supreame gouernment that was ordained by the Apostles, ouer Bishops, and their vniuersall causes, was by certaine chiefe or head Bishops, and not by one; and then where was this singular supreame gouernement of the Pope, ouer all Bishops to be found? But now to salue this fore com­meth in their Iohannes Boemos, with these words, and saith, Boemos in his booke of the beginning of Arts, Chap. 12. of the first rising of Chri­stians. The holy Apostles did all consent, that Peter and all that fol­lowed him in the seate at Rome, should for euer be called Pa­pa; vniuersall Father of Fathers. A most horrible and blas­phemous title, forbidden by our Sauiour Christ, to be giuen to any mortall man, Matth. 23.9. Call no man your fa­ther vpon earth, for there is but one, euen your Father which is in heauen. Therefore seeing this title is proper to God a­lone, The title of vniuersall Fa­ther, forbidden by Christ. and forbidden by our Sauiour to be giuen to any o­ther, how can we beleeue, that the Apostles of Christ durst consent to giue it to Peter: or, that Peter durst euer take it vpon him: and yet notwithstanding, hee addeth further and saith: And that he should at Rome be President ouer the vniuersall Church, as the Emperour there was ruler ouer the World. And to match the Consuls (which were twaine) they appoynted foure head fathers, in Greeke, named Patriarkes: one at Constantinople, another at Antioch, a third at Alexandria, and the fourth at Ierusalem. And hereby he would proue the Bishop of Rome; to be supreame head ouer all: but if Gregorie the Great, had not condemned this for a fond fable, by confessing that Peter himselfe was not called vni­uersall Apostle, and that no Bishop of Rome before his time, euer had that title or dignitie, yet hee himselfe hath. For whereas he affirmeth, the Patriarkes (at the first ordi­nation thereof) to be foure in number (which indeed they [Page 74]were, before there was a sift at Constantinople) and would haue Constantinople to be one of the foure, by the Apostles owne ordination; it is graunted by our English Catho­liques In their an­swere to mee, about Page 4. that till after the Councell of Nice, there was not so much as the name of Constantinople once heard of, which was aboue three hundred yeares after Christ, and about two hundred yeares after the decease of all the Apostles: there­fore how Constantinople could be one of the first foure, by the Apostles owne ordination and deed, let the Reader iudge. As for the time before, when she was poore and rui­nous Byzantium, shee could be none: for as wee heard by their Doctor Harding right now, that the Patriarchall Ci­ties, were the great and chiefe Cities. But in this his foy st­ing in Constantinople for one of the first foure Patriarkes, we see it euident, he did it onely to exalt the Bishop of Rome a degree aboue the Patriarkes, which as we heard in the 3. Section, Gregorie in my 3. Section. Gregorie condemned, in that he said: If one Patri­arke be called Vniuersall, hee derogateth from the other P [...]tri­arkes. Also, If this name may goe currant, honour is taken a­way from all the Patriarkes, of whom he confesseth himselfe to be an equall and a fellow brother. Againe, seeing hee also confesseth that to his time, no Bishop of Rome was a­boue a Patriarke, he proueth Boemous his testimonie false. Also, M. Hanmar in his Ecclesiast. Historie of the first 600. yeares after Christ, Fol. 564. to 600. M. Meredith Hanmar Doctor of Diuinitie, albeit he be of their minde, that the Patriarkes had their beginning from the time of the Apostles, and would proue it by Eu­sebius, Epiphanius, Socrates, Euagrius, and others, in this suc­cessiue manner, setting downe the most ancients first and not last, as Boemous doth,

Yet he proueth Rome to be but one of the foure Patri­arkdomes, and but the third in antiquitie, and consequently the Bishop of Rome but one of foure equals, and therefore no singular supreame vniuersall head ouer all. Wherefore how vainely doe they stand vpon Ireneus his numbering the Bishops of Rome to his time, and Saint Augustine to his time, to proue the succession of Popes from Peters time, see­ing neither of them gaue them the name of Popes, but Bi­shops and Priestes. Number the Priests from Peters seat (saith S. Augustine) August. in Psal. contra par­tem Donati. and see who succeeded one another in that rowe of Fathers. And elswhere he gaue them the name of Bishops, but neuer the name Popes; therefore to his [Page 77]time, which was about foure hundred yeares after Christ, those that Ireneus, and he, two hundred yeares after num­bered, were not Popes, as the Popes of Rome are now, but such Bishops as we haue now. Also with small credit can they stand vpon the succession of vniuersall Popes, seeing their Prophetesse Saint Bridgit saith of Boniface the first vniuersall Pope, Bridgit in her 27. chap. of her third Booke. Hee did mount vp to fit in the Chaire of pride: Which sheweth the Popes Chaire, not to bee the Chaire of Peter. Also their Pa [...]acelsus (in a Prophesie of his) said thus to the Pope, Paracelsus in his 12. figured Prediction. Behold thou hast lifted vp thy selfe on high, but it is not thy place; neither shalt thou abide a­boue: for thou art a yoake and a burthen too heauie to be borne, hence it is holy Father (S. P.) that thou fallest: Thou hast pla­ced thy selfe aboue God, and hee shall returne vnto thee the re­ward thou hast sought. Againe, in vaine doe the Popes them­selues boast to be of that sort of Bishops which succeeded the Apostle Saint Peter, seeing their Saint Elizabeth saith thus vnto them in the person of Christ, Elizabeth against the Church of Rome, lib. 3. cap. 14. They swallow vp the carnall and temporall things of my people, and doe not minister vnto them spirituall things, and euen they that doe walke vn­der my name, doe not feare to persecute mee in my members. Be­hold and consider (saith to her the Angel of her vision) how the soueraigne high Priest, the Lord Iesus, in the dayes of his o­bedience walked in the middest of his Disciples, not in the height and haughtinesse of a Lord, but in the humilitie of a seruant, &c. Behold his blessed seede, the ministers of your spirituall vocation, the holy Apostles, and their successors, of whose societie yee doe glorie, &c. Consider, if their waies were like yours, doe not beleeue that they were, for their waies were faire and streight, but yours are disordered, filthie, and foule. They did not walke in the haughtinesse of their hearts, nor in the tumultuousnesse of a proud traine, nor in couetousnesse of worldly wealth, nor in the costlinesse of clothing, &c. Neyther was there running after Hawkes and Hounds, but in all sinceritie they traced the foot­steps of the great Pastor, &c. Behold the head of the Church crieth, but his members are dead; for the Apostolicall Sea is be­set with pride and auarice, and is filled with iniquities and wicked­nesse. They scandalize my sheepe, and make my people to erre. [Page 78]Againe, their Saint Bridgit in the person of Christ, expo­stulating the matter with Pope Gregorie the eleuenth, saith thus vnto him, Bridgit lib. c. [...]ap. 142. Why doest thou hate me so much? and where­fore is thy boldnesse and presumption so great against me? for thy worldly Court marreth and spoyleth mine that is heauenly, and thou presumptiously robbest me of my Sheepe. Moreouer, thou pluckest from me violently innumerable soules, and sendeth to Hell fire almost all that come to thy Court, because thou doest not giue diligent heed to those things that belong to my Court. Therefore how can we beleeue that these Popes are of the same ranke of Bishops which succeeded the Apostle Saint Peter, or what credit doth the Church of Rome gaine by the succession of her Popes?

9 Againe, They are ne­uer able to proue that Peter was euer called by the Popes titles; or that Peter euer called the Church his Spouse. how can we beleeue that the Popes are the suc­cessours of Saint Peter, seeing they are neuer able to proue, that Peter, or any of those Bishops which next succeeded him, was euer called by any of the Popes titles. For in what booke or Chapter of the Scriptures doe they find that Pe­ter was euer called, Our Lord God the Pope. An vndoubted and true God on earth. Not a pure man, but a true God: as we proued in our first Chapter, and second Section, the Pope is called? Or, where find they that any one of all the Apostles, euer called Peter, Lord of Lords, and King of Kings: Or Supreame head of the vniuersall Church: or that Peter euer called the Church his Spouse, as the Pope doth? If they cannot shew so much as any one place to proue it, what reason haue we to beleeue it. Therefore, forasmuch as we finde vniuersall Popes, not to be the successours of S. Peter, but of Boniface the first vniuersall Pope, made and e­stablished in the yeare of Christ 607. And that they all hold, that without an vniuersall Pope to be head, there can be no Church, it is without all contradiction, that for the first sixe hundred and sixe yeares next after Christ, the Pa­pists had no Church. For as no head, no body, no hus­band, no wife; so, no vniuersall Popes, no vniuersall spouse of the Popes. By which wee see that plainely condemned for a meere illusion of Antichrist, which is so common a­mong them, namely, that the Popish Church was the most [Page 79]ancient mother of all Christian Churches. And as we see it not to bee true, so shall we further see also that neither was that first Church which Saint Peter planted in Rome, the most ancient, and mother Church. For as both Ie­rome, Jerom. cata­log. eccles. Scrip. and Eusebius testifieth, Euseb. eccles. his lib. 2. cap. 14.16. Peter came not to Rome, till the second yeere of Cladius the Emperour, which was in the yeere of Christ, 44. and foureteene yeares after hee was called to be an Apostle. During which time, hee and the other Apostles, had planted many Churches in the world, and yet was none of them the mother Church: For that onely must needes be the mother, which was first, in which Christ himselfe first planted and taught that Faith and Religion, which afterwards (by the meanes of his A­postles) should be made Catholique; which as S. Matth. Matth. 26. Luke 21. Matth. 10.5.6. chap. 26.55. and Saint Luke, chap. 21.37.38. sheweth, was Ierusalem, which Faith and Religion (as appeareth in Matthew 10.) Christ commaunded not to reueale to the Gentiles, till they had spread it throughout the Regions of Ierusalem: therefore Ierusalem, and not Rome, was the first and most ancient Church.

10. Againe, when as afterwards, the Gospell was prea­ched to the Gentiles, it was not first taught to the Romans, no not by S. Peter himselfe.) For as themselues confesse, Peter after he had preached well neere seuen yeares about the coasts of Ierusalem, went to Antioch, and taught there other 7. yeares, before hee came to Rome; therefore that verie first Church of Rome, could not be the most ancient Mother of the true Catholique Faith and Religion. If not the first, which was planted by Peter, then not the second, that was planted by Boniface, aboue fiue hundred yeares after.

11 And that it may yet more manifestly appeare, that shee was not the Mother, but one of the chiefe Daughters, not the head, but a chiefe member of the Mother Church, these words of Tertullian (which liued in the next age after the Apostles) will make it plaine: Tertul. de prae­scription. contra. Haereticos. Runne ouer (said he) and behold the Apostolike Churches, whereas the Apostles Chaires are yet still continued, and whereas the Authenticall writings of [Page 80]the Apostles are pronounced, sounding out the voyces, and repre­senting the faces of each one of them. The next Countrey to you is Achaia: There haue you the Church of Corinth. If ye be not farre from Macedonia, there haue you the Church of Philippi, and the Church of Thessalonica: If ye may goe ouer into Asia, there haue ye the Church of Ephesus. If ye border neere to Italie, there haue ye the Church of Rome. And further, to proue Rome but one of the chiefe members of the whole Church, he saith thus; Tertul. De prae­scription. contra Haereticos. These so many and so great Churches, are all that same one first Church, planted by the Apostles, from whence issued all the rest. And so are they all first Churches, and all Apostolique, in that they follow all one vnitie. By which who seeth not, but that euen that same Church of Rome, which was first, was but one of the Daughters of Ierusalem, from which the Church Tri­umphant had her name deriued, and not from Rome; and yet indeed was shee but the figure of the vniuersall Mother Church: For as Saint Paul said, Galathians 4.26. Ierusalem which is aboue, Galat. 4.26. is the Mother of vs all; therefore it is flat blas­phemy, to say that Rome is the vniuersall Mother of all Chri­stian Churches: and the rather, for that as her state standeth now, the Angell saith, Reuelat. 17. Shee is the mother of whore­domes, and abominations of the earth.

12 Againe, The Church triumphant, and the church mil­litant being but one, can haue therefore but one head. in that the Apostle saith, Ierusalem which is aboue, is the mother of vs all; it sheweth the Church Trium­phant, and the Church millitant, to make both but one Church: And therefore whereas the Papists would make these two parts of the Church, two seuerall Churches, that so they might set vpon the millitant part another head be­sides Christ; what else doe they thereby, but make that part an adultresse, and consequently the Whore of Babylon. For by Saint Pauls doctrine, Romans 7.3. Romans 7. shee that hath two Hus­bands at one time, is an Whore. And doubtlesse, howsoe­uer shee is rightly called Babylon, for resembling olde Baby­lon, in Tyrany, Idolatry, and other abominations; yet is shee called an Whore, chiefly for coupling her selfe to another Husband besides Christ.

13 In the time of the Apostles, Christ onely is the Head. it is cleare by Saint Paul, in diuers of his Epistles, that both the parts of the Church, [Page 81]as well that beneath, as that aboue, and both together, Christ onely is the head. had none other head but Christ. For first Ephesians 1. cap. verses 20.21.22. he speaking of Christ, saith. Ephes. 1.20.21.22. God set him at his right hand in the heauenly places, farre aboue all principalitie and power, and might and domination, and euery name that is named, not in this World onely, but also in that that is to come. And hath made all things subiect vnder his feete, and hath giuen him ouer all things to be the head of the Church, which is his body. And Colossians 1.18.19. He is the head of the body of the Church: Colos. 1.18.19. he is the beginning and the first begotten of the dead, that in all things hee might haue the preeminence: For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulnesse dwell. Also to shew that the Church hath onely but this one head, hee writing to the Church of Corinth, 2 Epistle 11.2. said thus vnto her: 2 Cor. 11.2. I haue prepared you for one Husband, to present you as a pure Virgin to Christ. Which plainly declareth, that as the Church vn­der the Law, had none other Husband, but God himselfe; Vnder the Law the Church had no husband but God. (For as the Prophet Esay said to the Church of the Iewes, cap. 45.5. He that made thee, is thine Husband, whose name is the Lord of Hostes) so likewise vnder the Gospell, that the Church hath none other Husband but onely the Sonne of God.

14 And now also that it may as plainely appeare, that for 605. yeeres next after Christ, this doctrine of one head­ship, was onely approued of euen by the Bishop of Rome himselfe, to wit, Gregory the Great; these his owne words, written against the Bishop of Constantinople, which sought to be vniuersall head with Christ, will make it cleare. Gregory. lib. 4. Epist. 38. If (said he) Saint Paul would not haue the members of the Lords body to be subiect to any heads but to Christ, no, not to the Apostles themselues; what wilt thou answer to Christ the head of the vni­uersall Church in the last day of iudgement, which goeth about to haue all his members subiect to thee by the title of vniuersall? Whom doest thou imitate in so peruerse a name, but Lucifer? So that here we see the case made cleare, that the Romish Church with two heads, (Christ and the Pope) as yet had not any being at all, neither the name of Pope approued of, as wee shewed in the fifth Section, in that when as Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria, offered to Gregory, (in the superscription of his [Page 82]Letters) the title of vniuersall Pope, Gregory not onely flow­ted him for his folly, but also besought his holinesse to of­fer it him no more, for that as he said it was a title beyond all reason to be giuen to any.

15 The first that I find that went about to arrogate vn­to himselfe the Title of Pope, The first that sou [...]ht to bring in the name Pope. was Leo, Bishop of Rome, as may appeare, in that his Legates in the Councell of Chalceden, contended both for the title and authority, howbeit they were withstood by the whole Councell, and decreed against, as I shall proue in the 19. Section of the 8. Chapter.

16 Well then, all things being made cleare, that before there was a Church planted at Rome, there was a Christian Church, which had then none other vniuersall head but Christ, and that seeing the Church which wee haue now, doth acknowledge none other head; who can iustly denie our Church to be a true member of the most ancient Apo­stolique Church? Againe, forasmuch as the matter is made as apparant, that the Church planted afterwards by Peter and Paul, (for by both of them was the Romish Church plan­ted) to Gregories dayes (to wit, to the yeere of Christ 605.) did not approue, nor tollerate any other vniuersall head; who can denie the Church of Rome (during that time) to be a fellow member with our Church, of the most ancient Ca­tholique Church?

17 But now albeit we haue proued, that for want of an vniuersall Pope to be head (so many hundred yeeres) there could be no body, or Popish Church: yet forasmuch as we see that there is now such a Church, and know also that it hath beene of long continuance, it resteth that in the next Chapter we shew, both when it first began, how far and wide it did extend it selfe; and how ignorantly many haue dealt in their writings, to giue that title of Popish Gouernours, to the successours of Saint Peter, calling them Popes: and more wickedly the Papists, in calling them vniuersall Popes; to the horrible deluding of the multitude, in making them to be­leeue that the Popish Church, and the Church which Saint Peter planted in Rome, were both one and the same; which if it be true, then was the founder thereof Antichrist; for so [Page 83]saith their Saint Bernard, the Pope is: And so saith their Ioa­cham the Abbot. And so saith their Auentine; and so saith Gregory the Great. And so saith their Saint Vincent, and pro­ueth Boniface the third, to be the head, as the other and di­uers moe proueth his successours to be his incorporate bo­dy, as appeareth in our second Chapter; and as now in the next Chapter, we shall more largely proue.

CHAP. VI. Tending to resolue all men, that the Popish Church, and the succession of singular vniuersall Popes, had their first beginning but in the yeere of Christ 607. and that also from that time that they had a Church, wee had a Church continually among them, till about 20. yeeres be­fore Luthers time. And as before they had a Church, which did extend it selfe farre and wide, so euen then and at all times, in other parts of Christendome, (as in Asia, Affrica, Macedonia, Misia, Valachia, Russia, Muschouia, &c.) we had as great a Church as they, if not greater. Which being proued, both their antiquity, vniuersality, and succession of vniuersall Popes, will proue but a fond fable, and a meere illusion of Anti­christ.

1 THE Papists haue of long time borne the World in hand, that we had no Church be­fore Luthers time; howbeit, as we proued in the former Chap. by sufficient testimonies, that for the first 606. yeeres next after Christ, they had no Church; so will we now (God willing in this Chapter) proue that their Church had her first beginning, but in the yeere of Christ 607. Note therefore (Christian Reader) what [Page 84]their Writer Vrspergensis saith, his words be these; Vrspergensis, in Phoca. At the re­quest and suite of Pope Boniface, the Emperour Phocas appoin­ted the Sea of the Apostolike Church of Rome to be head of all Churches. Also their Writer Sabellicus saith, Sabellicus En­nead. 8. l. 6. Pope Boniface the third, at the first enterance into his office, was an earnest su [...]ter vnto the Emperour Phocas, that the Church of Rome, might be head of all Churches, which thing hardly and with great labour was granted to the Apostolique Sea of Rome. Now (Christian Reader) iudge thou, how true it is like to be, that the Church of Rome, had preeminence from Saint Peters time, seeing it is granted vnto her but now in the yeere of Christ 607. as also the Popes owne Decretall, and Platina doth witnesse, as we shewed in the former Chapter. Wherefore the Bishop of Rome, being now in this yeere first made and established vniuersall Father of all Christian Bishops, and Rome the mo­ther of all Christian Churches; it is cleare, that in this yeere of Christ their Church first began. For as before Christ was, there could be no Christian Church; so before there was an vniuersall Pope, there could be no Popish Church. But now an vniuersall Pope being made and established su­preame head of the Church, they may be bold to say they haue a Church; and we may be as bold to say, that from this yeere of Christ, and no further, they may demand of vs, where our Church was to Luthers time; and also to answere them, The head of Antichrist, and the body of An­tichrist. that so much of it as was comprehended within the Romish iurisdiction, was from thence, first vnder this head of Antichrist, Boniface: after him, vnder this his incorporate body of Popes.

2 These euen from the very time of the decease of their predecessour and head, began to put in practise their An­tichristian authority, receiued from him, for the subduing of all Churches that did resist them; amongst which the Church of Rauenna was one: which as the Popes Decretall testifieth, thought scorne to be brought in subiection to Rome: neuerthelesse the same Decretall declareth, that in [Page 86]the end, Pope Domnus made her to yeeld. And this was a­bout 64, yeeres after the first vniuersall Pope. Also the same Decretall declareth, that the Church of Aquila re­sisted, but yet about some 20. yeeres after the other, Pope Sergius got the victory, and forced her to yeeld. And thus did they continue vanquishing all Churches, in the West part, till neere Luthers time. But yet not so, but that mau­gre the heads of all the Popes, we had a Church continued in the Romish iurisdiction, till within some 20. yeeres before Luthers rising; though not alwaies a standing state, but a dispersed company, scattered here and there, by meanes of persecution: Reuelat. 12.14.15.16. wherein that prophecie was fulfilled, Reuel. 12. which testifieth that in the time of Antichrists reigne, the Church of Christ (within his dominions) should be driuen into the wildernesse of this world, and great floods of per­secution sent after her to ouerwhelme her; but as the Text saith, The earth opened her mouth, and swallowed vp the floud: That is, she was preserued by meere temporall and earthly people, for amongst the spiritualtie, both she and her seed were holden as heretiques, and that chiefly for these causes. First, for that when as they saw, that vniuersall dominion which the Pope had gotten ouer the Clergie; they affirmed him to be that Angell of the Bottomlesse Pit, prophecied of in the 11. verse of the 9. chap. of the Reuelation, that should attaine to be king of the Clergie, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greeke named Appolyon; which in English signifieth a destroyer. Secondly, for that when as they saw the Pope to bring into the Church (and establish for Prin­ciples of Religion) his Heathenish vnwritten verities, The Pope re­uealed himselfe to be Anti­christ. and those olde heresies, wherewith the false Apostles and other Heretiques had corrupted the puritie of the Gospell, and that he did offer them to the Church in the name of Christs Gospell, they affirmed him to be that whore of Babylon, fore­told in the 4. verse of the 17. chap. of the Reuelation, that should offer to the world, The abhomination and filthinesse of her fornication, in a golden Cup, to wit, in the name of Christ. Thirdly, for that when as they saw the Pope gotten aboue the Secular powers, and that Emperours and Kings did [Page 87]yeeld him such subiection, as to fall downe before his foot­stoole; to kisse his feete, to carrie him vpon their shoulders, to leade his horse, to hold his stirhop whiles hee gets on horse-backe, yea, euen to become his Vassalles, they affir­med him to be the same great Antichrist, mentioned in the 13. verse of the same chap. vnto whom the Text declareth, The Kings of the earth should giue their power and authoritie. Fourthly, for that when as they saw the Pope to be come to that great height of pride (as we plainely did demonstrate in our first Chapter) namely, to take vpon him the title of God, and to suffer himselfe to be called our Lord God the Pope: An vndoubted and true God on earth; And to suffer men to prostrate themselues before him, and to crie vnto him: O thou our Sauiour, which takest away the sinnes of the world, haue mercy vpon vs. And to exalt his power ouer the Angels in heauen, diuels in hell, and ouer the dead; and his decrees aboue the decrees of God, and to haue power to fetch out of hell, as many soules as he will, and place them in heauen: they affirmed him to be same Man of sinne, and sonne of perdition, foretold by S. Paul, 2 Thes. 2. That should sit as God, in the Temple of God, shewing himselfe to be God, and exalting himselfe aboue all that is called God, or that is worship­ed. Lastly, for that when as they saw, that with tooth and naile, he laboured to frame and fashion all things to the si­militude of the first beast, (The Heathen Empire) they affir­med him to be that second beast mentioned in the 11. and 12. verses, of the 13. cap. of the Reuel. which should arise in the Romane kingdome, after the Romane Emperours, of whom S. Iohn saith thus. And I beheld another beast, Reuel. 13.11.12 com­ming vp out of the earth, which had two hornes like the Lambe, but he spake like the Dragon: and he did all that the first beast could doe before him, and hee caused the earth, and them that dwell therein, to worship the first beast. That is, by bringing them to honour, reuerence, and obserue all the former Heathenish and Idolatrous ordinances, set vp againe by him: Whereunto because that part of our Church (among them) would not yeeld, it grew into contempt with them, and was most grieuously persecuted, and the faithfull Christians [Page 88]driuen from place to place, and from countrie to countrie, being of the most part (among them) taken and holden for notorious heretiques, such as they hold vs to be at this day. And because they grounded all their assertions, vpon those and such like places of Scriptures, whereby the Popes calling began to be called into question, the Scrip­tures were forbidden to be written any longer in a knowne tongue, and for that cause also it was, that they so blasphe­mously depraued the Scriptures, calling them Pigghius Hie­rar lib. 3. cap. 3. fol. 203. A nose of waxe, an inkie letter, a dead letter, and a blacke Gospell: and that they are none otherwise to be vnderstood, then the Pope and his Church will interpret them: and that they must follow the Church, and not the Church them: and that the authority of the Pope and Church of Rome, is a­boue them. Asoius & Hosius. Hence it was also that Lay men were forbidden to reade the Scriptures, perswading them that they did but leade men into errour, and that ignorance is the mother of deuotion; howbeit all this did nothing preuaile: for the faithfull in euery Coast and Countrey among them did the more diligently follow Christs commandement, (Iohn 5.) Search the Scriptures: Ioh. 5.39. and that euen in the greatest heate of persecution, which was during those fiery fiue moneths, mentioned in the 5. Reuelat. 9.5. verse of the 9. chap. of the Reuelation, which some of the learned doe interpret to be those last 500. yeeres before Luthers time, in which Antichrist was growne vp to his full height and power: and euen then did God stirre vp a great company of corragious Champi­ons to withstand the Pope, and openly, and boldly, to write, speake, and preach against him and his proceedings, till well towards the rising of Luther, a great part of which we will now produce, as they thus follow in particular.

3 About the yeare of our Lord 1158. (which was almost foure hundred yeares before Luthers daies) Gar­hardus, and Dulcinus Nauarenses, did earnestly preach a­gainst the Church of Rome; and taught, that the Pope is Antichrist; that the Clergie and Prelates of Rome were reiected, and were become the very whore of Babylon, pre­figured in the booke of the Reuelation. These (as the [Page 89]histories doe testifie) came into England, The two wit­nesses as they follow, are sayd to be two, be­cause th [...]y bear witnesse to the two Testamēts. and brought cer­taine others with them, who were by the King and the Prelaetes, burned in the foreheads, and sent out of the Realme, and afterwards were put to death by the Pope. In the yeare 1160. Waldus. Waldus, one of the chiefe Magistrates of the Citie of Lyons in Fraunce, was terrified at the sight of one that fell downe dead suddenly: he shewed great fruits of repentance, both by exercising the workes of mercie, in relieuing the poore; and also by instructing himselfe and his family in the word of God; and in exhorting all that resorted vnto him to the same, and by translating certaine places of Scriptures into the French tongue, which he de­clared vnto many: He, and a great number that receiued instructions by him, maintained the same doctrine, drawne out of the holy Scriptures, which we doe now; condem­ning the Masse to be wicked, the Pope to bee Antichrist, and Rome to be Babylon, &c. They were threatned, and by violence of persecution scattered into many places, and some of them remained long in Bohemia. In the yeare 1212. An hundred burned in one day. the Pope caused an hundred persons in the Coun­try of Alsatia (whereof diuers of them were Noble men) to be burned in one day, for maintaining doctrine against the Romish Church. About the yeare of Christ 1230. The Graecians renounced the Church of Rome. al­most all the Church of the Graeciaens renounced the Church of Rome, because of their execrable Simony, and such like abominable wickednesse. In the time of the Emperour Frederike the second, about the yeare 1240. there was in the Countrey of Sweuia many Preachers, which preached freely against the Pope and his Prelates; affirming that they were Heretiques, Simonackes, and such like. About the yeare 1250. rose vp Arnoldus de nona villa, a Spaniard, Arnoldus. a man famously learned, and a great Writer; hee impug­ned the errours of the Popish Church, and taught, Guilielmus. that the Pope led the people to hell. About the same time, Gui­lielmus de sancto Amore, a maister of Paris, and chiefe ru­ler of that Ʋniuersitie, applied all the testimonies of Scrip­ture (which are touching Antichrist) against the Popish Clergie. About the yeare 1290. Laurence, an Englishman, Laurence. [Page 90]and a maister of Paris, mightily proued the Pope to be An­tichrist, and the Synagogue of Rome to be Babylon: the Pope after his death, caused his bones to bee taken vp and burned. Robert Gallus. At the same time Robert Gallus, a man of noble parentage, impugned the Pope of Rome, and his Clergie, calling the Pope an idol. Robert Grostid. Also about the same time, Robert Grostid, Bishop of Lincolne, a man famously learned in three tongues, wrote diuers Inuectiues against the Pope, pro­uing him to be an heretike: after his death, the Pope would haue had his bones digged vp, but was terrified by a Visi­on. About the yeare 1350, the Lord raised vp diuers lear­ned men, Gregory Armi­nensis. which openly and boldly impugned the Pope and the Church of Rome. Gregory Arminensis, who layed o­pen the abuses of the Romish Synagogue, and confuted the Popish doctrine of free-will. In Germany a Preacher taught likewise. Petracha. Franciscus Petracha, at the same time, called Rome. The whoore of Babylon, the Sanctuary of heresie, and Schoole of errour. Johannes derupe Scissa. And a little before that, Iohannes derupe Scissa, was cast into prison, for rebuking the Popish Prelates for their detestable enormities; and for that hee called the Church of Rome, The Whoore of Babylon, the Pope the Mi­nister of Antichrist, and the Cardinalls false Prophets. And being in prison hee wrote a booke, prophecying of the afflictions which hanged ouer the heads of the Romish Cler­gie. Couradus Hager. Also there was maister Conradus Hager, who taught more then twenty yeares against the Masse: hee was after­wards shut vp in prison. Gerardus Rid­der. Michael Cese­nas. Petrus de Car­bona. Iohannes de Po­liaco. Also one Gerardus Ridder, wrote a booke against the Monkes and Friers, which he entitu­led, Lachrime ecclesiae. About the same time Michaell Cese­nas, and Petrus de Corbona, and Iohannes de Poliace, were condemned by the Pope and his adherents. The said Mi­chaell wrote a booke against the pride, tyrannie, and pri­macie of the Pope, accusing him to be Antichrist, and the Church of Rome, Babylon, That whoore drunke with the blood of the Saints. He left behind him many followers, of whom a great part were slaine by the Pope, and some of them were burned. Two Friers. About the same time, two Friers were put to death in Auinion, for matters which they had against the Pope: one [Page 91]of them was called Iohannes Rochetailiada, who did preach that the Church of Rome is Babylon, the Pope and Cardinalls Antichrist. About the yeare 1360. was set forth a wri­ting against the Pope and his Clergie; The Plowmans complaint. Armachanus. called the Complaint of the plow man. About the same time, Armachanus an Archbishop in Ireland was raised vp against Antichrist; he was a man of great learning and godlinesse; his troubles were many, and his deliuerances great by Gods proui­dence. In the yeare of Christ 1364. Nicolas Orme. Nicolas Orme prea­ched a Sermon before the Pope and his Cardinalls, in which he rebuked the Popish Prelates, and affirmed their destru­ction not to be farre off. About the yeare 1370. liued Mathew Parisiensis, a Bohemian, Math. Parisien­sis. who wrote a large booke of Antichrist, and noteth the Pope to be the same. About the yeare 1384. Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica, Nilus. wrote also a large booke against the Romaine Church. About the yeare 1390. many were put to death for the Gospell, re­fusing the doctrine and worship of the Church of Rome: as at Bringa there were burned sixe and thirty Citizens of Maguntia. Many put to death for refu­sing the Ro­mish religion. In the prouince of Narbone, there was to the number of an hundred and fortie, which chose rather to suffer all torments, than to receiue the Romish religion, and so to deny the truth of the most glorious Gospell. And a good while before this time, there was foure and twentie put to death at Paris; there were foure hundred noted to be heretikes, foure score beheaded; Prince Armericus was hanged, and the Lady of the Castle was stoned to death. In the daies of King Edward the third, about the yeare 1371. beganne Iohn Wickliffe of Oxenford, Wickliffe. openly to deale against the Pope, and Popish doctrine. The times were then very grieuous, the Popish kingdome of Antichrist being risen vp vnto a very great strength and crueltie. King Edward himselfe being very well learned, & a valiant Prince, great­ly withstood Popery; hee much fauoured and defended Wickliffe, and so did diuers Noble-men, insomuch that M. Wickliffe and others preached against the Church of Rome, the Pope and his Prelates doing what they could, were not able to hurt him. After the death of King Ed­ward, [Page 92]he was greatly supported by the Londoners; and so escaped the hands of his aduersaries, still proclaiming the holy and heauenly doctrine of the Gospel, against the Ro­mish Antichrist. It pleased God by his preaching, and by his bookes, to giue light to many in the Land: sundry were put to death, The Lord Cobham. of whom the Lord Cobham was one; and diuers fled out of the Land, because they would not deny the truth which they had learned of him. That Po­pish Councell of Constance, fortie one yeares after his death, condemned his doctrine, and caused his bones to be dig­ged vp and burned. And as Wickliffes doctrine tooke place heere in England, and spread farre, so were some of his Workes carried into Bohemia, where they did more pre­uaile: Iohn Husse. for about the yeare 1410. rose Iohn Husse, who taught in Bohemia, with diuers others, the holy Gospell of Iesus Christ, which a multitude zealously imbraced, and thereupon renounced the Church of Rome. He was cited to appeare before the Pope, which he auoyded; and about the yeare 1414. hee was charged againe to appeare, then he was excommunicated, and much molestation followed, but he continued a faithfull witnesse of Christ, and open­ly impugned the Romish Church and Synagogue, vntill the Councell of Constanoe, where he was condemned as an he­retike, Hierome of 'Prage. and burned. In the same Councell, Hierome of Prage, a worthy seruant of Christ, for resisting the Romish Harlot, was condemned and burned. These men were put to death, but Antichrist and all his power could not roote out the Gospel in Bohemia. God raised them vp a valiant Captaine Iohn Zisca, Iohn Zisca. and they put to flight great armies of the Papists that came against them. About this time, there followed great persecutions in England, and many were put to death, whom they called Lolards. Ʋeselus Groni­gensis. God also raised vp one Ʋeselus Gronigensis, he was so worthy a man, that hee was called Lux mundi, the light of the world: He disputed mightily & boldly against Popery, and proued their doctrine false and wicked, and that the Popes Keyes doe not open, but shut heauen Gates. This man ended his daies in the yeere of Christ 1499. Sauonarola In the yeare 1500. Hieronomus Sauonarola a [Page 93] Monke in Italie, with two other Friers, Dominicke and Siluester. Dominicke and Sil­uester, were condemned to [...]eath at Florence: they taught and maintained against the Popish doctrine, the things which we doe now.

4 And thus hauing slaine and put to death all within the Romish iurisdiction, that did any way gaine say them, The two wit­nesses are both slaine. they haue now gotten all in quiet possession, leauing none that would not be conformable to Antichrists lore. And this is it which Saint Augustine did find by the Scriptures, the great Antichrist should bring to passe, as may plainely appeare by these his words: For that wee beleeue that An­tichrist shall come vnto such an height of vaine-glory, it shall be lawfull for him to doe such things, both towards all men, and al­so towards the Saints of God, that many weake men shall thinke, God hath forsaken the care of the world. And also wee see that prophesie heere fully verified in the 13. chapter of the Reuelation, which saith thus of the Romish spirituall gouer­nour: He caused that as many as would not worship the Image of the beast, should be killed. That is, all that would not be con­formable to al the old Heathenish ordinances, set vp againe by the Pope, and preach and professe the same, should be killed. So that herein also is fulfilled that prophesie in the eleauenth chapter of the same booke, concerning the kil­ling the two witnesses, whom the tenth verse of the same chapter declareth, The 9. and 10. verses sheweth, that by the 2. Witnesses are meant all the Preachers that should vex An­tichrists vvhol [...] kingdom; which in the sixt verse of the 14. chap. are included in the person of one Angell with all other throghout Chri­stendome. should vexe Antichrists whole king­dome: for which cause hee should slay them. But where­as Bellarmine would haue them to be onely two persons, and that they should containe themselues, within that one nation of the Iewes; the Text is plaine to the contra­rie, in that it saith, And they of the people, and kinreds, and tongues, and Gentiles, shall see their corpes three dayes and an halfe, and shall not suffer their carkeises to be put in graues: and they that dwell on the earth shall reioyce ouer them; and be glad, and send gifts one to another: for these two Prophets vexed them that dwelt on the earth. Now in that the text declareth that the two witnesses were slaine among the Gentiles, in diuers nations of the earth: and that those nations euery where, saw their dead corpes lie among them, which they coun­ted [Page 94]not worthie to be buried in Christian mens moulde (as they call it) it is cleare, they were not two persons, but all those Preachers which euery where bare witnesse to the truth of the two Testaments, whereby they vexed Anti­c [...]rist, and the Antichristians, wheresoeuer they did in­habite vpon the face of the whole earth.

5 But now in that it is said, They lay dead three dayes and an halfe: and in the words following: After three dayes and an halfe the spirite of life comming from God, shall enter into them, and they shall stand vpon their feete: This is to be vnderstood of the time, from the killing the last of the witnesses, to the rising againe of the first of them, and not of the 1260. dayes, the whole time of Antichrists reigne, mentioned in the third verse of the 11. chapter of the Re­uelation, as some doe vnderstand it: for it is very absurd to say, that the witnesses should lie dead, during the whole time of their prophecying, and yet prophecie too. Now for that we finde that the next that rose after their death, to oppose themselues against Antichrist, and to set vp the Gospell againe in his kingdome, was that man of God Luther: therefore in him did the two witnesses first begin to rise againe: for it is cleare, it is not meant, that the same should rise againe in their owne persons, but that euen as Elias was reuiued in Saint Iohn Baptist (not in the same person, Luke 1.17. but as Saint Luke saith, chap. 1.17.) in the same spirit and power: so should they after a little moment, rise in power and spirit, in the persons of others. And this first rising, was about the yeare of Christ, 1520. So that coun­ting from those three last, which were put to death in the yeere of Christ, Wee had a Church among the Papists till about twentie yeares before Luther. 1500. we had no appearing Church left in the Romish iurisdiction, for the space of twenty yeares before the rising of Luther: which time is called but three dayes and an halfe, in respect of the three Angels yeares and an halfe (the time of Antichrists reigne) wherefore seeing they had their Church alone, without our Church, but twenty yeares before Luther: how wickedly doe they delude the multitude, in making them to beleeue, they had the Romish Church, and all other Christian Chur­ches [Page 95](vniuersally) from Saint Peters time; and that wee had no Church till Luthers time: whereas we see it proued most apparently, that for the first 606. yeares, next after Christ, our Church was, and theirs had no being at all: and that the very first beginning of their Church, was the entrance vpon our Church in the Romish iurisdiction, of which wee see a part continued in view till about twenty yeares before Luther, which if wee had not had, yet will wee now proue, that continually from the Apostles time, to Luthers time, we had else-where as great a Church as they, if not greater.

6 Vnderstand therefore (Christian reader) that albeit the whole Christian Church was one, yet afterwards it was diuided into two parts, to wit, East and West, so till the Coun­cell of Florence (which was about fourteene hundred yeeres after Christ) they possessed but the West part. The Councell of Florence. And not­withstanding Michael Paleolgus Emperour of the East, in hope of some aide of the Pope, and the Princes of the West against the Turke, did his good will to haue brought the East part in subiection to the Popes of Rome, yet as their Paulus saith, Paul Aemil. in Philippo 4. his people so detested him for it, that after his death, they would not admit him common Christian buriall. A­gaine, it is certaine, that the Greekes counted the Romanes a most polluted and an infectious people: for in their late Councell of Lateran, it is said, Jn Concil. La­teranen. Cap. 4. The Greekes began so much to abhorre the Romanes, that if it had happened the Lattine Priests to haue ministred vpon their Alters; they would not offer any ob­lation vpon them before they had washed the same. Againe, al­beit the Legates of the East, in the Councell of Florence, was perswaded to yeeld to be subiect to the Pope, yet doubting it would not be well taken at their returne home, they halfe recanted and said The Councell of Florence. We haue no leaue nor commission to speake these words. And notwithstanding at their returne home they laboured so with the Greekes, that they consented to yeeld, yet this continued not, for as their Platina saith, Platina in Eu­genio. Not long after, they fell to their olde bent againe. But had it continued to this day without reuolting, yet had it come too too late to haue maintained the antiquitie of the Popes [Page 96]vniuersalitie: yea too late by at the least 1300. yeeres. And therefore it was that Illyricus, which dwelt vpon the borders of Grecia, wrote thus, Illyricus Testibus Veritatis. page 5. The Churches of Grecia, and the Churches of Asia, Macedonia, Misia, Valachia, Russia, Muschouia, and Affrica, ioyned thereunto, that is to say, (saith he) in a manner all the whole world, or at the least the greatest part thereof, neuer graunted the Pope his supremacie.

7 So that (Christian reader) thou seest, that howsoeuer the Emperour Phocas did giue that prerogatiue to the Bi­shop of Rome, to be vniuersall head of all Christian Bi­shops, and Rome to be chiefe of all Christian Churches; it doth not therefore follow, that all Christian Churches were content therewith, or did yeeld thereunto; or that Rome euer attained thereunto: onely she obtained to be vniuer­sall superiour ouer the West Churches, as is plainely con­fessed by their Doctor M. Harding, in his Booke of Confu­tation of the Apologie, Harding A­polog. chap. 23. diuision 2. where he saith; Rome is the Mo­ther of all the West Churches: If but of the West, then not vni­uersally of all, both East and West: therefore by M. Har­dings owne confession, here falleth to the ground the Popes vniuersalitie. And therefore, as we saw proued in the for­mer Chapter, that for the first sixe hundred and six yeares, their Church had not any being at all; so here we see pro­ued as plainely, that after they had a Church, they had it but by measure, and not vniuersally as they fondly fable. Wherefore (christian Reader) whensoeuer they shall hereafter demaund of thee, where our Church was before Luthers time, answer them thus. It was by Gregory the Greats confession sixe hundred and fiue yeeres before there was an vniuersall Pope, to make a Popish Church: hauing then none other, but onely the same vniuersall head, that now the true Christian Catholique and vniuersall Church hath, of which we are now apart: and that afterwards, when an vniuersall Pope was ordained, and made supreame head of the Church, and had gotten dominion ouer the West part thereof, yet euen there was our Church in reasonable qui­etnesse, till about foure hundred yeares, when as Pope Hil­debrand began to be a fire-brand. For indeed about that [Page 67]time, Antichrist began to lay himselfe open to the world, by his tyrannie which he began then to exercise against those that did withstand him: and afterwards when as hee was growing vp to the full measure of iniquitie, and that our Church (among them) could no longer beare his de­testable enormities, then during the next fiue hundred yeares following (through their grieuous persecutions) it was driuen into holes and corners; and as many as they found, they destroyed, and the rest would haue destroyed, had they not fled into those other parts of our Church be­fore mentioned, where they were preserued by Gods pro­uidence, from the sonne of perditions tyrannie, according to the prophesie in the fourteenth verse of the twelfth Chapter of the Reuelation, which saith: But to the woman, (to wit, the true Church) were giuen two wings of the great Eagle, that shee might flie into the wildernesse, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and halfe a time, from the presence of the Serpent. The Church of Rome is pro­ued to be a persecuter of the true Church. And bid them now bragge of the visibilitie of their Church, and of the standing state it alwaies had, since it was a Church (because thou canst not deny it them) but withall, giue them to vnder­stand, that euen thereby, is our Church proued that true Church, which the Angel in that chapter foretold should be driuen from home, and dispierced abroad: and theirs to be the tyrannicall and persecuting Church, which should driue it out of her Countrie. And thus much for the pro­uing when their Church first began, and how farre it did extend it selfe, as also the first beginning of vniuersall Popes, to bee sixe hundred and sixe yeares after Christ; whereby both their antiquitie and vniuersalitie is vtterly o­uerthrowne. Now to the conclusion of all.

8 Forasmuch as we (which now are distinguished from them by the title of Protestants) confesse, that in this their Romish iurisdiction we had no Church left at the rising of Luther; they demaund of vs, from whence our Bishops had their callings, and how our Ministers which they haue ordained euer since, can haue lawfull callings, seeing there was then no Protestant Bishops to ordaine them: neither that by the Apostles, euer any Christians had that title [Page 98]giuen them. We answer: For the title Protestant, wee stand not vpon; for wee graunt that in the time of the Apostles there was not any Christians called by that name, no more then there was any called by that name Catholique. The onely title proper to the professours of Christ, was giuen by the Apostles, in the Citie of Antioch, which was, to be called Christians (as appeareth in the 11. of the Acts of the Apostles,) but afterwards, when as counterfait profes­sours of Christ, as the Arians, Macedonians, Eun [...]nians, were growne to be Sectaries, and Heretiques, and each of them to challenge vnto themselues the title of the true Church: There was another sort in Rome, called Homousians, which were indeede of the true Church: these to distinguish themselues from those counter­fait Christians, intituled themselues, Christian Catho­liques. Whereupon, as Socrates testifieth, Socrates lib. 5. cap. 10. that worthie Prince Theodosius hearing thereof, caused these foure sorts of Christians to be brought before him, and euery Sect to bring their seuerall opinions in writing; which when hee (and his Bishops there assembled) had throughly pervsed and examined, he tore in pieces the Papers of the three He­retiques, and approued onely of the Homousians, finding it onely to agree with the Doctrine of the Scriptures. And thereupon made this Decree: All people subiect to our Em­pire, How and when the name Ca­tholique was giuen to Christians. we will haue to continue in that Religion which Saint Pe­ter the Apostle deliuered to the Romans, as the faith kept from his time to this day doth declare, and the which it is euident, Bishop Damassus, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria, a man of Apostolique sanctitie doe professe: to wit, that according to the Apostolique and Euangelique Doctrine, wee beleeue one God­head of the Father, Sonne, and Holy Ghost, of like maiestie in sacred Trinitie. The obseruers of this Law, we commaund to be taken for Christian Catholiques; the rest, as mad and frantike, we adiudge to beare the reproach of Heretiques: which must looke to feele first the vengeance of God, and next such penalties as the motion of our hearts directed from aboue shall appoynt. And this was about two hundred yeares before the Papists had a Church, therefore this act being done onely in our Church, it is without all contradiction, we onely must needs [Page 99]be of that sort of Christians, vnto whom the title Catho­lique was then giuen; and consequently, of the true and most auncient Catholique and Apostolique Church. So likewise afterwards, when as the West part of the Church, did vnder the title of Christian Catholiques, professe Christ after an Antichristian manner; then certaine true Christi­ans, withstanding them, protested a contrary manner of Christian profession, agreeable to the auncient Catholique Faith and Religion; and by their protesting, did distinguish themselues from that counterfait companie, which they then saw (as we now haue declared at large in our former Chapters) were cleane swarued from the true Faith and Re­ligion: And from thence, we following their true Faith and religion, retain the same title, to distinguish our selues from our most counterfait Christian Catholiques. But would God both these new titles were laid away, and that both sorts might be called by their owne proper titles, to wit, Christians and Antichristians: for so the Church of Christ should the better be knowne from the Church of Anti­christ.

9 Now for the lawfulnesse of our Bishops callings, wee say, that when the time drew neere, that the Gospel which Antichrist had suppressed in the Romish iurisdiction, should be set vp againe (according to that old Romish prophesie, intituled, Stimulus diuinae contemplationis, written I know not how many hundred yeares agoe, bearing that after the yeare of Christs Incarnation, 1534. In an olde Booke. Good Law, good Reli­gion, good peace, together with Faith, Truth, and sound Do­ctrine, should returne againe into the World in their proper shape, and true likenesse) then about that time, when by the meanes of that man of Cod, Luther, some Bishops were conuerted to true Christianitie againe, and that others had time to conuerse with them, concerning the present neces­sitie of electing and ordaining Christian Ministers: then they entered by the olde ordinances of those Christian Bi­shops which were before Poperie was, and so ordained mi­nisters by the rules and authoritie of the first Apostolicke order, which had alwaies continued in those other parts of [Page 100]our Churches, which (as wee shewed) were neuer mem­bers of the Popish Church: For otherwise, had they not bin first conuerted, they and all the Ministers which they haue ordained, should haue been the seruants of Antichrist, euen as those were before, and at this day are, which haue their calling from Antichrist the Pope. For so their S. Bernard, speaking of Bishops and Ministers (which haue their cal­ling from and by the Popes ordination) saith▪ Bernard supra cant. Serm. 33. They serue Antichrist. Also their Albertus Magnus saith, Albert in Jehn 10. They bee the Ministers of Antichrist, and the vnderminers of the flocke of Christ. And therefore whether it be likely that our Mini­sters (which be ordained by Bishops of an ordinarie calling from the Apostles of Christ) haue lawfull callings; or such as haue their calling from Antichrist the Pope, let the Christian Reader iudge. And the more to inlighten his iudgement, and better discerning the truth hereof, let him consider these fruits and effects of their calling. Their Saint Bridgit bringeth in Christ thus complayning of the Romish Clergie, Bridgit lib. 1. cap. 56. They faine themselues to be mine, and in the meane time they worke wickedly against mee. Their Saint Elizabeth bringeth in Christ thus reporting of them, Elizabeth against the corruptions of Rome lib. 3. cap. 14. They that walk vnder my name, doe not feare to persecute mee in my members. Their Prophetesse Mathilde saith, Mathilde in a prophesie of hers. They are falne from Christ, and become rauening Wolues, deuouring and cutting the throats of Christs Sheepe.

10 And that the vnpartial Reader may yet be the more fully resolued, that these Priests which haue their callings from the Pope, are not the Priests of Christ, their Saint Bridgit bringeth in Christ thus disclaiming them vtterly, saying, Bridgit lib. 1.47. Behold such Priests are not my Priests, but very tray­tours; for they both sell mee, and betray mee like Iudas. Where­fore notwithstanding they carrie the name of the Priests of Christ, as Iudas carried the name of an Apostle of Christ; yet the Reader may plainely see, they are but counterfaits, and as verie traytours to Christ, as Iudas himselfe was. And thus much for the answering these obiections; namely, that their Church was the most ancient and Apostolique Church: That the succession of Popes descended from [Page 101]Saint Peter: That wee had no Church till Luthers time: That our Protestant Bishops and Ministers, haue no lawfull callings. Now it resteth in the next Chapter, to trie whe­ther the Popes owne calling be proued a lawfull calling, by generall consent of Councels and Fathers, as they avow, or whether it be not a meere illusion of Antichrist so to say.

CHAP. VII. Tending to resolue all men, that the Papists great boa­sting of their generall consent from Saint Peters time, is but a very Antichristian illusion: that their antiquiy of the Popes vniuersall Supremacie, is but a fallacie: that the succession of vniuersall Popes descended from Saint Peter, is without veritie: and all of them toge­ther flat forgeries: euen as wee haue already proued their other Principles to be, and as in this Chapter (God willing) we shall proue them all to be.

FIrst, N. D. in his Wardword, Bellarmines assertion. the Answere to Sir Frances Hastings Watchword, page 102. (wher­of Bellarmine is supposed to be the originall Au­thour) to enduce vs to beleeue that from Saint Peters time, the Popes vniuersall Supremacie was appro­ued of by all Councells and Fathers, saith: All the Christi­an world hath euer made this most certaine and infallible dedu­ction, that Christ gaue not to Saint Peter these imminent pre­rogatiues of authoritie, and superioritie for himselfe alone, but for his posterity, and successours also that should ensue him in his seate and charge ouer the Church of Christ to the worlds end: For this cause haue they reuerenced and respected so much the Bishops of Rome, as by all generall Councels and Fathers, and Ecclesiasticall Histories appeare.

CHAP. VIII. Tending to resolue all men, that the Apostle Saint Peters authority was but the same that the other Apostles was: and therefore that supreame authority which the Pope Claymeth from Saint Peter, is fabilous. That Christ alone is the supreame head of the Church, euen of that part that is Millitant, as that which is Triumphant. That Ie­rusalem is the most ancient Mother of the Catholique Church: that the Popish is the Church of Antichrist, and therefore it is blasphemy to affirme it to be the same which Saint Peter first planted in Rome. That there was no Church planted in Rome till the yeere of Christ 44 before which time there were many Christian [Page 115]Churches planted in the World, therefore Rome could not be the Mother, but a Daughter of the Mother Church.

1 IT hath of long time gone for currant Do­ctrine (Christian Reader) that our Sauiour Christ made Saint Peter supreame head and Prince of all the Apostles. 1 2 That vnto him onely, he committed the Keyes of the kingdome of Heauen. That vnto him hee committed the care and charge of his whole Church. 3 That vnto him onely he committed the of­fice of feeding both Sheepe and Lambes, 4 olde and young. That hee was that Rocke on which Christ said hee would build his Church, 5 6 and against which the gates of hell should not preuaile. That for him the prayer was made. Finally, 7 that he alone had an ordinary power, from whence all the other Apostles receiued their powers and authority; and that the Pope receiued the same ordinary power from him, whereby he taketh vpon him to giue power and authority to all Bishops, Pastors, and Ministers: All this I say, during the time of Popish blindnesse, went through the Romish iu­risdiction for Catholique doctrine, which God-willing shall be proued but fond fables.

2 First then, whereas they say that Christ made Saint Pe­ter Prince and head of all the Apostles; this may easily be proued a fable, because there is nothing in all the Scriptures made more manifest, then Saint Mathew, Saint Marke, and Saint Luke, hath made it to the contrary. Luke 22.23.24.25.26. For as Saint Luke declareth, that there was a strife risen among the Apostles about principalitie and supreame dignity, and that they be­gan to enquire among themselues, which of them should seeme to be the greatest. So Saint Matthew and Saint Marke decla­reth, that when their Master Christ perceiued whereabout they went, he did not make so light a matter of it, as to giue them leaue to determine it among themselues, but with great care, he called them vnto him, and sate downe; and as they all stood before him, Matthew 20, 25.26. he decided their question (according to Saint Matthew thus,) Ye know that the Lords of the Gentiles [Page 116]haue domination ouer them, and they that are great exercise au­thority ouer them: but it shall not be so among you; but whosoeuer will be great among you, let him be your seruant. According to Saint Marke thus: Marke 9.33.34.35. If any desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and seruant vnto all. So that by this wee see it very ap­parant, that Christ allowed no supremacy or principality at all among the Apostles; therefore the Popes principality, and supremacy which he challengeth from Peters authority, is fabulous. For it is cleare, that if Christ would haue had vn­der him any such singular vniuersall head, ouer his Church; now, by reason of this present occasion, had been the onely time to haue made it knowne: but in that he said in so plaine and expresse words, It shall not be so among you; he made it plaine to the contrary. Hence it was that Saint Bernard ap­plyed these words of Christ, and also the words of Peter him­selfe, against that false challenge of the Pope, saying: Bernard 2. Booke of consideration. Peter could not giue that he had not; did he giue Lordship? heare what he saith: Not as ouer Gods heritage, but being a patterne to the flocke. And least (said he to the Pope) thou thinke it to be spo­ken onely in humility and not in truth; it is the voyce of the Lord in the Gospell. The Kings of the nations raigne ouer them; but you shall not be so. It is plaine (saith he) the Apostles are for­bidden Lordship, therefore goe thou and vsurpe greedily vnto thy selfe, either Lording it Apostleship, or being Apostolike Lordship, thou are flatly forbidden either. All which most euidently de­clareth, that the Popes vniuersall supremacy, which he clai­meth from Saint Peter, is flat forgery.

3 Secondly, they say, To Peter onely Christ committed the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen. For the clearing of which point, we are first to make knowne what those Keyes are; for by that the most ignorant may the more easily iudge, whe­ther to the rest of the Apostles, Christ did not also giue the Keyes. Luke 11.52. Christ himselfe in the 11. Chapter of Saint Lukes Gospell, Matthew 16.19. declareth the first key to be Knowledge: and in the 16. Chapter of Saint Matthews Gospell, the second to be Power. For the first key (to wit, knowledge) it is cleare by Saint Iohn in his 17. Iohn 17.8. Chapter of his Gospell, that Christ gaue it as well to the other Apostles, as to Peter. For in praying [Page 117]for them all in generall, he vttered these words to his Father: I haue giuen thy words vnto them which thou gauest me, Iohn 15.15. and they haue receiued them. Againe, Chapter 15. speaking to all his Apostles in generall, he said. All things that I haue heard of my Father, haue I made knowne vnto you. Likewise in the 14. Iohn 14.26. Chapter, speaking to them all in generall, he said: These things haue I spoken vnto you being present with you, but the comforter which is the holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remem­brance which I haue told you: So that hereby it plainly appea­reth, that Christ gaue this first key to all the Apostles in ge­nerall, and therefore not to Peter alone.

4 Now touching the second key, namely, the power of binding and loosing, remitting and retaining sinnes, it is as cleare, that Christ gaue it indifferently to all the Apostles. Matthew 16.19. For as Saint Matthew in his 16. Chapter sheweth, that he said to Peter; Whatsoeuer thou bindest on earth, shall be bound in hea­uen, and whatsoeuer thou loosest in earth, shall be loosed in heauen: Matth. 18.18. so in the 18. Chapter he declareth, that Christ spake these very same words to all the Apostles, saying: Whatsoeuer ye bind in earth, shall be bound in heauen; and whatsoeuer ye loose in earth, shall be loosed in heauen. And likewise Saint Iohn in his 20. Chapter witnesseth, that he said also to them all in ge­nerall: Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit, they are remitted vnto them; Iohn 20.23. whose sinnes ye retaine, they are retained. Therefore it is ma­nifest that Christ gaue this key also to all the other Apostles as well as to Peter. And therefore it is which Saint Origine saith; Orig. in first Treatise on Matthew. This saying, to thee will I giue the Keyes, is common to all the rest of the Apostles; and the words that follow, as spoken to Peter, are common to all. Likewise Saint Augustine saith; August. 124. Treatise vpon Iohn. When they were all asked, Peter alone doth make answer, and it was said vnto him: And I will giue thee the keyes; as though he alone had receiued authority to bind and loose, whereas he had spoken that for them all, and receiued this, as bearing in himselfe the person of vnity. Wherefore in another place, reprouing those Romane heretikes of his time, who would needs haue those words to be spoken to Peter alone, and him to be the Rocke on which Christ said, he would build his Church, [Page 118]said; Augustine in his Booke of the troubles of the Christians. Wretched men, whiles in Peter they vnderstand not Christ, that is the Rocke: and whiles they will not beleeue that the keyes are giuen to the Church, they haue quite lost the Keyes out of their hands. In his Trea­tise vpon Iohn. For (said he) if this was said onely to Peter, to thee will I giue the Keyes; thou the Church hath them not. And thus much touching the second point: But now before I come to the third point, I must craue pardon to digresse a little, for that because the Pope challengeth from the autho­rity of the keyes, to haue an absolute power to forgiue sinne, and to giue the kingdome of Heauen; I thinke it very need­full to open that mistery of the vse of the Keyes, and how farre their powers doe extend.

5 Thou knowest (Christian Reader) that the vse of Keyes, are to open and to shut; to let in, and to keepe out such as are not meete to come in. Now from these meta­phors and their properties, haue the spirituall keyes their titles and resemblances of properties; and doe in this man­ner both open and shut, to wit, by the sentence of the Law, to shut the locke of excommunication against open offen­ders; and by the sentence of the Gospell, to open it againe, to those that openly repent & confesse their sins. And this is it which their Haymo saith: Haymo in Homely vpon the feast of Pe­ter and Paul. By Keyes we must vnderstand knowledge and power to discerne between good and bad; that those whom thou seest to abide in the true faith, thou shalt iudge them worthy of Heauen; and those whom thou seest to depart from the true faith, thou shalt iudge them worthy of hell fire. The Bishops (saith he) Ibidem. binde men, when they separate them from the society of the Church, and keepe them from receiuing the body and bloud of Christ: he looseth them, when as after repentance made, he recei­ueth him in againe into the fellowship of the Congregation, and ad­mitteth him to the Lords Table. And this is now all the power the Church hath by the two Keyes; as for sinne, Christ him­selfe hath said, Matthew 16.19. & 18.18. it is both bound and loosed in heauen by God himselfe. Howbeit, we denie not that it is done according to the true sentence, and cen­sure of the Minister, euen as the same Writer saith: Jbidem. By thy sentence in earth, I shall confirme it in Heauen. So that by this we see, that the ministeriall binding and loosing, remitting, [Page 119]and retaining sinnes, is nothing else, but by denouncing the binding sentence, and pronouncing the loosing sen­tence, to declare vnto men, that they are both bound and loosed by God in heauen. And hereof it is which that ma­ster of the sentences, (Peter Lumbard) saith: Lumb. 4. Se [...]m. 18. dist. Nec ideo. God hath gi­uen Priests power to binde and loose, that is to say (saith hee) to declare vnto men, that they be eyther bound or loosed. It were against vs (saith Saint Augustine) August. 2. booke 11. chap. Permentanus. that we should be compelled to graunt that this thing were done of men, but not through or by men. Againe he saith, August. in his Booke of the ladders of Paradise. The Lord graunted the office of Bapti­zing vnto many; but the power and authoritie in Baptisme to for­giue sinnes, he hath reserued onely to himselfe. And to this a­greeth that which Saint Ambrose saith, Ambrose in his 9. Book [...] 76. Epistle. The Lord remai­neth alone, for no man can be partner with God in for giuing of sinnes. And thus then who seeth not, that albeit sinne bee ministerally remitted and retained, yet is it actually done of God himselfe. So that whereas the Pope would craftily ascribe this absolute power to Saint Peter; all men may apparantly see, he doth it but to draw the same power to himselfe, that so men might esteeme of his pardons, and take them of his owne price. And thus much touching the vse of the keies, and how farre their powers doe ex­tend.

5 Thirdly, whereas they say, To Peter Christ committed the care and charge of the whole Church: we answere, that it is not any where to be found in all the Scriptures, that Christ said to Peter, To thee I commit the care and charge of the whole Church: but this wee finde in the 2 Corinth. 2. Cor. 11.28. Gal. 2.7. 11. cap. that Saint Paul said of himselfe: I am cumbered daily, and haue the care of all Churches. Againe, we read in the second chapter to the Galathians, that Saint Paul speaking of Peters charge and his owne, said: The Gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to mee as the Gospell ouer the cir­cumcision was committed to Peter. Now then, seeing that cir­cumcision was but that one Nation of the Iewes, and the vncircumcision all the other Nations of the World; who had the more vniuersall charge? not Peter, but Paul: and yet indeed and truth, to say that euery of the other Apo­stles [Page 120]charge was not as vniuersal, Acts 9.15. as either Peters or Paules, i [...] as plaine foolerie, as to say, that because the Lord said to Annanias of Paul: Hee is a chosen vessell vnto mee, to beare my name before the Gentiles, and Kings, and children of Israel; therefore none but Paul. Or, because Peter said of him­selfe, Acts 15.7. God chose out mee, that the Gentiles by my mouth, should heare the words of the Gospel, and beleeue. Ergo, not by the mouth of Paul, nor any other of the Apostles, but by Pe­ters alone. John 13.13. Or to say, because Iohn is said, Iohn 13.23. to be the Disciple whom Iesus loued, therefore none but Iohn. Or because Saint Chrisostome said of Iohn, Chrisost. ad Pap [...]. Antioch. Hom. 73. He was the Pil­lar of all the Churches in the World, therefore none but hee. To bee briefe, it is cleare by Saint Matthew, chapter 28. verses 19.20. and chapter 18. verse 19. and by S. Marke, chapter 16.15. and to the end of the chapter, that Christ committed the care and charge of his whole Church, to all his Apostles indifferently; and that by his owne commis­sion, euery of their authorities, was as great and as large as either Peters or Paules. And therefore fabulous is it, that the Pope doth challenge, from the right of Saint Peter, to haue the vniuersall care and charge of the whole Church committed vnto him, or any one man in all the world. S. Ambrose speaking of this poynt at large, concludeth thus, Ambrose of the dignitie of Priesthood. The sheepe and flocke which Peter receiued, we all receiued the same together with him. Now, they will not say that S. Am­brose was a Pope of Rome, therefore they must needes grant that he spake this generally of all Bishops, Pastors, and Mi­nisters, and not of the Popes of Rome alone.

6 Fourthly, they say, To Peter Christ committed the office of feeding both Sheepe and Lambes, olde and young: to which we answere; It is cleare, that by feeding, Christ meant the feeding of the soule by preaching the Word of eternall life: Now, whether this office of preaching, was com­mitted to Peter alone, and not generally to all the other Apostles, the verie plaine and expresse words of their gene­rall commission, set downe by Saint Matthew, and Saint Marke, doth declare. Saint Matthew noteth them thus from Christs owne mouth, chap. 28.18.19. All power [Page 121]is giuen to mee in heauen and in earth: Matthew 28.18.19. Marke 16.15.20. Goe therefore and teach all Nations. Saint Marke, chap. 16.15.20. thus: Goe ye in­to all the World, and preach the Gospel to euerie creature. And in the same chapter it followeth: And they went forth and preached euerie where. Now then, what sheepe or Lambes, old or young, had Peter to feede, that the other Apostles had not? his commission could extend no further, then all the World ouer, and to euery creature, and so farre did theirs extend as well as his. Therefore, how can the Pope iustly claime from Peter, to be the onely feeding Father of Gods vniuersall Church? Saint Augustine saith, August. in his Booke of the troubles of Christians, chap. 3. Those words spoken to Peter; Feede my Sheepe; when they were spoken to Peter, they were spoken to all Priests and Ministers: If to all, then not to any one alone, and consequently not to the Pope.

7 Fiftly, they say Peter was that Rocke on which Christ said he would build his Church, against which the Gates of hell should not preuaile; which being true, how was it then, that the gates of hell, (to wit, the power of Sathan) did so preuaile against him, that hee failing in the fundamentall point of Religion, attempted to debarre the recouerie of the most happie estate of the vniuersall Church; for which Christ called him Sathan? For no sooner had Christ impar­ted vnto him, what things he was to suffer at Ierusalem, for the recouerie thereof, but presently hee gaue Christ councell he should not doe it: Matth. 16.22. Maister (said hee) pittie thy selfe, this thing shall not be vnto thee. So that if Christ had followed his counsell, euery particular member of his Church had beene damned. Therefore it is cleare, Peter was not that Rocke on which Christ said he would build his Church, against the which the gates of hell should not preuaile.

8 Furthermore, if Peter had beene that Rocke, against which the power of the Deuill should not haue preuailed; how was it, that Saint Paul found him a desembler in Reli­gion, for which himselfe saith, Gala. 2. Gala. 2.11.12.13. hee reproued him before all men in the Citie of Antioch. Also, if he had been that Rock against which the power of hell should not pre­uaile, [Page 122]whence was it then, that hee became an Apostata, by cursing himselfe, if euer he knew Christ, and by denying him with an oathe. Matth. 26.72.73.74. Therefore it is euident, hee was not that maine Rocke, against which the Gates of hell should not preuaile, nor on which Christ said he would build his Church: yea, the very expresse words of the Text decla­reth that he did not meane vpon Peter: for the words are not vpon thee, Matth. 16.18. but vpon this Rocke. That is, saith Saint Au­gustine, August. in his 3. S [...]r. vpon Matthew. vpon this Rocke which thou hast confessed, vpon this Rocke which thou hast acknowledged, saying, Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God, I will build my Church. I will build thee vpon mee, and not mee vpon thee: for men willing to build vpon men, said; I hold of Paul, I am of Apollo, and I holde of Peter: But others that would not build vpon Peter, but vpon the Rocke said, I holde of Christ. And this interpretation of Saint Augustine, their Doctor Beda so approueth of, Beda vpon the 1. Cor. the first chap. that in his interpretating the same words, hee obserueth Augustines words verbatim. Likewise their Docter Haymo, thus ex­poundeth the same words, Haymo of Pe­ter and Paul. Because (saith he) thou hast professed mee truely to be the sonne of the liuing God; vpon this Rocke, that is vpon me whom thou hast confessed to be the sonne of the liuing God, I will build my Church. Thus then wee see that Christ himselfe is that Rocke, on which hee said hee would build his Church, and not Peter. And the rather, be­cause it is not any where found in all the Scriptures, that the power of hell did euer any way preuaile against him, but may euidently be proued, it did more preuaile against Peter, then against any other of all the Apostles: therefore it is without all contradiction, that Christ himselfe is that maine Rocke; yea the same on which Saint Hierome wit­nesseth Peter himselfe did helpe to build the Church. For he complaining how the Christian Doctrine was then in his time corrupted in Rome, said, Hierome idem aduersus Iouianum. Was there none other place in all the World, to receiue this voluptuous Doctrine, but that which Peters preaching had built on the Rocke Christ? Decla­ring thereby, that Christ was that maine Rocke, and not Peter. 1. Cor. 3.11. And therefore it was that Saint Paul. 1 Cor. 3.11. speaking of the maine Rocke or Foundation, concludeth [Page 123]hereof thus: Other foundation can no man lay, then that which is laid, which is Iesus Christ.

9 But heere now perhappes they will obiect and say, Did not Christ say to Peter, thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a Rocke, or a Stone? We answere, Hee did. For if wee speake of the Ministeriall foundation, no man can deny but that Peter was therein a Rocke, or a Stone, as the Prophets and the other Apostles were: for that Saint Paul speaking of the ministeriall foundation, E­phesians 2.20. saith plainely; Ephes. 2.20. It is built (to wit the Church) vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Iesus Christ himselfe being the head corner stone. But in that hee bringeth in Christ among them, and ascribeth vnto him onely the prerogatiue of singularitie; it is cleare, that euen in the ministeriall foundation, hee allowed none singular but Christ alone: And therefore that prerogatiue of singulari­tie, which the Pope would claime by right from Peter, is e­uen flat forgery, and a foolish fantasie.

10 I am not ignorant what a shuffling they keepe with Saint Hierome, to proue Peter one singular in the ministeri­all foundation; but if it be possible for any man to speake plainer words to the contrary, then these, let the Reader iudge: Hieron. lib. 1. aduersus Iouian. Yee will say (said hee) the Church is founded vpon Peter: notwithstanding in another place, the same thing is done vpon all the Apostles, and all receiued the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen, and the strength of the Church is founded equally vp­on them all. And hereof it is which Saint Origen saith, Origen. in 16. Matth. tract. 1. If onely vpon Peter thou thinke the whole Church to be built, what wilt thou say to Iohn and euery of the Apostles? And a little after. For, if this speech, To thee will I giue the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen be common to all, why then should not all that which goeth before, and that which followeth after (as spo­ken to Peter) be common to them all? By which we see plainly, that seeing Peter is not a Singular in the Ministeriall foun­dation, the Pope very vniustly challengeth that preroga­tiue from him.

11 Sixtly, they say, For Peter the prayer was made: as though Christ had not praied aswel for the other Apostles, [Page 124]as for him. But for the blowing away of this miste, I re­ferre the Reader to the seauenteenth chapter of Saint Iohns Gospell, where he shall see, that Christ prayed as well for all the other Apostles, as for Peter: whereupon it was, that Saint Augustine wrote thus against those Heretikes of his time, Augustine in his first booke of his qu [...]stion vpon the Old and New Te­stament, the 75 question. Did Christ pray but for Peter, and not for Iames and Iohn? It is manifest, that all the Apostles were meant in Peter, because in another place hee saith: I pray for them whom thou hast giuen me, and I will that where I am, they may be also.

12 Lastly they say thus: Peter had an ordinary power from whence all the other Apostles receiued their power and authority. For answere whereof, and for breuitie sake, I am compelled also to referre the Reader to these places of Scripture, Iohn 20.21.22.23. Matth. 18.18.19. and 10.5.6.7.8. and 28.18.19.20. Iohn 14.26. Acts 2.1.2.3. which doth plainely proue, that all the Apostles in generall, and euery particular of them, receiued their power and autho­rity, immediately from Christ, as Peter himselfe did. And hence it was that Saint Cyprian knitteth vp the conclusion thus, Cyprian of the simplicitie of Prelates. Christ gaue to all his Apostles, like and equall power and authority. And where then was that ordinary power of Saint Peter, that the Pope should challenge from him that prerogatiue, to haue a singular power and principalitie, to giue power and authoritie to all Bishops, Pastours and Ministers, iust no where to be found. For albeit our Saui­our Christ, seeing Peter so forwards aboue the rest, and fore-seeing also, how prone & ready he was to fall before any of the rest; tooke the more care of him, and paines with him, and vsed greater motiues to incourage him to constancie: it doth not therefore follow, Peter, Peter, none but Peter. Nay, we see it most euident, to be altogether no such matter: onely it was a subtill illusion whereby they did cunningly conueigh all power in the Romish iurisdicti­on to the Pope, and by which they labour still to retaine it; and not onely that power which they faine Peter to haue had aboue the other Apostles, but euen that also which God himselfe hath aboue all: for thus doe they write, See Chap. 1. Sect. 3. In the Pope there is all manner of power aboue all po­wer, [Page 125]as well of heauen as of earth. Againe, Ibidem. The Pope hath power ouer the Angels both good and bad. Againe, Ibidem. The Pope hath power to commaund the Angels, and hath power ouer the dead. Againe, Ibidem. The Pope hath so great power both in Purga­tory, and also in Hell, that hee may deliuer by his Indulgences, and place in the heauen, and habitation of the blessed, as many soules as he will. Againe, Ibidem. The Pope is all, and aboue all. By which, what else will they proue, but that the Pope is the God of all power, and consequently an almighty God? Moreouer, thus doe they write, Ibidem. It is sacriledge to doubt of the Popes power, for he is the cause of causes; therefore we must make no question about his power, seeing there is no cause of the first cause. And hereby they will proue him to be an eternall God. But forasmuch as they fain the Pope to haue receiued al his power from Peter; let them shew vs, first in what place of Scripture they find Peter to haue receiued this power frō Christ: secondly, where any of all the Apostles haue thus written of Peters power: if they can shew none, then it is certaine Peter neuer had that power, and therefore the Pope could not receiue it from him: and yet notwithstan­ding doe they further write thus, Cha. 1. Sect. [...] The Pope hath the place vpon earth, not of a pure man, but of a true God. Againe, Ibidem. Our holy Father the Pope is an vndoubted and true God on earth: Therefore Sect. 4. Those things hee doth, hee doth them as God: Sect. 2. And is to be taken for God, and worshipped with diuine honour as God. And to ratifie the truth heereof, they close vp the whole with this title; Sect. 2. Our Lord God the Pope. Therefore forasmuch as none is to be found in any part of all the Christian Churches in the vniuersall world, that doth claime to himselfe the essentiall properties and prero­gatiues of God, but the Pope: it is without all contradicti­on, none but the Pope is that Antichrist, The man of sinne, and sonne of perdition, fore-told by Saint Paul, 2 Thessaloni­ans 2. That should sit as God in the Temple of God, shewing him­selfe to be God. To be briefe, as they cannot shew any one Scripture, by the authoritie whereof the Pope may iustly claime from Peter these essentiall prerogatiues of God, or the title of God; so can they not shew by any one place [Page 126]of Scripture, that Christ cuer gaue to Peter any such titles or dignities, as the Pope yet further claimeth from him; as to be called the Ʋicar of Christ: Supreame head of the Church: or Prince of Priests. Nay, albeit the contrary may be direct­ly proued, in that when as the strife was risen amongst the Apostles about supreame principalitie, Luke 22. Christ himselfe tooke in hand the matter, and thus resolued them, saying, Luke 22.24. Matth. 20.25. Marke 10.24. Matth. 20. Marke 10. It shall not be so among you: but whosoeuer will be great among you, shall be your seruant; and whosoeuer will be chiefe of you, shall be seruant to all the rest: yet will they haue Peter to be the Prince of all the Apostles, that so they might deriue that dignitie to the Pope. to make him Prince of all Priests. Therefore, for the knitting vp of all that hitherto we haue intreated of, and the manifest o­pening and clearing of the whole matter, and of all that we haue said concerning this point: this I say, that foras­much as wee haue proued this maine fundamentall prin­ciple, not to stand vpon a sound ground, whatsoeuer is built thereon can not stand. For seeing Christ gaue no greater principalitie to Peter, then hee did to any of the o­ther Apostles, it was not possible, that Peter could be the supreame head of Christs vniuersall Church. And that it may also appeare, how vnlawfull it was for Peter, or any but Christ alone, so to be; Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, himselfe plainely proueth from Saint Paul, as may appeare, where hee reprehending Iohn Bishop of Constan­tinople, for attempting to be supreame head of the Church, gaue him to vnderstand, that therein he declared himselfe to be the fore-runner of Antichrist: And to shew him that he was neuer able to answere that iniurie done to Christ, he demaunded of him this question, saying; Gregor. lib. 4. Epist. 38. If Saint Paul would not haue the members of the Lords body to bee subiect to any head, but to Christ, no not to the Apostles themselues; what wilt thou answere to Christ the head of the vuiuersall Church at the last iudgement, that thus goeth about by the name of Ʋ ­niuersall Bishop, to make all his members subiect to thee? Whom doest thou immitate in this so peruerse a name, but Lucifer, that would haue beene head ouer all the Angels in heauen? By which [Page 127]hee proueth this saying of Cardinall Cusanus, Cusanus ad Bohemos epist. 2. The mem­bers vmted to the Chaire & ioyned to the Pope make the Church to be but an Antichristian delusion; and the Pope for tak­ing vpon him to be supreame head of Christs vniuersall Church, to be that great Antichrist which the Church of Rome should take for her other husband besides Christ, whereby she should proue her selfe to be indeed the whoore of Babylon, mentioned by the Angell in the seauenteenth chapter of the Reuelation. For it is manifest by Saint Paul, Romans 7.2. That she that hath two husbands at once, is an whoore. And therefore this maketh the case to stand cleare, that Rome cannot be the Mother of all Christian Churches, vnlesse wee may conclude that all Christian Churches are the children of an whoore, which God forbid.

13 The Church of God vnder the Law, The Church vnder the Law, had God onely to her husbād as the Church vnder the Gos­pel hath Christ onely. had none o­ther Head or husband but God himselfe, as appeareth by the P [...]ophet Esay 45.5. where hee said to the Church of the Iewes: Hee that made thee, is thine husband, whose name is, the Lord of Hostes. So by the words of Saint Paul, it ap­peareth as plainely, that vnder the Gospell, the Church hath none other head, but Christ: yea, as well that part that is Millitant, as that that is Triumphant, and both to­gether, because they both make but one Church. And therefore writing to the Church of Corinth, in his 2 Epistle 11. chapter, 2. verse, he said thus vnto her. I haue prepared you for one husband, to present you a pure Virgin to Christ. And to the intent that all might know, that the Church Tri­umphant, and the Church Millitant, hath both but one and the same head, hee writing to the Church of Ephesus, chapter 1.20.21.22.23. said thus vnto them, of Christ. God hath set him at his right hand in heauenly places, farre a­boue all principalitie and power, and might, and domination, and euery Name, that is named, not in this world onely, but also in that that is to come. And hath made all things subiect vnder his feete, and hath giuen him ouer all things to be the head of the Church, which is his body, euen the fulnesse of him that fil­leth all in all things. And to the Colossians, chapter 1. verses [Page 128]16.17.18. thus: For by him were all things created, which are in heauen, and which are in earth, things visible and inuisible: whether they be Thrones or Dominions, or Principalities or Po­wers, all things were created by him, and for him. And hee is before all things, and in him all things consist. And hee is the head of the body of the Church: hee is the beginning and the first begotten of the dead, that in all things hee might haue the preeminence: for it pleased the Father, that in him should all fulnesse dwell. By which it is manifest, Christ Iesus alone is the head of the whole Church, The Pope can­not claime an­tiquity of Bi­shopricke from Peter, because Peter was not the first bishop, but Iames. and not Peter; and there­fore the Pope cannot rightly claime the vniuersall headship from him. If Peter had beene the supreame head of the Church, why was hee not then the first Bishop of the Church, but agreed with Iames and Iohn, to make Iames the Iust the first Bishop, as Clement the first witnesseth, in these words; Clement. lib. 6. Hypotip. Ierusalem the most ancient mother church and not Rome. Peter, Iames and Iohn, after the Assumption of our Sauiour, challenged not this prerogatiue vnto themselues, but appoynted Iames the Iust Bishop of Ierusalem? And as these words of Clement proue Peter not to be the first Bishop; so doe they proue Rome, not to be the first Church, where the first Apostolicall Bishop was placed, but Ierusalem: therefore not Rome, but Ierusalem, must needes be the most auncient Apostolike Church.

14 That must needes be the most auncient Apostolike Church, whose ministers Christ himselfe appointed the A­postles first to be, which was the Church of Iewrie, as ap­peareth by S. Mathew chap. 10.5.6. where, after he had re­peated the names of the twelue Apostles, which Christ had chosen, said: These twelue did Iesus send forth, and comman­ded them, saying: Goe not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the Cities of the Samaritans enter yee not: but goe yee rather to the lost sheepe of the bouse of Israell. Therefore the Church of Ierusalem, was the most auncient Apostolike Church, and not the Church of Rome, which was the chiefe of the Gentiles

15 Againe, that Church must needes be the Mother of the most auncient Catholique h [...]urch, in which Christ himselfe first planted the Faith and Religion which should [Page 129]be Catholique; and by the meanes of whose Ministers the Catholique Church should receiue it: which Faith and Religion Saint Mathew, chap. 26.55. and Saint Luke chap. 21.37.38. witnesseth Christ taught vnto the people daily in the Temple of Ierusalem, and commaunded her Ministers (the Apostles) to publish the same afterwards to the vni­uersall world, Mathew 28.19.20. therefore Ierusalem, and not Rome, is the Mother of the most auncient Catholique Church.

16 Moreouēr, There was no Romish Church at all 14. yeeres after Peter was called to be an Apostle, Ierusalem must needs be the mother Church of all Christian Nations, for that in her all the Apostles re­ceiued the holy Ghost, and the gifts of tougues, that euery Nation might be taught by them in their owne language, what to beleeue, and doe, to be saued; the which they had largely put in practise, during well-neere foureteene yeeres immediately after their calling, before Peter came to Rome. For they cannot denie but that Peter came not to Rome, till the second yeere of Cladius the Emperour, which was in the yeere of Christ his incarnation 44. Before which time Peter planted many Churches in diuers Coasts. For themselues affirme in their Rozarie, that before he came to Rome, hee spent his time preaching in Iewry, Syria, Antiochia, and other places: Many Chur­ches were plan­ted in the world before Peter came to Rome, Therefore seeing that besides those other Churches which were planted by the rest of the Apostles, Peter plan­ted many before he planted a Church at Rome, it is cleare, that when as he had planted a Church in Rome, shee could be but one of the Daughters, and not the Mother of the most ancient Catholique and Apostolike Church.

17 Lastly, it must needs be the most ancient Church, and the Mother of all the Churches Millitant, from which the Church Triumphant, hath her name deriued; but Saint Paul, Galathians 4, and Saint Iohn, Reuelations 21. sheweth her name to be deriued from Ierusalem, therefore Ierusalem (and not Rome) was the Mother of all Christian Churches Millitant: That is to say, the onely figure of the vniuersall Mother; for as Saint Matthew, Chapter 23.9. sheweth the vniuersall Father to be, not in earth, but in Heauen: so Saint Paul, Galathians 4.26. sheweth the vniuersall Mother, not [Page 130]to be in earth, That must needs be the most an [...]i [...]nt Church Milli­tant, trō which the Church Triumphant hath her name der [...]ued. but in Heauen.

18 And now (Christian Reader) as wee shewed thee at large in our fifth Chapter, that before the yeere of Christ 607. there was no Popish Church in Rome; and here, that before the yeere of Christs incarnation 44. there was no Romish Church at all; so will we now shew thee more plainly, that after there was a Romish Church, and that shee was be­come most famous for her Faith and Religion, that yet euen then, shee was not the Mother, but a Daughter, not the head, but a chiefe member of the Apostolike and Catholike Church. Tertullian, who liued in the next age after the A­postles, wrote thus: Tertul. de prae­scription. centra Haereticos. Runne ouer, and behold the Apostolique Churches, whereas the Apostles Chaires are yet still continued, and whereas the Authenticall writings of the Apostles are pro­nounced, sounding out the voyce, and representing the face of each one of them. The next Countrey to you is Achaia: There haue you the Church of Corinth. If ye be not farre from Macedonia, there haue you the Church of Philippi, and the Church of Thessa­lonica: If ye may goe ouer into Asia, there haue ye the Church of Ephesus. If ye border neere to Italie, there haue ye the Church of Rome. Tertullian De praescription. Co­tra Haereticos. These so many and so great Churches, are all that same one first Church, planted by the Apostles, from whence issued all the rest. And so are they all first Churches, and all Aposto­like, in that they all follow one vnitie. And thus we see, that al­beit at this present time, when Tertullian wrote this, Ierusa­lem was destroyed by enemies, Rome was yet then but a chiefe part of the Church, and not as they write; The mother and mistresse of all: neither as they write, that 24. q. 1. c. Rogamas &c. Sacro sancta. therefore all Churches are subiect to the Sea of Rome, because Peters Sea was tranflated from Antioch to Rome, seeing Saint Cyprian in the open Councell of Affrica, reprehending Stephanus Bishop of Rome for seeking that subiection, said; Cyprian ad Qair [...]um. Peter was neuer so in­solent, or arrogant, as to aduance himselfe as Primate, and one vn­to whom nouices and punies should be subiect. But here they haue marred their whole matter, and ouerthrowne the antiquity of the Sea of Rome (which they of long time haue borne the World in hand, was established by Christ himselfe; and that Peter was installed therein, immediately vpon the death of [Page 131]Christ) in that they affirme Peters first Sea to be at Antioch, where Eusebius witnesseth; Anton. chro. part 1. t [...]. 6. cap. 4. para [...] 1. Eliseb. [...]. lib. 3. cap. 1.4. He was Bishop, and resident vpon that charge seauen yeeres, (euen as Gregory the Great also witnesseth) before he came to Rome. And thus we see how wickedly they haue deluded the World, touching Peters supreamacy, and the Antiquity of the Church of Rome.

19 But now whereas they alledge succession of vniuer­sall Popes; and will proue it both by Saint Ireneus and Saint Augustine, in that they numbred the Bishops of Rome from Peter. Irenaeus (they say In their Cal­lendar.) numbred the Successours by name from Peters time, thirteene: but let them proue that any one of them, was by him, or any other before him, called vniuersall Pope, and the victory shall be theirs: if they can proue none, then it is certaine, that to his time there was none. Also whereas their Doctor Master Harding saith, Harding Apol. cap. 5. Diuisio 1. Augustine Epist. 165. Saint Augustine, hauing reckoned vp in order the Bishops of Rome to Anastasius, Successour to Siricus, who was the eight and thirty after Peter saith, that in all that number & role of Bishops, there is not found one that was a Donatist: and therefore he con­cludeth: Ergo the Donatists be not Catholique. So we say by the same rule, that forasmuch as Saint Augustine found in all that rolle not one that was, or had the title of vniuer­sall Pope, but Bishop onely, it is cleare that vniuersall Popes cannot be Catholique. Againe, that it may appeare that Saint Augustine did not approue of any such haughty ti­tles, nor allowed any lawfull, but the name of Bishop. He with the assent of 215. Bishops in the third Councell of Car­thage, made this decree: Councel Car­thage. Cannon 26. It hath liked vs that a Bishop of a First See be not called Prince of Priests, or Highest Priest, or any such like, but onely a Bishop of a First See. Which words albeit their Doctor Master Harding Harding Apo­log. cap. 4. Di­uis. 2. would not haue to extend to the Bishop of Rome; yet in the words following, by a conse­quence he granteth it doth. For saith he, By these two words, Prima Sedes those Fathers vnderstood any City, in which a Pa­triarke or Primate hath his See. I call it a First See, or rather (if it might be permitted) a Primate See. In great Cities where the Highest Courts were kept for Iustice, and where the chiefe [Page 132]Pagan Priests of the Latines, named Primi Flamines were resi­dent before the comming of Christ, there after Christs comming were Patriarkes or Primates placed, by whom the weighty matter of Bishops should be decided. And we proued in our 5. Chap­ter and 8. Section, that the foure first Patriarkall Cities were these. Ierusalem, Antioch, Rome, and Alexandria. Therefore the words of the Councels Decree, must of force as well con­cerne the Patriarke of Rome, as any of the other three Pa­triarkes. And that it may appeare they doe, their Gration al­ledging the words of that Councell, applyeth them to the Bi­shop of Rome. Also in the glose are these words: Dist. 99. Prime. This is the third part of this distinction; wherein it is said, that the Pope ought not to be called vniuersall Bishop. And as to this Councell, I finde not in any Prouinciall Councell the name of Pope; so neither in the first, second, nor third generall Councell, doe I finde the name of Pope once mentioned, but the name Bi­shop onely. True it is, that in the fourth generall Councell, holden at Chalcedon, Councell of Chalcedon. Action 16. about the yeere of Christ 451. the name Pope was giuen to the Bishop of Rome, but not by the Councell, but onely by the Bishop of Romes Legate, Lucen­tius; as appeareth in the 16 action. Who when hee saw that the Councell had set downe a Decree (for the restraining the Bishop of Rome from the vniuersall authority which he challenged) and would not reuerse it, he said in the behalfe of himselfe, and Paschasinus his fellow Legate: If ye will not put the matter againe to voyces, yet let our protestation against it be set downe in record, that we may know what to informe the Pope of the vniuersall Church. The Iudges answered: That which we pronounced, the whole Councell hath approued. The title which this Councell gaue to the Bishop of Rome (as appeareth in the beginning of this 16. Action) was the same which they there gaue to the Bishop of Constantinople, which was Archbishop, and not Pope.

20 And now whereas their Master Harding saith, Harding. A­polo. cap. 4. Di­uision 3. that Gregory the Great, affirmeth, that this Councell did offer to Leo (then Bishop of Rome) the title of vniuersall Pope, and he refused it, this we see not to be so; but had it beene as they say, that this Councell did offer it vnto him, and he refused it; [Page 133]it maketh as well to proue the title not lawfull, nor to des­cend from Saint Peter, as that the Councell refused to giue it vnto him. For if the Title had descended successiuely from Peter, and beene a lawfull Title, what cause had he to refuse it? Againe, if the Title bad beene a lawfull Title, why did Gregory himselfe refuse it, when Eulogius Patriarke of Alex­andria did offer it vnto him, and not simply refused it, but thus flowted him for his folly? Gregory. lib. 7. Epist. 30. Ecce (saith he) Behold euen the Title of your Letter, ye haue written the proud poefie, meaning me the vniuersall Pope, notwithstanding I haue forbidden it; I be­seech your holinesse doe so no more. Againe, if the Title had been a lawfull Title, why did he call Iohn Bishop of Constantinople, Gregory. lib. 6. Epist. 30. The fore-runner of Antichrist, for seeking to bring it into the Church: And say; Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 34. By this pride of his, what else is signified, but that the time of Antichrist is at hand? Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 34. The King of pride is at hand, and an Army of Priests is prepared, which is a lamen­table thing to be spoken. Yea, and why to make all men to know him by that Title, did hee thus describe him, saying; Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 38. He is Antichrist, that shall claime to be called vniuersall Bishop, and shall haue a guard of Priests to attend vpon him? And also to seeke to cleare all his Predecessours to Peters time, from euer claiming that Antichristian Title, saying: Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 32.36. None of my Predecessours Bishops of Rome, euer consented to vse that vngodly name, no Bishop of Rome euer tooke vpon him that name of singu­laritie. And further, to shew what an vnlawfull Title it was to be called the vniuersall head of Christs Church, and the danger that might ensue, said; Gregory, lib. 4. Epist. 32. If we haue but one head, the fall of that head, is the fall of the whole Church: If any man pre­sume to take vpon him the name of vniuersall Bishop, the whole Church falleth downe from her estate, when hee falleth which is called vniuersall; but farre may that name of blasphemy be from all Christian mindes. By which it appeareth plainely, that the Romish that is now, which hath an vniuersall Pope for her Husband and head, is not the Church of Saint Peter, but the Church of Saint Antichrist. And therefore to say that the Romish Church which Saint Peter first planted in Rome, was one and the same that the Church of Rome is now, is most horrible blasphemie, and a meanes to bring a great [Page 134]scandall vpon that part of the Primitiue Church. For if she was the same; then was shee that Whore of Babylon, mentio­ned by the Angell in the 17. Chapter of the Reuelation. For so saith Ioacham Abbas of the Popish Church. Joacham on the 17. chapter of the Reuela­tion. The very Text it selfe doth teach (saith he) how that the woman beguiled with gold, and which committeth (pirituall fornication with the Princes of the earth, is the very Church of Rome, which Babylon­like playeth spiritually the Whore with stockes and stones. Againe, if that first Church of Rome was the same that this Church vnder vniuersall Popes is; then was shee the same which the Angell in the 18. Chapter of the Reuelation saith, Is falne, and become the habitation of Diuels: for so their Saint Katha­rine of Siene saith the Church vnder the Popes is: Katharine in a prayer for the reformation. Selling (saith she) through Symony the grace of the holy Ghost, abusing ecclesiasticall matters, corrupting and killing the soules which Christ hath redeemed with his blood, &c. O Tabernacle, but of the Diuell. And of which Ioacham also saith: Ioacham vpon the 1. and 2. chapters of Je­ [...]emy. This is the Sy­nagogue of Sathan, and his seate. Therefore to say that this se­cond Church of Rome, is the same that Saint Peter first plan­ted in Rome, is most damnable blasphemie. And thus much for the conclusion of all that which wee haue hitherto in­treated of. Now let vs proceede.

CHAP. IX. Tending to resolue all men, that the Popish Church can­not be the true and most auncient Catholique Church, because the most auncient Apostolike Church was knowne by hauing onely two Sacraments, and theirs hath seauen; which iust number, as they can not bee found in Scriptures; so can they not be found once na­med by any of the foure first generall Councels, or any Prouinciall Councell, or any of the auncient Fathers, till after the rising of the great Antichrist in Rome. [Page 135] Also that their Masse was inuented by man, and not the ordinance of Christ and his Apostles. That it tendeth to the ouerthrow of the power of Christs Sacrifice on the Crosse; casteth mens mindes into a doubtfull wa­uering of their saluation, and finally dissolueth the whole harmony of the Scriptures, both Propheticall and Apostolicall.

1 THE Papists haue wonderfully deluded the multitude, in making them to beleeue that the most auncient Catholique Church, re­ceiued from the institution of Christ, and the ordinance of the Apostles these seauen Sacraments. The first, the Sacrament of Baptisme. The second, the Sa­crament of Confirmation. The third, the Sacrament of the Altar. The fourth, the Sacrament of Matrimony. The fift, the Sacrament of Orders. The sixt, the Sacrament of Penance. The seauenth, the Sacrament of Extreme Vnction. But because they cannot proue by any one place of Scrip­ture these seauen to be Sacraments, nor the number of seauen to come from the institution of Christ, or the ordi­nance of the Apostles; some of them would proue it by this reason. The books in the Apocalypse haue seauen Seales: The seauen Angels haue their seauen Trumpets: Christ hath in his right hand seauen Starres: Christ walketh in the middes of seauen golden Candlestickes Zacharie saw seauen Eyes vpon a stone: There were seauen Candlestickes in the Tabernacle. Now if this manner of reasoning will serue to proue that in the true Church of Christ, there must needs be seauen Sacra­ments, then will this manner of reasoning proue, there must needes be but two. First, for that the first Church consi­sted onely but of two persons, Adam and Heuah: Second­ly, for that the first publike places, wherein God appoyn­ted himselfe to be serued, was in number but two, the Ta­bernacle and the Temple: Thirdly, for that God gaue his Law to the Church in two Tables: Fourthly, for that the whole tenure of the Doctrine, wherein God would haue [Page 136]his Church instructed, is contained in two testaments, Old and New: Fiftly, for that the witnesses of those testaments, are said to be two: Sixtly, for that the supreame gouer­nours which God set ouer his Church, were but two, Mo­ses and Aaron: Lastly, because the whole duety of all Church-gouernours, are included in these two words, V­rim and Thummim, there must be but two Sacraments in the Church of Christ. But their Doctour M. Harding well perceiuing that this manner of proofe, will not serue the turne, he taketh a better course (as he thinketh) for he will proue his fiue added Ceremonies, to be Sacraments, be­cause they were called Sacraments by some of the aunci­ent Fathers, as indeede wee graunt they were: but what of this, seeing we can proue, that they called, not onely fiue other Ceremonies Sacraments, but many moe: as for ex­ample, Tertullian called the generall state of the Christian Faith, The Sacrament of Christian Religion, Tertull. contra Marcionem. li. 4. Saint Hie­rome called Martyrdome a Sacrament, Hierome ad Oceanum. Saint Augustine called the forme of the Crosse a Sacrament, Aug. in Serm. De Sanctis 19. Leo called the Vowe of Virginitie a Sacrament: Leo inter De­creta Leonis. cap. 14. Saint Bernard, hee called the washing of feete, The Sacrament of daily sinnes: Bern. in Serm. de Coena Dom. And yet besides these other fiue, were many moe called Sacraments: Saint Hillarie Hilar. in Mat. Cannon. 11.12. & 23. in diuers places of his wri­tings calleth Prayer a Sacrament: Fasting a Sacrament: Weeping a Sacrament, and the whole tenure of the Scrip­tures, a Sacrament. For as the Iewes, before the comming of Christ, had brought into a custome, to call their Obla­tions, and whatsoeuer tended to the worship and seruice of God, Sacrifices: So after the comming of Christ, had the Christians brought into a custome, to call almost all whatsoeuer tended to the worship and seruice of Christ, Sa­craments. Saint Augustine speaking of these and other such new deuices (which were then crept into the Church) saith; August. in his 219. Epistle. Albeit they be not against the faith, yet with seruile burdens they so oppresse our very religion, which God of his mercy would haue to be free vnder few and most manifest Sacraments of diuine seruice, that the state of the Iewes is much more tolerable: for the Iewes, notwithstanding they knew the time of libertie, yet [Page 137]were they subiect onely to the pacts and burdens of the Law of God, and not to the deuices of men. Againe hee saith; In his third Booke of Chri­stian Doctrine, 6. cap. Our Lord and his Apostles haue deliuered vnto vs a few Sacraments instead of many, and the same in doing most easie, in signification most excellent, in obseruation most reuerend; as is the Sacra­ment of Baptisme, and the celebration of the Body and Bloud of our Lord. Againe, in another place hee saith; De Symbolo ad Catechumenos. These be the two Sacraments of the Church: If these two, then not Scauen.

2 Furthermore, that it may plainely appeare, that the true Christian Church, is to be knowne onely by hauing two Sacraments, and not Seauen: Let vs heare what Saint Chrysostome saith, his words be these: Chrysost. of the Work [...] vpon Matth. hom. 49. All those things which appertained to Christ indeede, haue the Heretikes in their Schismes, Churches, the Scriptures of God, Bishops, and other order of Clerkes: likewise Baptisme, and the Sacrament of thankesgiuing, and to conclude, Christ himselfe. So that here­by we see it plainly proued, that to Saint Chrysostomes time, (which was about two hundred yeeres before the Papists had a Church) the true Church of Christ was knowne by hauing two Sacraments, and not Seauen: and therefore the Popish Church, by retaining seauen Sacraments, is ap­parently knowne to be not the true Church of Christ. That man of God Martin Luther (which before had beene a Pa­pist), speaking of this matter, saith thus; Luth. Babilo­nicall Captin. In proper speach, those we call Sacraments, which are promises with signes anne­xed, the rest that haue no signes, are bare promises; wherefore speaking hereof precisely and strictly, there are onely two Sacra­ments in the Church of God, Baptisme and the Bread, forasmuch as in these onely, we find the signes ordayned of God, and also the promise of remission of sinnes. But here because it may be, they will obiect and say, that Luther was but of a latter hatch, and but of lesse then one hundred yeers standing, let them heare what he saith that liued but in one age next after the Apostles, Tertullian by name, thus he wrote against Mar­tion the Heretike: Tertull. lib. 4. against Marti. How doest thou breake marriage, neither coupling the man and the woman together; nor being coupled, o­therwise admitting them to the Sacrament of Baptisme, and [Page 138]thankesgiuing. Note (saith the Translatour) how he striketh away fiue of the Popish Sacraments, which of their owne heads they haue deuised. Yea, and let them heare what hee saith that liued in the next age after that, S. Cyprian by name, thus hee saith: Cypr. lib. 2. Epist. 1. ad Ste­phan. Then may they be throughly sanctified, and become the children of God, if they be new borne by both the Sacraments. Now in that hee saith, both, it is cleare, that hee acknowledged but onely two Sacraments. But why should wee trouble the Reader any longer about this mat­ter, seeing the question is resolued by these two Writers of their owne. Bessarion and Paschasius? Bessarion saith, Bessa. of the Euchar. We reade that these onely two Sacraments were deliuered vs plainely in the Gospell. Paschasius saith, Pascha. of the Supper of our Lord. These be the Sa­craments of Christ in the Catholique Church, Baptisme, and the Body and Bloud of our Lord. Therefore forasmuch as by Scripture, they cannot proue their fiue ceremonies to be Sacraments; nor by the auncient Fathers (before the ri­sing of Antichrist) the number of Seauen onely; and that we haue proued, that for foure hundred yeeres next after Christ, there was but onely our two Sacraments in the Christian Church; that must needes be a counterfeit Christian Church, and of a latter hatch, that will be knowne to be the true Catholique Church, by retaining more then two, nay then three times two Sacraments. And that indeed it may more plainely appeare, that by retai­ning more then two, it is not the true Church: one of the Popes owne Pen men, describing the true Church by her owne notes and markes, saith thus: Nicol. Cusanus De potestate Ec­clesiae Romanae, Epist. 1. In this sensible world that is heere beneath, wee must learne by sensible Tokens to know the very Church of Christ: for otherwise we are not able to reach the truth. And a little after: This Church standeth of them that declare by sensible and outward tokens, that they be parta­kers of Christ, as they be, that confesse Christ to be the Sonne of God. And therefore this Church hath certaine holy Tokens, or Sacraments, ordained to that end, that thereby wee may know them that be of Christ, so farre forth as by such Tokens conie­cturall knowledge may be gathered. Therefore I say, That this Church of Christ, by this coniecturall iudgement is counted holy, [Page 139]notwithstanding wicked men and Hypocrites couer themselues vn­der the same outward tokens. And what those tokens are, he expresseth in these words following: And receiue Bap­tisme, and the Lords Supper, as well as the Godly. And thus much for this point. Now let vs see what wee can say to the Sacrament of the Altar, or Masse.

3 Their Masse they would beare the world in hand, was the ordinance of Christ, and formed and framed by the A­postles: and that Saint Peter said their Masse at Rome, and Saint Iames at Ierusalem. But how true this is, these words of their Iohannes Boemos, will plainly demonstrate: Iohan. Bohem. In his Booke of the beginning of things. cap. 1 [...]. The Masse (saith hee) so call they the Sacrifice, was first vsed to be done in such simple sort, as is yet accustomed on Good-Friday, and Easter euen, with certaine Lessons before it: But then Pope Celestinus put to the office of the Masse. Thelesphorus, Glo­ria in excelsis: But Hilarius of Pictauia, made, Et in terra. Samachus ordayned it to be sung. The Salutations which by the tearme of Dominus vobiscum be made seauen times in the Masse, were taken out of the Booke of Ruth, by Clement and Anaclet, and put in, in their places. Galasius made vp all the rest to the Offertory, in the same order they be vsed, except the Sequences and the Creede: whereof Nicholas put to the first, and Damassus the next: according to the Synode of Constanti­nople. Another added the Confiteor: Gregory linked on the Offertory. Leo, the Preface. Gelasius the great Cannon, and the lesse. The Sanctus, blessed Sixtus: and Gregory the Pater noster. Sergius tacked on Agnus, and Gregory the poste communion. The closing vp of all with, Ite missa est, Benedica­mus, Deo gratias, was Leoes inuention. Now forasmuch as themselues witnesse, that their Masse was but the inuenti­on of man, and not fully framed and finished of more then sixe hundred yeares after the decease of all the Apo­stles: How vntrue must it needes be, that Saint Peter and Saint Iames said this Masse, or that the antiquitie thereof came from Christ and his Apostles? Now that wee may see also whereunto it tendeth, and know the better how to answer vnto it, let vs obserue their owne definition: thus they define it.

4 Now touching this definition, wee are aduisedly to consider how it can possibly stand with the truth; for if it be of necessity vnto saluation, to haue the body of Christ dai­ly, or oftentimes offered for sinne; then is it certaine, that Christ by the Sacrifice of his death vpon the Crosse, did not take it away: and then are all these Scriptures confounded, which denie it needfull to haue any more oblations for sinne, or the body of Christ any more offered for the same: namely, where the Authour to the Hebrewes saith, Chapter 10.14. Heb. 10.14. Heb. 10.1. Heb. 9.26. For with one oblation hath he consecrated for euer them that be sanctified: and where hee also saith, Chapter 10.10. We are sanctified euen by the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once made: and againe, where he further saith, Chapter 9.26. Now in the end of the World hath hee appeared once to put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe: Heb. 10.18. and also where he concludeth of this point thus, Chapter 10.18. Where remission of these things is, there is no more offering for sinne. Wherefore if it be true, that of necessity Christ must continually be offered for sinne; then are these testimonies most vntrue: but in that they are yea, and Amen, they most truly declare the de­finition of their Masse to be false, and that the necessity of daily sacrificing for sinne, is not grounded vpon the truth. Also seeing that vnder the Gospell, there must not onely be but one onely oblation for sinne, but also but once offered, and that by Christ himselfe; the Papists are condemned for notorious heretikes, that will haue so many thousand ob­lations, and so many times offered by others, For doe they not thereby make that one Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse, as insufficient for the taking away of sinne, as the daily sacrificing the bodies of beasts, and shedding the bloud of Calues in Moses Law, which were daily offered, because they serued onely for sinnes past, and not for sinnes to come, [Page 141]and therefore as the holy Ghost saith, Hebrewes 10. made nothing perfect? Wherefore who seeth not, but that the brin­ging into the Church the necessity of daily sacrificing for sinne, bringeth in with it the vtter ouerthrow of the effica­cie of Christs death and bloud-shedding. But forasmuch as the holy Ghost (speaking of the daily offering of Christ for sinne) saith Hebrewes 7.27. Which needed not daily, as those high Priests, to offer vp sacrifice, first for his owne sinnes, and then for the peoples; for that did he once when he offered vp himselfe: their daily sacrificing for sinne, is not onely superfluous and vaine, but also most hereticall and blasphemous.

5 But what shall we say now, haue they nothing to an­swere? yea verily, for thus in effect they say: Thomas of A­quine. De vene­rable. Sacra. Al­ter. cap. We acknowledge and confesse, that Christ by the sacrifice of his death, freed vs from the guilt of originall sinne (that is, from that one sinne of A­dam) but for the malediction of all our actuall transgressions, that to be taken away by the blessed sacrifice of the Masse: which being true, then are wee more beholden to their sacrifice, then to Christs sacrifice. For if Christ by his sacrifice, tooke away onely the guilt of that one sinne, and left vs guilty of many thousand sinnes; what hath he done for vs? but the sacrifice of the Masse, 1. Epistle of Iohn, 1. chap. 7 verse. which taketh away the whole multi­tude of our sinnes, that is it which wee are beholden to in­deede. But how true it is, that Christ by the sacrifice of his death and bloud-shedding, cleansed vs but from that one sinne onely, these words of Saint Iohn will make it plaine, where hee saith, 1 Epistle, 1 Chapter, 7 verse. The bloud of Christ cleanseth vs from all sinne: and also these words of Saint Paul; Titus 2 Chapter, 14 verse. Titus 2 chap. 14 verse. He redeemed vs from all ini­quity: and likewise these words, where hee speaking of our condemnation by originall sinne, and the restoring vs a­gaine by Christ, saith; Romans 5 Chapter, 16 verse. om. 5.16 ver. Neither is the gift so, as that which entred in by one that sinned: for the fault came of one offence to condemnation, but the gift is of many offences to iustification.

5 Againe, if it be true, that the suffering and death of Christ, serued but for the healing the wound of originall sinne, and not also for our actuall transgressions; then is not [Page 142]this true which the Prophet Esay saith, Chapter 43.5. He was wounded for our transgressions, he was broken for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was vpon him, and with his stripes we are healed. Therefore it is very cleare, that if the Papists doctrine be true, the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles are meerely false. But if we shall beleeue them, that Christ by his sacrifice vpon the Crosse, did satisfie the wrath and iustice of God, for one part; and they by their sacrifice vpon the Altar for another part, and so Christ with them, and they with Christ, as fellow-helpers and copartners toge­ther, doe fully satisfie Gods iustice for all sinne; how shall we beleeue the Prophet in another place? where (in the person of Christ) he saith, Esay 63.3. Chapter 63.3. I haue trodden the Wine­presse alone, and of all people there is none with me. Or, that which the Authour to the Hebrewes saith of Christ, Heb. 1.3. Chapter 1.3. He hath purged our sinnes by himselfe: or that which he saith, Heb. 9.26. Chapter 9.26. He hath put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe. Wherefore as I said, if we must imbrace their do­ctrine for truth, then must we reiect the doctrine of the Pro­phets and Apostles as erroneous. But what saith Saint Am­brose to this partnership in taking away sinne? euen thus he saith: Ambrose in his 9. Booke, 76. Epistle. The Lord remaineth alone; for no man can be partner with God in forgiuing of sinnes, this is Christs onely office, that hath taken away the sinnes of the World. Therefore to restraine the power of Christs sacrifice to that onely one sinne of Adam, that so the multitude of our transgressions might be done away by the sacrifice of their Masse, is vtterly to ouer­throw the proper prerogatiue of Christ, and the whole ver­tue of his death and passion, in which the matter of remission of sinnes, iustification, and saluation, doth onely consist. For as the Apostle Saint Paul saith, Colossians 1.22. Colossians 1.22. In the bodie of his flesh through death, he made vs holy and vnblameable, and without fault in the sight of God: and set at peace, through the bloud of his Crosse, both the things in earth, and the things in hea­uen. Wherefore to bring in any other sacrifice for sinne, but onely the oblation of Christs body broken, and his bloud shed, and that offered by himselfe once for all; is vtterly to ouerthrow all whatsoeuer Christ hath done for mans re­demption; [Page 143]to cast mens mindes into a doubtfull wauering of their saluation, to proue the Prophets and Apostles false witnesses, and finally, to dissolue the whole harmony of the Scriptures, both Propheticall and Apostolicall. Hebrewes 9.14 For in that the holy Ghost saith, Hebrewes 9.14. Christ offered vp him­selfe; it is cleare, that no sacrifice can serue for sinne, but where Christ himselfe is the Priest. Also seeing hee saith, verse 22. Without shedding of bloud, there is no remission of sins; Cap. 9.22. if Christ himselfe should come amongst vs, and offer him­selfe neuer so often, and not shed his bloud, it could doe vs no good. Againe, seeing hee saith likewise thus of Christ, Ʋerse 25. Not that he should offer himselfe often, Cap. 9.25. for then must he often haue suffered since the foundation of [...]; he offe­ring himselfe neuer so often, without as [...] death, could doe vs as little good. Therefore w [...]eeth not but that the sacrifice of the Masse, whereat Christ is not the Priest, nor in which the bloud of Christ is shed, nor he suffe­ring death, how often soeuer it be celebrated for our sinnes, profiteth iust nothing at all, nor doth any good? Nay, ra­ther who seeth not what hurt it doth, in that men are indu­ced to looke for that there, which indeede is not there to be had? For whereas they make the multitude to beleeue, that they sacrifice in their Masse the very body of Christ for their sinnes; the Scripture denieth him to be there, or any where else but in heauen. Heb. 10.12. For as the Authour to the He­brews saith, Chap. 10.12. This man after hee had offered one Sacrifice for sinnes, sitteth for euer at the right hand of God, and from thence tarrieth till his enemies bee made his foote-stoole: which as Saint Luke sheweth, Acts 3.21. is till the end of the World: and therefore how can they come by his body to offer in their Masse? As for that they say, it is easily to be come by, because by the words of consecration, the bread is transubstantiated into the body of Christ, and the wine into his bloud; is easily confuted by Saint Chrysostome, Theo­doret, Pope Galasius, and their Bishop Fisher, Chrisostome saith, Chrisostome Ad Caesatima Monachum. The bread when it is sanctified by meanes of the Priest, it is exal­ted to the name of Lords body, yet the nature of bread doth still re­maine. Againe he saith, Hom. 11. on Matthew. The very body of Christ it selfe, is not [Page 144]in the holy vessels, but the mistery thereof is there contained. Theodoret saith, Theo. in Dio­logue 1. The sacramental signes goe not from their owne nature after sanctification. Pope Galasius saith, Gala. against Eutiches. There leaueth not to be the substance of bread and wine, nor the nature of wine. Their Bishop Fisher saith; Fisher against Luther. No man shall proue by the very words of the Gospell, that any Priest in these our dayes doth conse­crate the very body and bloud of Christ. And a little after hee saith. Neither is there any word found here (meaning in the new Testament) to proue that there is the true presence of Christs flesh and bloud in our Masse. So that by this who seeth not how impiously they delude the ignorant, in making them to beleeue that they haue the body of Christ in the Pixe, or Priests boxe, to sacrifice for their sinnes: and cause them also to commit idolatry, in adoring the bread for Christ?

6 Now therefore (Christian Reader) forasmuch as thou heardest before, that the holy Ghost maketh it a necessi­tie, that so often as Christ is offered for sinne, hee must as often be crucified to death; it is cleare, that the Papists ne­cessitie of daily offering, bringeth in with it, a necessitie of daily crucifying and killing of Christ. Wherefore in ordayning an order of daily sacrificers of Christ; what else doe they, but establish an order of daily crucifiers and kil­lers of him? in which therefore it is euident, they shew themselues much more horrible and vile, then Iudas did in betraying of Christ: For notwithstanding Iudas for filthie lucre deliuered his Maister to be crucified; yet did he not seeke to procure an order for the continuall crucifying of him: neyther to iustifie his action, did hee contend with the gaine sayers; but with great horrour of conscience, condemned it as euill, and after a sort repented, and brought againe the money, the hier of his fact, and deli­uered it backe to the owners: but these murtherers; not onely contend for the necessity of that they doe; but also haue receiued great summes of money, oftentimes to sa­crifice, and consequently to crucifie Christ: and yet haue they not by restoring any part thereof, shewed so much as that signe of Iudas his outward repentance. Moreouer, [Page 145]it is very cleare, that this their doings, hath a farre worse effect, then Iudas his action had; for Iudas his action (in respect of Gods determinate counsell,) furthered mans sal­uation: but the necessitie of daily sacrificing for sinne, (vnder the Gospell) vtterly ouerthroweth mans saluation. Malac. 1.11. And yet notwithstanding, they sticke not to say, that this is that Sacrifice of the New Testament, which the Pro­phet Malachie fore-tolde, God had appoynted the Chri­stian Gentiles, to offer vnto him in euery place: whereas it is cleare it is meant of the whole spirituall worship and seruice of GOD vnder the Gospell, which consisteth of preaching, praying, and thankesgiuing, as may plaine­ly appeare by these auncient Fathers interpretations vp­on the same place of the Prophet. Tertullian saith, Tertullian in his Exhortati­on vnto Cha­stitie. The pure Sacrifice that Malachie speaketh of, that should be offered in euery place, is the preaching of the Gospell to the ende of the World. Saint Hierome saith, Hierome vpon the first of Ma­lachie. The Prophet Malachie meaneth heereby, that the prayers of holy people should be offe­red to God, not onely in Iewrie, but also in all places. Also Iu­stinus Martyr saith, Iustinus Mar­tyr, in Dialoguo cum Triphone. Esaias promised not the restoring of a bloudy Sacrifice, but the true and spirituall Sacrifice of Praise and Thankesgiuing. Therefore we see that the spirituall Sa­crifice vnder the Gospel, is preaching, praying and thank es­giuing. To conclude, whereas they would haue made the world to belecue, that their Masse (and the vse thereof) is but the application, or applying of the Sacrifice of Christs Death and Bloud vnto vs: wee see it tendeth to the vtter destroying of Christs Sacrifice, for that they make their Sacrifice of the Masse, the very substance of the thing it selfe.

CHAP. X. Tending to resolue all men, that the words of Christ, in the sixt Chapter of Saint Iohns Gospell (touching the ea­ting his flesh, and drinking his bloud) are onely but [Page 146]figuratiue speeches: as also those his other words, when he instituted the Sacrament, and deliuering the Bread to his Apostles, said: Take, eate, this is my body which is giuen for you.

1 OVR Sauiour Christ, Iohn 6.59. teaching in the Syna­gogue at Capernaum, deliuered these words vnto the Iewes, saying: I am the liuing Bread that came downe from heauen: If any man eate of this Bread, hee shall liue for euer: and the Bread that I will giue, is my flesh, which I will giue for the life of the world. Verse 51. Againe, Except yee eate the flesh of the Sonne of Man, Verse 53. Verse 54.55.56.57. and drinke his bloud, ye haue no life in you. And againe, Whosoeuer eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, hath eternall life, and I will raise him vp at the last day. For my flesh is meate indeede, and my bloud is drinke indeede: he that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the li­uing Father hath sent me, so liue I by the Father; and he that ea­teth me, euen he shall liue by me.

2 Now in these words (Christian Reader) we are chief­ly to obserue these three things. First, that the scope and drift of our Sauiour Christ, was to enduce the Iewes to haue vnderstood, that he was the second person in the Godhead, equall with the Father; and that it was of necessity vnto saluation, that they should eate and feede on him, as he was God. And this is it which he said. I am the liuing bread which came downe from heauen: If any man eate of this bread, he shall liue for euer. Secondly, he would they should haue knowne, that he being the second person in the God-head, had taken into his diuine nature flesh and bloud: and that it was also of as great a necessity vnto saluation, that they should eate and drinke the same, and feede on his flesh and bloud. And this is it which he also said. Christ must be eaten as he is God, as hee is man, and as he is both God & man. Except ye eate the flesh of the Son of man, and drinke his bloud, ye haue no life in you. Thirdly, he would they should haue perceiued, that as he was both God and man, so it was also of as great a necessity vnto salua­tion, that they should feede on both his natures vnitedly together. And this is it which hee further said vnto them. [Page 147] He that eateth me, euen he shall liue by me. By which we see it euident and plaine, that none can be saued, but those that doe eate Christ; not onely as hee is God, but also as hee is man; and also as he is both God and man. Eaten then he must be of necessity, (as both the Papists and we confesse) but the manner how hee must be eaten, is all the matter in question; whether spiritually by faith, or corporally with the mouth and teeth.

3 The Iewes supposing Christ had beene man onely; when they heard him say hee was the bread of God that came downe from heauen to giue life vnto the World, To eate & feed on Christs flesh, is to be­leeue that by the suffering in his flesh, hee tooke away the sinne of our flesh. and that he that did eate thereof, should not die; they were of­fended: but when he added further, and said; And the bread that I will giue, is my flesh, which I will giue for the life of the World, of which whosoeuer shall eate, shall haue euerlasting life; they raged and murmured among themselues, saying. How can this man giue vs his flesh to eate? This is an hard saying; who can heare it? But when our Sauiour perceiued their carnall vnderstanding, in which they so grossely erred in the man­ner of eating, by imagining they should haue eaten him with their mouthes and teethes, as their Fathers did eate Manna; then in the 58. verse fully to resolue them, that he meant no such kinde of eating, he said. The Iewes er­ring in the mā ­ner of eating, could profit nothing by the matter they should eate. Not as your Fa­thers did eate Manna. And yet more fully to resolue them, that indeede he meant a spirituall kinde of eating; in the 57. verse he said plainely thus: As the liuing Father hath sent me, so liue I by the Father, and he that eateth me, euen he shall liue by me. By which words he declared vnto them, that as he did not liue carnally by the Father, but spiritually; so should they liue spiritually by him. Howbeit, The cause was, they would none of his in­terpretations. such was their peruersenesse, that they would none of his interpretations, but because he had said, they must eate his God-head, they would no otherwise vnderstand, but that hee meant, they should eate it carnally; and also because hee had said they must eate his man-hood, they would no otherwise, but that they should eate his flesh corporally: then said Christ fur­ther vnto them, It is the spirit that quickneth, the flesh profi­teth nothing: Meaning as they vnderstood it should bee [Page 148]eaten; for otherwise his flesh was as profitable as his God­head (vnto those that did eate it after that manner as hee meant) else would he not haue said. Whosoeuer eateth my flesh, hath eternall life: and except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, ye haue no life in you. But therefore they failing in the manner, could profit nothing by the matter they should eate, The manner wherein they erred, Christ himselfe shew­eth, Verse 64. and the manner wherein they failed, hee declared in the 64. verse, was, because they did not eate him spiritually by faith. For said he: But there are some of you which beleeue not.

4 Thus then we may be fully resolued, that the manner of eating which Christ meant, was spiritually by faith, which hee made plaine vnto them, not onely in that 64. verse, but almost throughout the whole Chapter: for wee may there see, that whensoeuer he spake of eating; still hee added beleeuing; onely to manifest vnto them, that by ea­ting, Eating and be­leeuing, is both but one thing. he meant beleeuing. Also that they might the more plainely haue vnderstood, that by eating and beleeuing, he meant but one, and one onely thing, he expounded it vnto them, by that one onely effect, which he declared, both ea­ting and beleeuing hath. For as in the 54. verse, he said: Whosoeuer eateth my flesh, and drinketh my bloud, hath eternall life, and I will raise him vp at the last day. So in the 40. verse he said: This is the will of him that sent me, that whosoeuer seeth the Sonne, and beleeueth in him, should haue euerlasting life; and I will raise him vp at the last day. Wherefore seeing he shewed them so plainely, that the effect of eating and beleeuing, was but one and the same thing, they might the more easily haue vnderstood, that by eating and beleeuing, he meant but onely one and the same thing; and so conse­quently, that they should eate him spiritually by faith, and not after a carnall and corporall manner.

5 And thus (Christian Reader) haue we found out the true meaning of those words of Christ, touching the eating and feeding on him: euen by conferring place with place, and verse with verse; which is doubtlesse the most surest way for the bringing the truth to light, euen by expounding one Scripture by another. For as Saint Chrisostome saith; Chrisost. in his 12. Hom. Gene­sis. The [Page 149]holy Scripture expoundeth it selfe, and suffereth not the Reader to erre. And as Saint Augustine saith; August. in his Bocke of que­stions, 83. the 69. quest. The circumstances of the Scriptures, is wont to giue light, and to open the meaning. As also in another place, 3. Booke, 29. Chap. of Chri­stian doctrine. Darke places are to be expounded by more plaine places. The surest way of expounding the Scripture, is to expound one Scripture by another. But the Papists refusing to take this course, haue most grossely erred in the true vn­derstanding of Christ; and also most ignorantly charged vs to hold that heresie of those obstinate and blind Capernaites, whereas indeede, themselues hold the heresie. For their he­resie was (as we see) that Christ meant a corporall kinde of eating, euen as they hold; but we hold cleane contrary: and therefore not we, but they are of the fellowship of those first Authors of that heresie; who as the Text declareth, did therein so fall from Christ, as that they forsooke his com­pany. Wherefore, all that will wilfully fall away from Christ, let them with those cauilling Capernaites, hypocriticall Dis­ciples, and our counterfait Catholiques, hold that he­resie.

6 But now forasmuch as it is an vsuall thing with them, whensoeuer they see themselues conuicted by Scripture, to tell vs, that no Scripture is of any priuate interpretation; and therefore vnlesse we can shew them, that the same Scripture is so expounded by the ancient Fathers, they will not admit it, be the sense made neuer so plaine: Let them therefore heare how the ancient Fathers testimonies doe expound those words of Christ.

7 Saint Origine writing vpon those words. Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, ye haue no life in you, saith; Origen in his 7. Hom. vpon Leuiticus. Consider that these things written in Gods Booke, are figures, and therefore examine and vnderstand them as spiri­tuall, and not as carnall men: for if you vnderstand them as carnall men, they hurt you: for euen in the Gospell there is found a letter that killeth: for if you follow the letter or words of this that Christ said; Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, this letter killeth. Againe, Origine vpon the same words saith: Orig. in his 7. Booke vpon Leuiticus. This letter killeth; but if thou take it spiritually, it killeth not but in it is a quickning spirit: vnderstand therefore spiritually [Page 150]those things that be spoken. Also Saint Augustine vpon the same words saith: Augustine in his 3. Booke of Christian do­ctrine. Now this saying of Christ, Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man, and drinke his bloud, ye haue no life in you, seemeth to command a haynous and a wicked thing, therefore it is a figure. Againe, writing vpon those words: It is the spi­rit that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, thus he expoun­deth them. Vpon the 98. Psalme. Ye shall not eate this body that ye see, neither shall ye drinke that bloud that they shall shed which crucifie me; I haue commended vnto you a certaine Sacrament, being spiritually vn­derstood, it will giue you life. Againe, In his 27. Treatise vpon Iohn. When you shall see the Sonne of man ascend vp where he was before, then shall you vnder­stand that he giueth not his body in such sort as ye imagine, neither that he is to be consumed by bits and morsels. Also fully to re­solue all true Christians that Christ meant, that none could eate him effectually vnto saluation, but such onely as eate him spiritually, he saith; In his 26 trea­tise vpon Iohn. He that eateth inwardly, not that ea­teth outwardly; he that eateth in heart, not that presseth with the teeth: to beleeue in Christ, that is the eating the bread of life; pre­pare not your mouthes, prepare your hearts. And againe he saith; In his 26 trea­tise vpon Iohn. Our Lord called himselfe the bread that came downe from hea­nen, exhorting vs to beleeue in him; for to beleeue in him, that is the eating the bread of life: he eateth that beleeueth in him. Also in reprouing all those in particular, that would eate Christ carnally, he saith: In his Booke against the Iewes, 9 cap. Why doest thou prepare thy belly and thy teeth, beleeue, and thou hast eaten. Therefore saith Saint Chri­sostome, Chrisostome in his 46. Hom. vpon Iohn. If any man vnderstand those words of Christ carnally, he shall surely profit nothing thereby; for what meane these words: The flesh profiteth nothing, he meant not his flesh, God forbid; but hee meant of all these that fleshly, and carnally vnderstand those things which Christ spake, and what is carnall vnderstanding else, but to vnderstand them as they be spoken? And therefore it is which in another place he saith: In his 14. Hom. vpon Iohn. God will not that we vnder­stand the words of holy Scripture simply and plainely as they lie, but with great wisedome and discretion. And that indeed it may more plainely appeare, that by retaining more then two, it is not the true Church: one of the Popes owne Pen-men de­scribing the true Church by her owne notes and markes, saith thus. In Ioh. Hom. 39. In this sensible world, that is here beneath, we must [Page 151]learne by sensible tokens to know the very Church of Christ: Nicol. Cusae­nus, De pote­state Ecclesiae Romana, Epist. 1. For otherwise we are not able to reach the truth. And a little after. This Church standeth of them, that declare by sensible and out­ward tokens, that they be partakers of Christ, as they be, that con­fesse Christ to be the Sonne of God. And therefore this Church hath certaine holy tokens, or Sacraments, ordained to that end, that thereby we may know them that be of Christ, so farre forth as by such tokens coniectured knowledge may be gathered. Therefore I say, That this Church of Christ, by this coniecturall iudgement is counted holy, notwithstanding wicked men, and hypocrites couer themselues vnder the same outward tokens. And what those to­kens are, he expresseth in these words following: And receiue Baptisme, and the Lords Supper, as well as the godly. And thus much for this point. Now let vs see what we can say to the Sacrament of the Altar, or Masse. And thus we see that those words of Christ, are spiritually to be vnderstood, and not carnally, as the Papists vnderstand them: neither doe I see how they can properly apply those words to the Sacra­ment; for that we see, the scope and drift of Christ, was one­ly there, to draw them to the knowledge of him, as he then was, to wit, both God and man, and that he being God, was become man, to satisfie the wrath and iustice of God for man, in the same flesh that man had offended in, that so they might haue beleeued, that he was the same Messias and Sauiour, foretold by Moses, on whom they did relie: but no one word of the Sacrament: therefore it seemeth to me, those words doe not directly concerne the Sacrament, or Sa­cramentall eating. And the rather also may they be of my minde, for that these of their owne side, haue thus written, Michael vehe Michael vehe contra Luthe­rum. of eating the Sacrament, Christ in the sixt Chap­ter of Saint Iohn, spake nothing. And this he there proueth. Their Doctor Doring saith: Doring. in Psal. 110. That saying hath no foundation, or warrant in the words written by Saint Iohn. Therefore to speake of the receiuing of the Sacrament, in true vnderstanding, it hath no force. And a little after. For this was spoken long before the Sacrament was ordained. Therefore out of those words, they can make no good proofe, touching the communion of the Sacrament, seeing the Sacrament at that time had no being. Wherefore let [Page 152]vs now come to the words, which properly and directly ap­pertaineth to the Sacrament, or Sacramentall eating. Which when Christ deliuered the Sacrament to his Apostles, were these. 1 Cor. 11.24. Take, eate, this is my body, which is giuen for you: or as Saint Paul saith: Which is broken for you.

8 Now touching these words (Christian Reader) which they would haue also litterally to be taken, and not figura­tiuely to be vnderstood, it will plainely appeare, that they are but figuratiue speeches. First, for that when as Christ deli­uered the bread, and said, Take, eate, this is my body, which is broken for you; his body was not then broken, but was bro­ken the next day after. Secondly, for that it was his very bo­die that deliuered the bread, which he called his body, and it is certaine he had not two bodies: therefore in calling the bread his body, and the wine his bloud, they were onely such figuratiue speeches, as he vsed at other times; as when he called himselfe a doore, Iohn 10.7. Iohn 15.1. Iohn 10.11. Apoc. 5.5. Apoc. 14.1. Gen. 33.20. Iudg. 6.24. Rom. 4.17. a vine, a shepheard, &c. and where he is called a Lyon, a Lambe, &c. And as are vsed in many other places of the Scriptures, as Genesis 33. Where Iacob called the Altar which he had set vp; The mighty God. And likewise in Iudges the 6. where Gideon called his Altar Iehouah: which were none of them so, but figuratiuely. And therefore it is which Saint Paul saith, Romans 4. God calleth those things which be not, as though they were: euen as himselfe also did, when he called the stonie Rocke Christ: which as Saint Augustine saith; August. in his 57. question vpon Leuit. Gen. 17.10. Was not Christ by substance, but by signification. And as God himselfe did, Genesis 17. where he called circumcision, which was but the Sacrament, or signe of his couenant, The Couenant. Therefore it is certaine, that those words of Christ, in calling bread his body, and wine his bloud; were but the like figuratiue speeches. And that the Reader may be the more fully resolued, that they were indeede but figuratiue speeches, let him diligently obserue these testimonies of the auncient Fathers.

9 Tertullian saith; In his Booke against Mar­tion. Iesus tooke bread, and giuing it among his Disciples, made it his body, saying: This is my body; that is to say (saith he) a figure of my body. Saint Ambrose saith, Ambrose 4. Booke 5. Cha. of Sacraments. The Priest saith; Make vnto vs this oblation to be acceptable, which is the [Page 153]figure of the body and bloud of Christ. Theodoret saith; Theodoret in his 1. Dialogue. It is cleare that they are the figures of those things whereof they beare the name. So that howsoeuer, as Saint Cyprian saith: Cyprian de vn­ction Chrismatis. Christ in his last Supper gaue to his Apostles, with his owne hands, Bread and Wine, which he called his Body and Bloud, yet on the Crosse he gaue his very body to be wounded with the hands of Souldiers, that the Apostles might declare to the World, how, and in what manner, bread and wine may be the flesh and bloud of Christ, and the manner hee straight wayes declareth thus: that those things which doe signifie, and those things which are signified by them, may be both called by one name. And therefore it is also which Saint Augustine saith; August. 57. question vpon Leuit. A thing which signifieth, is wont to be called by the name of the thing which it signifieth. And in another place, In his 23. E­pistle to Benifa­cius. For if Sacraments had not some similitudes or likenesse of those things whereof they be Sacraments, then they should be no Sacra­ments at all; but for their similitude and likenesse commonly they haue the names of those things whereof they be Sacraments There­fore (saith he) after a certaine manner of speech, the Sacrament of Christs body, is Christs body, the Sacrament of Christs bloud, is Christs bloud. And in another place thus; In his 18. Book, 48. Cha. of the City of God. All signes and tokens, seeme in a manner to beare the persons of the things them­selues, that they signifie: So the Apostle saith; The Rocke was Christ, for that the Rocke whereof it was spoken, signified Christ. And thus we see the matter made as cleare as the Sunne that shineth at noone day; that those words of Christ, in calling bread his body, and wine his bloud, were onely but figuratiue speeches: and therefore the bread and wine, are onely but figures of his body and bloud. But yet forasmuch as the Antichristians haue so besotted the multitude, in making them to beleeue, that after the words of consecration, the bread and wine is transubstantiated into the naturall body and bloud of Christ; let vs heare a little further what the Fa­thers say more fully to this point.

10 Saint Ambrose hereof saith thus: Ambrose in his Booke of those things that are declared by the mist ries, the last Chap. Before consecra­tion, another kinde is named: but after consecration, the body of Christ is signified. Theodoret saith: Th [...]odo. in his 1. Dialogue. Christ did honour the vi­sible tokens with the names of his body and bloud, not changing the nature, but adding grace vnto nature. Againe he saith; In his 2. Dia­logue. The [Page 154]sacramentall signes goe not from their owne nature after sanctifi­cation. Also Saint Chrisostome saith: Chrisost. ad Caesatium Mo­nachum. The bread before it be sanctified, is called bread; but when it is sanctified by the meanes of the Priest, it is deliuered from the name of bread, and is exalted to the name of the Lords body, yet the nature of bread doth still re­maine. And therefore in another place he saith plainly thus: In his 11. Hom. vpon Ma­thew. The very body of Christ it selfe, is not in the holy vessels, but the mistery or sacrament thereof is there contained. But that which is more then all this, the Pope himselfe saith, euen Gelasius by name: Gelasius a­gainst Eutiches. There leaueth not to be the substance of bread and wine, or the nature of wine: and indeed the image, or representa­tion of the body and bloud, and the likenesse thereof, is published in the ministration of the misteries. Therefore it is which their Bishop Fisher saith: Fisher against Luther. No man shall be able to proue by the very words of the Gospell, that there is the true presence of Christs flesh and bloud in our Masse. To conclude, Saint Augustine saith: August. in his Booke of pro­fit of repen­tance. It is a dangerous matter, and a seruitude of the soule, to take the signe instead of the thing that is signified. And here haue we suf­ficient experience in the Papists, who by taking the signe for the thing it selfe, commit most horrible idolatry, in adoring the bread for Christ.

CHAP. XI. Tending to resolue all men, that wee ought not to pray to Saints, but to God onely: neither to worship Saints, but God alone: And that it is Sacriledge to doe either.

1. A Great part of the World (Christian Reader) hath of long time been carried away with the multitude of Popish delusions, amongst which this is one. Namely to say: We must goe to God by the mediation of Saints, as by noble men we goe vnto a King. Hereby haue they drawne the people to impart the glory of [Page 155]the Creator, to the creature: euen to pray to Saints, where­as they should pray onely to God. For so hath the Lord commanded vs, saying, Psalme 50. Psalme 50.15. Call vpon me in the day of thy trouble, and I will heare thee, and thou shalt glorifie me. Now therefore seeing the Lord commandeth vs to come vnto him, why should we goe first to any other, yea, first or last? Againe, seeing the Lord accounteth it a part of his glory to be prayed vnto, is it not a stealing from him a chiefe part of his glory to pray vnto others? yea, verily. And therefore all those that make any intercessiō to Saints, can no more look to obtaine any good at the hand of God, then theeues can looke to obtaine good at the hands of those from whom they robbe and steale.

2 Our Sauiour saith, Matthew 23. One is your Doctor, Matthew 23.8. Acts 3.22. 1 Cor. 1.30. euen Christ. Saint Luke saith, Chap. 3. Him must wee heare in all things. Saint Paul saith, 1 Cor. 1. He is our wisedome. Now if Christ be our Doctor and Teacher, and him whom wee must heare in all things, and also our wisedome by which we are to be directed: then ought we to learne of him, both to whom we should pray, and also the manner how to pray. And hereof haue we a plaine example in the Apostles, who knowing that the whole World was to be taught by him, desired him to teach them how to pray. Luke 11. [...]. Master (said they) teach vs to pray, as Iohn also taught his Disciples: and Christ being as willing to teach them, as they were to learne, began thus to instruct them, not onely in the manner how, but also to whom they ought to pray. When ye pray (said he) pray vn­to your Father which is in secret, and he shall reward you openly. Againe (said he) After this manner pray ye. Matthew 6.9. Our Father which art in Heauen, &c. Now if Christ were wise enough to teach his Apostles, then are wee to learne by his directions, not onely not first to goe to Saints, but not at all, but onely to God the Father of Heauen.

Wherefore then this vtterly condemneth the Papists of most wretched impiety, that will teach men first to goe to Saints. Also it flatly condemneth them of arrogancy, in ta­king vpon them to be wiser then Christ; who in his heauen­ly wisedome, knew best how to instruct Gods children in [Page 156]the right way, for the most speedy and surest obtaining their petitions.

3 It was not without great cause (Christian Reader) that S^t Paul said: Christ is our wisedome. For had [...]e sent vs to the Saints departed, yea, had hee picked out of all the Patriarks and Prophets, Abraham the Father of the faithfull, to haue prayed vnto, that by his mediation we might haue come to God, what had it auayled, seeing the Prophet Esay saith, Chap. Esay 63.16. 63. Abraham is ignorant of vs, and Israel knoweth vs not? Yea, seeing Salomon the wise, saith; The dead know no­thing at all? But therefore wee see Christ did it not; other­wise, hee should haue condemned himselfe of Popish igno­rance, in sending vs to seeke helpe at their hands, who are ignorant of vs, and knoweth not how to doe vs any good. Saint Augustine reprouing those heretikes of his time (which sought for helpe of the dead) declared plainely vnto them, that they did but delude themselues, and spend their labour in vaine; for said he: August. in his Book of the spi­rit & soule 29. The soules of them that be dead, are there where they doe not see, nor heare, what things are done, or chance in this life: Such is the care they haue for the liuing, that they know not what we doe, euen as our care is for the dead, that wee know not what they doe. And therefore it is, which in another place he saith: In his Booke of free-will. We are not commanded to goe to any creature, that we might be made blessed; but to the Creator and maker of all things, of whom if wee be perswaded otherwise then the truth is, we are deceiued with a damnable errour. Saint Chrisostome likewise, hauing to deale with the same kinde of heretikes, that supposed they could not come to GOD, but by the meanes and mediation of Saints, thus reproued their errour, saying; Chrysost. in his Serm. of going forward of the Gospell. There is no neede of a Porter, or Mediatour: say onely, Lord haue mercy vpon me: we haue no neede of an Aduocate with God, nor of any running or gadding about, for to speake saire vnto others; for although thou be alone, and without an Aduocate, and pray vnto God by thy selfe, thou shalt obtaine thy petition. For God doth not so easily heare vs, when others pray for vs, as when wee pray our selues, although we be full of much euill and vnrighteous­nesse. And yet to proue that we are indeede sooner heard when we pray our selues, then when others pray for vs, he [Page 157]bringeth the example of the woman of Canaan, of whom he saith vnto vs thus: In his 2. Hom. of the woman of Canaan. Thou seest how Christ denied and put her backe, when other men prayed for her (meaning the Apostles) but as soone as shee cried for her boone and gift, he granted it. Be­hold (saith he) the wisedome of the woman: shee prayeth not to Iames, shee intreateth not Iohn, shee goeth not to Peter, shee did not get her selfe to the company of the Apostles, shee sought for no Mediatour. By which he giueth vs to vnderstand, that the most surest way for the obtaining our requests, is to pray to God our selues, and not to trust to spokesmen: for as Saint Ambrose saith; Ambrose in his Book vpon the 1. Chap. t. the Romans. To obtaine Gods fauour, from whom nothing is secret, as knowing what euery man is meete to haue, we neede no spokesman, but a deuout minde, for wheresoeuer such a man spea­keth to God, God will heare him. By which we see, how vaine a thing it is to say; We cannot come to God, but by the me­diation of Saints. Yea, the same Father, in the words going before, doth proue such speeches but vaine, and to pro­ceede out of the mouthes, not onely of vaine men, but of a peruerse Sect past shame. For saith he; Ibidem. Men through shame vse accustomably euery where this miserable excuse, why they neglect to come to God, saying, that by them we goe to God, as by Noble men we goe vnto a King. Ambrose ac­counted it trea­son to God, to make Saints intercessours vnto him for vs. And then flouting them for their foolery, he thus finisheth vp his speech, saying. Well said; is there any man so mad, or so vnmindfull of his health, to giue vnto a Noble man the honour due vnto a King onely? for that if any in such sort behaue themselues, they are iustly condemned as guilty of treason. And (saith he) shall these men not thinke them­selues guilty, which giue the honour of the name of God, vnto a creature, and forsaking their Lord, doe worship their fellow seruant? as though there were any thing greater then God, to whom a man might doe seruice. For therefore (saith he) doe we goe to a King by tribunes, and Noble men; because the King is a man, and kno­weth not whom he may be sure to trust. And indeed for diuers causes, it is not meete that euery man should haue free ac­cesse into the Kings priuy Chamber, and chiefly for feare of treason against his person, as experience doth plainely teach vs; and as no doubt it would soone be seene, if our in­uocators of Saints might haue free passage. Neuerthelesse, [Page 158]where is there any such decree made, that no man may speake to the King, but by some Noble man? Doth not the King allow any man or woman to deliuer their Petitions vnto him with their owne hands, wheresoeuer they meete him? and is there any other decree made by God, to debar any from deliuering their Petitions vnto him by their mouth? Therefore what ground of truth haue they, to de­barre men from going to God, without hauing some one Saint or other, to be their Aduocate, Mediatour, or in­tercessour?

4 All the Principles of Popish Religion (Christian Rea­der) they say they hold by antiquity, The antiquity of this heresie. of which this is one: for we see it was sprung vp twelue hundred yeeres agoe: and therefore no maruell though they claime it by antiquity. Neuerthelesse, it was not so ancient, but that as we see, it was as anciently confuted, and condemned for sacriledge and treason to Gods owne person, both by the Scriptures and Fathers. No Patriarke, Prophet, or A­postle, euer prayed one to another. Neither yet was it so ancient, as that they can proue, that any one Patriarke, Prophet, or Apostle, euer prayed one to another, which if they had done, we see they had beene condemned by the ancient Fathers for theeues and traytors to God, as they condemned those heretikes of their time, and the counterfet Catholiques of our time, who most peruersely withstand the manifest truth of the Scrip­tures, which allow no more Aduocates, Mediatours, or In­tercessours, then there are Gods, which is but one; and hee onely, which is partaker of the natures both of God and man, as we shall now see euidently proued. Saint Paul, 1 Ti­mothie, 1 Tim. 2.5. 2 Chapter, saith: For there is one God, and one Media­tour between God and man, the Man Christ Iesus. Vpon which words Saint Augustine wrote thus: August. lib. 2. cap. 8. to Paer­meni. Paul (saith he) ma­keth not himselfe a mediatour betweene God and the people, but willeth them to pray one for another. Also in another place, to shew that none can be Mediatour betweene God and man, but he that is both God and man, he saith; Vpon the 134. Psalm. Thou O man couldest not come to God, vntill God became man, that thou being a man, mayest come to God; and he was made Mediatour of God and man, the man Christ Iesus. Againe, in another place he [Page 159]faith: In his Hom. of Sheepe, the 12. Chap. One Mediatour betweene God and man, &c. and he was God with the Father, and was man with men. The manhood is no Mediatour without the God-head. And in another place thus: In his Enchiri­dion to Laurence the 108 Chap. We could neuer haue beene deliuered by that onely media­tour of God and man, the Man Christ Iesus; vnlesse he had beene God also. So that who seeth not, but that he that is not both God and man, is not allowed to be Mediatour betweene God and man? And thus much out of the words of Saint Paul, and Saint Augustine vpon his words. Now let vs heare some others vpon this point.

5 Theophilact writing vpon the same words of Paul, saith thus: Theophi. vpon 1 Tim. 2. Chap. That the Mediatour should be the Sonne of God it was re­quisite, for he should be the reconciliation and perfect mediatour, for he is a mediatour of two: for hee put himselfe as a meane or middle thing, to ioyne contrary things together. Therefore he is the Sonne of God, and Mediatour of men; for he is partaker of both natures. And hereof it is which Saint Chrisostome saith: Chrisost. vpon 1 Tim. a Chap. The Mediatour ought to be ioyned by society of them both, of whom he is Mediatour, for it is the part of a Mediatour, to be par­taker of them both of whom he is Mediatour. And a little af­ter, he concludeth thus: For it was requisite that such a Me­diatour should speake with God. Also hereof it is which Saint Cyrill saith: Cyrill in his 12 Booke, 10. Chap. of Trea­sure. Christ Iesus is Mediatour betweene God and man, not onely because he hath reconciled man vnto God; but also be­cause hee is naturally and substantially both God and man in one person. And after this manner (saith he) God hath reconciled vs vnto him for otherwise how could Saint Paul say, that there is one Mediatour, Christ Iesus? Wherefore then, seeing that none can be Mediatour betweene God and man, but hee that is both God and man, no Saint can be Mediatour. And thus much of Saint Paul; now let vs heare what Saint Iohn saith, and the ancient Fathers vpon his words.

6 Saint Iohn in his 1. Epistle, 2. Chapter, saith: 1 Iohn, 2 Cha. 2 verse. If any man sinne, we haue an Aduocate with the Father, Iesus Christ the Iust, and he is the reconciliation for our sinnes. Vpon which words Saint Augustine saith; August. in his first Treatise vpon the Epi­stle of S. Iohn. He did not say, ye haue an Ad­uocate with the Father, but we haue: Neither did he say, ye haue me for your Aduocate: But brethren, we haue an Aduocate with [Page 160]the Father, Iesus Christ the righteous, and hee is the reconcilia­tion for our sinnes. He that hath holden this (saith he) hath hol­den no heresie he that hath holden this, hath committed no schisme. And a little after (speaking of Saint Iohn) hee saith thus: He had rather put himselfe in the number of sinners, that he might haue Christ his Aduocate, then put himselfe an Aduocate, where­as Christ should be his Aduocate, and be found among the proud men that shall be damned. And for conclusion of Saint Iohns words, thus he saith in another place: August. in his 2. Booke, 8. Ch. against Parme­nian. If Saint Iohn would say, this haue I written vnto you, that ye sinne not; and if you sinne, ye haue me your Aduocate before God, and I will entreate for you, what good and faithfull Christian could abide him, as the Apostle of Christ, or rather not thinke him to be Antichrist? And thus (Christian Reader) thou seest that to allow any other then Christ to be an Aduocate, Mediatour, or Intercessour, be­tweene God and man, is to allow hereticall, Antichristian, and damnable doctrine. And to affirme the Saints in hea­uen to take this office of Christ vpon them, is a part of that blasphemie mentioned, Reuel. 13.6. euen to blaspheme them that dwell in heauen.

7 That ancient Father Epiphanius, describing the alone and true Mediatour, saith: Epiphanius, fol. 433. For the Mediatour of God and man, is thus; being God, and made man, not hauing changed his nature, but according to both of them, hee is Mediatour. But what should wee stand to cite any more testimonies out of the Fathers, seeing some of their great Doctors and canoni­zed Saints affirme the same? Their Abbot Saint Bernard saith thus: Bernard in his 3. Serm. of the Annuntiation of the Virgin Mary. This Christ Iesus is the true and faithfull Media­tour, as in one person of God and man. Also their Saint Thomas of Aquine saith: Thomas of A­quine vpon the 1. Tim. 2 Chap. It may be said, that Christ is a Mediatour ac­cording to both natures; that is to say, as touching his God-head and man-hood, inasmuch as he is God and man: for because that he that is a Mediatour, ought to take part of both natures, and these are God and man. Now therefore, if there had beene no one ancient Father to haue proued our assertion, yet these two their canonized Saints, had been sufficient. Wherefore we see how vaine the Papists are, to pray to Saints, and to make them their Mediatours to God.

[Page 161]8 It is a world to see that men so wise and learned, should be so besotted in their senses, as to imagine, that Christ him­selfe should not be all, and altogether fully sufficient by his onely intercession, to reconcile men vnto God, seeing the Authour to the Hebrewes saith, Chapter 7. Hebrewes 7.25. He is able also perfectly to saue them that come to God by him, seeing hee liueth euer to make intercession for them. Doubtlesse, if Christ had not knowne himselfe wholly sufficient, he would not haue said, Iohn 14. No man commeth to the Father but by me. Iohn 14.6. Iohn 16.23. Nei­ther would he haue said, Iohn 16. Whatsoeuer ye shall aske the Father in my name, he will giue it you. Wherefore seeing Christ is sufficiently able to saue by his intercession, those that come to God by him: and that none can come to God but by him: and that those things which we aske in his name, wee shall obtaine; why should we delude our selues, in seeking re­conciliation by the intercession of others? Nay, we now see plainely, that those are deceiued, which hold not Christ all­sufficient, but will therefore goe to God by others, and that seeke to obtaine their requests in the names of others. But I maruell what hope they can haue to obtaine their Petiti­ons, which pray to God in the name of others, seeing Christ commanded them to pray in his name. Saint Cyrill saith: Cyrill in h [...]e Book vpon the r. of Esay. We must pray in the name of our Sauiour, if wee will looke to be heard of the Father. And in another place he rendereth his reason, saying; In his Booke of right faith. For why is it more meete to giue Saints their asking, and grant them their petitions, then for him which is onely by his owne nature, and truly God? Saint Augustine saith: August. in 108. Psalme. All prayers that are not made vnto God by Christ, not onely doth not put away sinne, but also are turned into sinne. So then, if to pray in the name of any but Christ, be to cause our prayers to be turned into sinne, and so to prouoke God to wrath; why should we, nay, how dare wee pray in the name of others? Yea, and why will wee be made such fooles, as to aske any thing of the dead Saints, which can neither giue, nor grant our requests? If we pray to God in the name of Christ, hee hath promised, Iohn 14. Chapter, that both his Father and he will heare our petitions, and grant our requests. And this is it which Saint Cyrill saith of Christ: Cyrill in his 11. Booke vpon John. He put to in my [Page 162]name, to shew that he was a Mediatour, and a granter, and a gi­uer with God; which prerogatiue no Saint hath.

9 Againe, forasmuch as Christ himselfe saith, Iohn 10. By me if any man enter in, he shall be saued: and in the 1. verse. He that entereth not in by the doore into the sheepe fold, but climeth vp another way, he is a thiefe and a robber: it is cleare, that all those that enter into the Church, by any other way then by Christ, or into the Kingdome of Heauen, by the meanes and mediation of Saints; they are but theeues and robbers: therefore if they repent not, and forsake their errour, they shall be sure to haue their part and portion with theeues and robbers: And thus much touching praying to Saints. Now a word or two touching the worshipping of Saints: which we will but briefly touch, because the matter is so plaine in the Scriptures, that nothing can be made more plaine to be erronious; therefore it neede not any long discourse.

10 In the 14. Acts 14.8. to the 16. Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, men­tion is made that Saint Paul hauing healed a criple that was borne lame, the people did so admire thereat, that they sup­posed Paul and Barnabas to haue beene Gods come downe from Heauen in the likenesse of men; whereupon (as the Text saith) They brought Bulles with garlands; beasts bedec­ked with flowers, to haue sacrificed vnto them, of which (as the Text also saith) When Paul and Barnabas heard, they rent their cloathes, and ranne in among the people, crying, and saying: O men, why doe ye these things? we are euen men subiect to the like passions as ye be. By which it is cleare, it was not lawfull to worship the Apostles; if not the Apostles, then not any other Saint. Reuel. 19.10. Also in the 19. Chapter of the Reuelation, the Text declareth, that Saint Iohn fell downe before the feete of the Angell, to haue worshipped him; but he said vnto him, see thou doe it not, I am thy fellow seruant, and one of thy brethren, which haue the testimony of Iesus: worship God. Now therefore, if neither the holy Apostles of Christ, nor the glorious and vnspotted Angels of Heauen may be worshipped; how may any other inferiour Saint be worshipped? Wherefore, this vtterly con­demneth the Papists of most pestilent peruersenesse, that will so directly, contrary to so euident a truth, teach men to [Page 163]worship Saints, yea, and not onely so, but that which is most horrible to heare, the very dumbe pictures and Ima­ges of Saints.

11 Saint Augustine (writing against Fostus the heretique) bringeth in these two places of Scripture, to proue that it is not lawfull to worship Saints; for said he, August. an his 20. book against Faustus, Chap 201. The very Saints themselues, whether they be dead men, or Angels, will not haue ho­nour giuen to them, which onely is due to God. This (saith he) ap­peareth in Paul and Barnabas, when the men of Licaonia, astonied at their miracles, would haue done sacrifice vnto them, as if they had beene Gods: For they renting their garments, confessing and perswading them that they were not Gods; forbad such things to be done vnto them. This (said he) appeared also in the Angels, as we reade in the Apocalips: The Angell forbidding himselfe to be worshipped. And therefore in another place he saith: In his Books of true Religi­on, 55. Chap. Let not the worshipping of dead men be counted holinesse among vs. And a little after: The thing that the highest Angell wor­shippeth, must also the lowest man worship. Let vs beleeue this, that the best Angels, and the most excellent Ministers would that we should worship one God with them. That ancient Father Epipha­nius, speaking against old doting and ignorant women, which then worshipped the Virgin Mary, saith; Epipha in his 3. Booke of He­resies, 59. he­resie. Let no man eate of this errour, touching Saint Mary: For though the tree be faire, yet is not this fruite to be eaten. Although Mary be beautifull, and holy, and honourable, yet is shee not to be adored and worship­ped: but these women worshipping Saint Mary, renew againe the sacrifice of wine, mingled in the honour of the Goddesse Fortuna, and prepare a Table for the Diuell, and not for God. Also Saint August. writing against Maximinus the Arian Bishop, saith; August. in his 1. Book against Maximinus. If we should make a Temple for an holy Angell, should we not be accursed from God, and the truth of Christ, and from the Church of God? because we exhibite that seruice to a creature, that is due to God alone. By which then who seeth not, but that to wor­ship Saints, yea, though not with Lateria, but with hyperdu­lia, is to make our selues the accursed of God: for in Gods di­uine worship and seruice, he will haue all, or none: euen as our Sauiour himselfe saith, Matthew 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serue. And yet be­sides [Page 164]the worship done to all other Saints: in their Rosarie, they haue twelue parts of spirituall worship, of which tenne is giuen to the Virgin Marie, and but two to God. And notwithstanding the worshipping of Saints was forbidden, both by the Apostles, and the Angell, and condemned by these ancient Fathers for deuilish and damnable (long be­fore the Popish Church was) yet after they had a Church, and that Antichrist the Pope was installed in his throne, (that he might share with God, herein, as in other parts of his glorious prerogatiues) this was established for one principle of Popish Religion. And thus much touching praying to Saints, and worshipping of them.

CHAP. XII. Tending to resolue all men, who were the first founders of the Doctrine of Purgatory, & the first place of Scrip­ture that was brought to confirme the Doctrine, and to proue a third place of rest for the soules departed: and how soone it had corrupted the Church, and con­founded the iudgements of the ancient Fathers: and what confusion it hath bred amongst the Papists them­selues: and how it tendeth to the ouerthrow of the pow­er of Christs death and passion.

AS touching the originall foundation of the Do­ctrine of Purgatory, Purgatory had her originall from the Hea­then Phi­losophers. thou shalt vnderstand (Christian Reader) that it came first from the Heathen Philosophers, in whom although there were the sparkes of diuine knowledge, as there is natural­ly in all men, and that by exercising themselues in the con­templation of the glorious workes of Gods creation, they were able to write some thing of God and diuine things; [Page 165]yet for want of the knowledge of his Word, and the rules of his testimonies; they could not write soundly. For al­beit the Law of Nature (by the wonders of heauen and earth) did teach them, that he that was the Authour of them, was mightie, and to be loued and feared aboue all: yet were they ignorant, how to loue and feare him aright. Also notwithstanding they had learned by the Law of Na­ture, that for those that did loue and feare him, he had prepared a place of eternall ioy, and for those that did nor, a place of perpetual paine; and that the pures could neuer ascend into his glorious presence, vntill they were made purer by some kinde of purifying: yet for want of true knowledge, they conceiued of these things but imperfect­ly, and did but meerely coniecture. For howsoeuer it be true, that God hath prepared a place of ioy, for those that loue and feare him, and also a place of punishment for those that doe not: and that the best and purest, can neuer come into his presence, vntill they be made purer by a more perfect purging: yet they beeing ignorant of the bloud of Christ, by which we should be purified, dreamed of a third place, in which we should be purged.

2 Now the chiefe of these Authours (as Tertullian wri­teth Tertullian in his Booke De praescriptionibus aduersus haere­ses, and in his booke De ani­ma.) were Pythagoras, Empedocles, and Plato. Hence it was (as Irenaeus testifieth) Jrenaeus lib. 1. cap. 24. that Carpocrates hauing lear­ned out of Plato his Philosophie, that mens soules after death must be purified, inuented a kinde of Purgatory; and out of the opinion of Pythagoras, sought to proue it by these words of Christ, Matth. 5. Thou shalt not come forth, till thou haue paid the vtmost farthing. By which we see, who were the first founders of Purgatory, and also the first place of Scrip­ture that was brought to confirme the Doctrine, and to proue a third place for the purifying of soules from sinne. Now let vs try out the true sense of that Scripture, to see if by it such a place can be proued.

3 Our Sauiour said, Thou shalt not come forth, till &c. Matth. 5.26. Vpon which word (till:) because the Papists also inferre, that Christ meant, that in time, he should pay the vtmost far­thing, and then come forth: wee will by another like place, [Page 166]shew the word, (till) doth not alwaies import a time fol­lowing, wherein the contrary may be affirmed. As when the Lord said to Iaakoh, Gen. 28.15. Gen. 28. I will not forsake thee, till I haue performed that I haue promised thee. Now if this word (till) doth alwaies intimate a time after, wherein a contra­ry may be concluded; then after the Lord had performed his promise to Iaacob, he forsooke him: But, as the Scrip­tures declare, God did neuer forsake him: so Christs word, (till) doth not import a time when the debter should pay the vtmost farthing, and then come forth; but that because he could neuer be able to pay it, hee should neuer come forth. For if Christ had meant, that men could pay the vt­most farthing due for sinne, and so release their soules, this had beene against himselfe, for then what need had any, of his paying any one farthing for them? Therefore it is cleare, that by paying the vtmost farthing, Christ meant the euer­lasting punishment that should neuer be paid. And this is it which Saint Hierome vpon the same Scripture saith. Hierome in his first booke chap. 1. vpon the Lamenta­tion of Ieremy. Christs meaning is that hee shall neuer come out, for that hee must euermore pay the vtmost farthing, whilest he suffereth euer­lasting punishment. And thus (Christian Reader) thou seest that by the true sense of those words of Christ, they cannot proue a third place. Howbeit, euen after this manner, doe they also wrest diuers other places of Scripture, to proue (if it were possible) a third place; euen to the confoun­ding of the whole harmony of the Scriptures, which by the expresse names of heauen and hell, do assigne but two pla­ces; and by not any where naming Purgatory, deny any such purging place to be.

4 In the sixteenth Chapter of Saint Lukes Gospel, Luke 16.22.23. our Sauiour Christ speaking of the rich Glutton, and of the poore Beggar, saith, And it was so that the Beggar died, and was carried by the Angels into Abrahams bosome. The rich man also died, and beeing in Hell in torments, hee lift vp his eyes and saw Abraham a farre off, and Lazarus in his bosome. By which words, wee see there is but onely two places into which the soules doe passe presently after death; namely, either into hell, or into Abrahams Bosome, which is a re­sting [Page 167]place in heauen for the soules of the faithfull, and not a place of pleasure in hell, as the Papists dreame. Matth. 8.11. For as Christ himselfe saith, Matth. 8. Many shall come, from the East and West, and shall sit downe with Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob in the Kingdome of heauen. Now if Abraham be in heauen, Abrahams Bosome must needes bee in heauen: Abrahams bosome. Therefore, there is but onely two places, heauen and hell. And this is manifestly proued also by these words of Salo­mon the Wise, which saith, Eccle. 11. Eccle. 11.3. If the tree fall towards the South, or toward the North, in the place that the tree fal­leth, there shall it be; To wit, abide for euer. Now as by trees the learned doe agree, is meant people: so doe they conclude, that by South and North, is meant heauen and hell; therefore there is but two places. Wherefore, how­soeuer the iudgement of some of the ancient Fathers was confounded in this Heathenish Doctrine of Purgatory, and that Saint Augustine himselfe had doubted of a third place, yet by these his owne words, he sheweth to all men, it was but his errour: for (saith hee) Augustine in his Sermon of time, the 232. Sermon. Let no man deceiue himselfe, there are but two places, as for any third, there is none at all: he that raigneth not with Christ, shall perish with the Deuill with­out any doubt. Againe hee saith, In his 18. Sermon of the words of the Apostle. There be two habitations or dwelling-places; the one, in the fire euerlasting; the other, in the Kingdome of heauen that neuer shall haue end. Againe, he saith, In his 5. book Hipognostichon. The first place, the Catholique faith, by Gods autho­ritie beleeueth to be the Kingdome of heauen: The second place, the same Catholique faith beleeueth to bee hell, where all runna­gates, and whosoeuer is without the faith of Christ, shall taste e­uerlasting punishment, as for any third place, wee vtterly know none, neither shall we finde in the holy Scriptures, that there is a­ny such. So then, by this we see the case is very cleare, there is no third place, and consequently no Purgatory.

5 Secondly, to proue yet a third place, Reuelation 6.9. they obiect those words of Saint Iohn, in his sixt Chapter of the Reue­lation, where he saith. And when I had opened the fift Seale, I saw vnder the Alter the soules of them that were killed for the Word of God, and for the testimonie which they maintained: And they cried with a loud voyce, saying: How long, Lord, holy [Page 168]and true, doest thou not iudge and auenge our bloud on them that dwell on the earth; and long white robes were giuen to eue­ry one: and it was said vnto them that they should rest for a little season vntill their fellow-seruants and their brethren, that should be killed euen as they were, were fulfilled. Loe (say they) here is a third place, euen a place where the soules of the faithful doe rest vntill the latter day. To which we answer: The Alter vnder which the soules are said to rest, The Altar is Christ. is Christ: as who so will reade the 56. Chapter of Esay: and se­uenth verse. And 60. Chapter, 7. verse of the same Pro­phet: and 8. Chapter, 3. verse of the Reuelation, shall see: or that will listen to these testimonies of these three ancient Fathers, shall heare, to wit, Saint Ireneus, Saint Augustine, and Epyphanius. Ireneus saith, Jreneus in his 4. Booke and 34. Chap. Our Alter is not in earth, but in heauen. Saint Augustine saith, Augustine in his 20. Booke, 10. Chap. of the City of God. Our Alter is in heauen, thither our prayers and oblations are directed. Epyphanius saith, Epiphanius in his 2. Booke of Melchisadech. Christ is our Sacrifice, our Priest, and our. Alter. So that we see euidently, that by the Alter is meant Christ: and there­fore the place in which the soules of the faithfull doe rest till the day of iudgement, is vnder the foote-stoole of Christ in Heauen. Wherefore those words of Saint Iohn, doth not proue a third place. Also this is made more manifest by the 15. verse of the 7. Chapter, where he speaking of the same soules, Reuel. 7.15. saith: They are in the presence of the Throne of God. And therefore whereas the Papists would haue this place of rest, Elisius Campus. Abrahams bo­some, or Para­dise. to be their Elisius Campus, a place of pleasure in hell; which they say is Paradise, or Abrahams Bosome: here they are compelled, either to say that the Throne of God is in hell, or else to grant that the resting place of those soules, is in Heauen; and then where is their third place yet proued?

6 But forasmuch as those words in the 6. Chapter, toge­ther with the other words in the 7. Chapter, doe shew the re­sting place of the soules of the faithful to be in heauen, and a place where they do crie for the time of the perfecting their full ioy and glory; it is cleare, that vnder the foote-stoole of Christ, is the Celestiall Paradise, which in the 16. Chapter of Saint Lukes Gospell, is called, Abrahams Bosome, where [Page 169] Lazarus, the go [...]d thiefe, Paradise is in heauen, not in h [...]ll. and all the faithfull doe rest with Abraham, the Father of the faithfull, till they receiue toge­ther the full fruition of their faith. So that hereby wee see Paradise to be in Heauen, and not in hell as they fable. And this is yet made more plaine by Saint Paul, 2 Cor. 12. where he saith: I know a man in Christ, about foureteene yeeres agone, 2 Cor. 12.2.4. which was taken vp into the third Heauen: How that he was taken vp into Paradise. By which it is most manifest, that Paradise is in the highest Heauen: and that therefore their hellish Para­dise, in which they faine their purified soules of Purgatory doe rest till the last day, is fabulous, and doth not proue a third place.

7 But now I doe expect, they will answer thus. Be it as you say, that Paradise is in Heauen, and that therein is the resting place of the soules of the faithfull; yet is there at least a third place, in which they did rest for a time; to wit, till they were purified, and made fit for Heauen: For to the very same effect are these words of Cardinall Allen; Allen in Fulks, page 139. By long amen­ding by fire, at last they come to that reward. Againe, speaking of Purgatory fire, he saith: Page 130. Through which the good must passe, before they come to eternall ioy. By which they would haue vs to vnderstand, that no soule can come into the presence of God in Heauen, Soules are in heauen, because they haue wa­shed them­selues white in the bloud of the Lambe, no [...] in the fire of Purgatory. but onely such as are purified by the fire of Purgatory: and that those that are in Heauen, are there, be­cause first they were so purified. Which how vntrue it is, these words in the 14. and 15. verses of the 7. Chapter of the Reuelation, will make it most euident, which saith: They haue washed their long Robes white in the bloud of the Lambe, there­fore are they in the presence of the Throne of God, and serue him in his Temple day and night. Now in that the holy Ghost saith: Therefore; it is as cleare as the Sunne at noone day that all those that are admitted into the presence of God in Heauen; are so dignified, because by the hands of their faith, they haue washed themselues white in the bloud of Christ, not in the fire of Purgatory. Wherefore as those words be­fore cited, did vtterly ouerthrow their hellish Paradise, so doth these words vtterly ouerthrow their hellish Purga­torie.

[Page 170]8 Thirdly, to proue yet that the soules are made perfect by the fire of Purgatorie, they cite the words of Saint Paul, 1 Cor. 1 Cor. 3.13. 3. where he speaking of ignorant Teachers, and their doctrine, saith: Euery mans worke shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it, because it shall be reuealed by fire. Which words they would make the World to beleeue, are meant of the fire of Purgatory, that shall (as they say) purge curious and vaine doctrine, and those that haue built it on the foun­dation Christ; whereas the very words themselues, doe make it plaine to the contrary: for in that it saith, the day shall de­clare it; 2 Pet. 1 Chap. 19 verse. 2 Thes. 2. ch. 8. he meant the truth, the light whereof Saint Peter calleth, The day-starre, 2. Epistle, 1. Chapter. And the power thereof, Saint Paul 2 Thessalonians, 2. Chapter 8, calleth the Spirit of Gods mouth, wherewith he sheweth, that Antichrist, and all Antichristian Teachers, and their doctrine, shall be consumed, euen as fire consumeth the drosse, and fineth the gold and siluer. And therefore in that Chapter, where hee speaketh of purging by fire, (that no man should vnder­stand him to meane a corporall or materiall fire) hee con­cludeth of that matter thus: 1 Cor. 3.8. As it were by the fire. That is, as it were by fire, the vaine doctrine shall be burned and consumed by the fire of Gods truth, and the Teacher there­of being tryed thereby to hold the foundation sound, the Church shall not condemne him as an heretique, but saue his life. For if Saint Paul should haue spoken those words, to haue maintained a place of purging sinne; then should hee haue vtterly confounded all his owne doctrine, throughout all his Epistles, where he so laboureth to proue, that our sins are wholly purged by the bloud of Christ onely. For first, in the third Chapter to the Romans, he saith thus of Christ: Whom God hath set forth to be a reconciliation through faith in his bloud. Rom. 3.25. Rom. 5.9. And in his 5. Chapter thus: Being now iustified by his bloud, we shall be saued from wrath through him. And in the first to the Colossians thus: Colos. 1.13. Who hath deliuered vs from the power of darkenesse, and hath translated vs into the Kingdome of his deare Sonne, in whom wee haue redemption through his bloud, that is, the forgiuenesse of sinnes. And in the same Chap­ter: Verse 19.20. For it pleased the Father that in him all fulnesse should dwell, [Page 171]and by him to reconcile all things vnto himselfe, and to set at peace through the bloud of his Crosse, both the things in earth and the things in Heauen. And for a full conclusion of this point, namely, that wee are absolutely made perfect by Christs death, and bloud, he saith, verse 22. In the body of his flesh, Verse 22. through death, he made vs vnblameable and without fault in the sight of God. Now then, this being true, to wit, that we are fully and wholly reconciled to God, by faith in the bloud of Christ, and our sinnes cleane washed away thereby, so as that we are made vnblameable and without fault in Gods sight; how absurd had it beene for Saint Paul, to haue taught any other kinde of purgation? Therefore it is cleare, that those his words in the third Chapter to the Corinthians, cannot be vnderstood of Purgatory.

9 Furthermore, as touching the truth of this doctrine, namely, that our sinnes are washed and cleansed onely by the bloud of Christ, Saint Paul is not singular in this point: for as we heard before out of the seauenth Chapter of the Re­uelation, that it was confirmed to Saint Iohn, by the Angell of God from Heauen; so likewise whosoeuer will reade the first Chapter of that Booke, shall finde these words set downe concerning Christ: Ʋnto him that loued vs, Reuel. 1.5.6. and washed vs from our sinnes in his bloud, and made vs Kings and Priests vnto God, euen his Father, be glory and dominion for euermore, Amen. And in the 1 Chapter to the Hebrewes thus: Heb. 1.3. Who being the brightnesse of the glory, and the ingraued forme of his person, and bearing vp all things by his mighty Word, hath by himselfe pur­ged our sinnes. And in the first Epistle, and the first Chapter of Saint Iohn, thus: Iohn 1. Epist. 1. chap. 7. The bloud of Iesus Christ cleanseth vs from all sinne. Wherefore then, seeing that of the bond slaues of Sathan, we are made Kings and Priests to God by the bloud of Christ: and that Christ of himselfe, and by himselfe, hath so purged our sinnes, as whereby wee are made vnblameable and without fault in Gods sight; why should we, nay, rather how dare we beleeue it is done by Purgatory? Againe, seeing the holy Ghost saith: By the bloud of Christ, Verse 9. wee are cleansed from all sinne; and in the verses following: From all vnrighte­ousnesse. And that Saint Paul saith; Titus 2. Titus 2.14. He redeemed [Page 172]vs from all iniquitie: why should we suffer our selues to be so deluded, to thinke that there is any sinne, vnrighteousnesse, or iniquity at all left to be purged by their imagined Purga­torie; or that there can be any vse at all thereof, or be any such place?

10 Saint Cyprian speaking of the matter of our purging, saith thus: Cyprian of Christs passion. Thy bloud O Lord seeketh no reuenge; thy bloud washeth our sinnes, and pardoneth our trespasses. Also to shew that there can be none other purgation, nor any place for the purging of sinne after this life; he saith else-where: In his first Treatise against Demetrian. Af­ter we be once departed out of this life, there is no more place of repentance, there is no more effect or working of satisfaction; life is here either lost or wonne. Also to the very same effect are those words of Saint Augustine: August. vpon the 25. Psalme. Let onely the price of the bloud of my Lord auaile me to the perfection of my deliuery. And in another place thus: In his 10. Booke, 22 Ch. of the City of God. The victory is gotten in his name that hath taken man vpon him, and that hath liued without sinne, that in him, and through him, being both the Priest and the sacrifice, re­mission and forgiuenesse of sinnes should be obtained and giuen: that is to say (saith he) by the Mediatour of God and man, that man Iesus Christ, by whom the purging of our sinnes being made, we are reconciled vnto God. Well then, if onely the bloud of Christ be auaileable to the perfection of our deliuerance from sinne, and that the purgation thereof, be so effectually made thereby, as that our sinnes are washed away, and all our trespasses pardoned, and wee reconciled vnto God in this life; and that here in this life, euerlasting life is either lost or wonne; and that after this life, repentance comes too late, and no satisfaction can be made; to what end should God prouide a place after this life, for the better perfecting of our saluation? But therefore it is which Saint Augustine in another place saith; In his 54. E­pistle to Maci­donius. There is no other place to correct our manners and conditions, but onely in this life: euery man shall haue that which he hath purchased vnto himselfe in this World. And what vse then can there be of Purgatory? Saint Ignatius saith; Ignatius in his 6. Epistle. Alwayes reason requireth, that whiles we haue space and time, we should amend and correct our faults, whiles in this life wee haue occasion giuen of repentance: for it is truly said, after [Page 173]death, there is neither time nor place to confesse our sinnes. And why then should wee beleeue that there is both place and time? Saint Ambrose saith; Ambrose vpon good death. He that here in this life recei­ueth not remission of his sinnes, shall not be there in the life to come: meaning Heauen. Also Saint Hierome speaking of the same point, saith thus: Hierome in his Booke vpon the 95. of Esay. He that doth not obtaine remission of his sinnes whiles he yet liueth in the body, doth perish to God, and abi­deth to himselfe vnto euerlasting damnation. And what auai­leth Purgatory after this life then? Saint Chrisostome likewise speaking of the same point, saith; Chrisost. in his 2. Sermon of Lazarus. Whiles we be yet here, we haue a godly hope, but as soone as we are departed hence, it lieth no more in vs for to repent, nor to wash away our sinnes. And how then after this life, can we helpe our selues in Purgatory? So that by this wee see how friuilous and vaine the doctrine of Purgatory is, and also how fantasticall their Purgatory Pro­ctors are, especially their Cardinall Allen; Cardinall. Al­len in D. Fulkes answere to a false Catho­lique. who in so many places of his Booke, affirmeth, that wee are purified in that fire, as gold is in the Furnace. That by suffering the paines of Purgatory, we are made perfect. That by suffering the tor­ments of Purgatory, wee doe satisfie Gods iustice for sinne: which how true it is, let vs consider a little further, and how it will stand with the truth of the Scriptures.

11 First to beate them with their owne rod, Wisedome 3.1. their owne Canonicall Scripture, the third of Wisdome, saith; The soules of the righteous are in the hands of God, and no torment shall touch them. Now if no torment shall touch their soules, how can Purgatory fire purifie them, as fire purifieth gold? or they be made perfect, or satisfie Gods iustice, by suffering those tor­ments, which shall not so much as once touch them? The 16. Chapter of Saint Lukes Gospell declareth plainely, Luke 16.23.24, 25, 26. that those sinners that are not forgiuen in this life, cannot after this life, be discharged by paines and punishments. And hereof it is which Iustinus Martyr, writing vpon the same Chapter, saith; Iustinus 2.60. to Orthodo­s [...]s. This is a plaine and manifest doctrine of Diues and Lazarus, by which is taught, that after the departing of the soule from the body, men cannot by any meanes bring profit or com­modity vnto them. And as touching those that are forgiuen in this life, Saint Chrisostome saith as plainely; Chrysost. in [...]is [...]4 Ho [...]. vpon Genesis. Where there [Page 174]is forgiuenesse, there is no punishment. Also forasmuch as Saint Paul, 2 Cor. 5. speaking of the generall resurrection, saith; Euery man shall then receiue the things which are done in his bo­die, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or euill; I would haue them to shew me but some one place, either in the Old or New Testament, that doth testifie, that God hath appointed such a punishment for the soules, (in the meane time) as shall set the bodies free for the punishment due for that they had done, and forced their soules to doe. If they can shew me none, then it is certaine, that there is no such punishment ordained of God, and consequently no such place of punishment. And therefore all these circum­stances duely considered, what reason haue wee to beleeue their old Philosophicall doting doctrine of Purgatory? Yea, or why should we beleeue that the soules of the righteous, goe thither immediately after death, seeing the Preacher decla­reth plainely, Eccle. 12.7. Eccle. 12. that they goe presently to heauen? For saith he; And dust returne to the earth as it was, and the spi­rit returne to God that gaue it. Luke 16.22. And seeing also Saint Luke in the 16. Chapter of his Gospell, saith of Lazarus: And the beg­gar died, Luke 23.43. and was carried by the Angels into Abrahams bo­some: which we shewed to be the celestiall Paradise in Hea­uen? And seeing Christ also said to the good thiefe: This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise? Nay, seeing the Bishop of Rome himselfe saith, euen Gregory the Great; Greg. in his 4. Bookes of Dialogues, 25. Chap. It is most certaine that the soules of the righteous, being loosed from the flesh, are receiued into the heauenly seates? Now then, if that be true, that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre; then the Papists, although they will not beleeue Salomon, nor Saint Luke, nor our Sauiour Christ; yet dare they not surely but beleeue the Pope of Rome, that the soules of the righteous, (present­ly after death) goe straight to heauen: from whence they will not say they returne downe into Purgatory; therefore it is cleare, there is iust no such place at all.

12 And thus (Christian Reader) thou hast seene most manifestly confuted, Cardinall Al­len in Fulke, to a false Catho­lique. that fond fable of Cardinall Allen, Pag. 178. where he basheth not to say, that all the ancient Fa­thers agreed in one, for the approbation of the doctrine of [Page 175] Purgatory; whereas we see, that it was not possible for any of them to speake more directly and expresly with it, then these their testimonies are against it; and that howsoeuer that he­resie (mingled with the truth) did wonderfully confound some of their iudgements, so as that the best learned of them, could scarcely tell how to conclude of the matter; yet these their testimonies may absolutely resolue vs, how wee are to conclude thereof. Neuerthelesse, let men vary neuer so much, the truth is consonant and agreeable to it selfe; neither neede any to differ therein, if they will square their doctrine by Saint Pauls rule, Romans 12. namely, Rom. 12.6. that it agree with the true proportion and analogy of faith: But how this do­ctrine of Purgatory doth agree therewith, these three princi­ples, collected out of the said Booke of Doctor Fulkes an­swer to Master Allen, will make it plaine. First in Page 92. Allen saith; Cardinall Al­len in Fulke. Purgatory paines doth not onely serue Gods iustice for the punishment of sinne, but also cleanseth and qualifieth the soule of man defiled. Secondly, in Page 154. he saith: The death of Christ doth not discharge vs of satisfying for our sinnes, nor of any other good worke, whereby a man may procure his owne saluation. Thirdly, in Page 133. he saith; In Purgatory we must be holden from life and liberty, till we haue paid the vtmost farthing, the to­leration of which bonds shall recompence the debt. Now how this doctrine can stand with the true proportion and analogy of faith in Christ, or not altogether withstand it, The doctrine of Purgatory against the faith. let the discreet Reader iudge. For if Purgatory paines, doe serue both for the satisfying of Gods iustice, and also for the purging of our soules from sin; & that Christ by his death, did not so satisfie for them, but that we our selues must make a better & more perfect satisfaction, euen to the vtmost farthing, or be hol­den in Purgatory for euer from life and liberty; what hath Christ done for vs, and to what purpose at all serued his death and bloud-shedding? or what doth faith in him a­uaile at all?

13 But seeing the doctrine of Purgatory is such, as can­not stand with the true proportion and analogy of faith; it is cleare, it is not grounded vpon the truth of Gods Word, but vpon the opinions of those faithlesse Philosophers, who [Page 176](as we said) for want of Gods Law and Testaments, and the rule of his truth to haue enlightened their iudgements, did but by the rules of the Law of nature meerely guesse at this point, as they did of God, and other diuine things: whose fantasies Saint Paul, Colos. 2 8. Colos. 2.8. forbiddeth vs to follow. Beware (saith he) left there be any man that spoile you through Philosophie, and vaine deceit, through the traditions of men, ac­cording to the rudiments of the World, and not after Christ. And thus much touching the first Authours of Purgatory, and the first place of Scripture that the heretiques brought (and Montanus and his Adherents afterwards) to confirme the doctrine: as also to shew how it tendeth to the vtter con­founding of the vertue of Christs death and passion, and faith in him, and how it did corrupt the Church, and con­found the iudgements of some ancient writers. Now let vs briefly take a view, how it hath also confounded the iudge­ments of the Papists themselues.

14 First, What confusi­on the doctrine of Purgatory hath wrought amongst the Papists them­selues. for the number of hels, Sillius saith; There beten. Aeneas saith, but nine. Gelasius, but seauen. Aquines, but foure. Diuers of the Papists will haue fiue, of which Para­dise to be one; which their Paullinus saith, is Abrahams bo­some, and is in the hell of the damned. Secondly, touching the place where Purgatory should be; Polidore saith: It is in Mount Aethne in Cicilie. Another saith; Saint Patrike pla­ced it in Ireland. The Manachies say; It is in the Globe of the Sunne. Others say: It is in the Globe of the Moone. Some say; It is vnder the South Pole. Others say: It is vnder the North Pole; but some others say: It is vnder the City of Romes for there is a deepe hole where Christ went downe with his Crosse on his backe. By which we see, that hell mouth is in Rome. Thirdly, touching the degrees of Purgatory, Lutzenburge saith: Purgatory is the highest of the foure hels. Va [...]a saith; It is the highest saue one. Herolt saith: It is the lowest saue one. Smith saith; It is the lowest of all: and Cardinall Allen saith; It is in the lower Romes, as the best learned iudge. Fourthly, what Christ did in Purgatory. Smith saith; Christ did in his soule suffer there for the sinnes of our soules. Allen saith; It is blasphemie to say, that the Diuels had power to torment the soule [Page 177]of Christ. Smith saith: Christ preached to the soules, and brought them all out with him. Martion saith; Christ did not deliuer all: for Abel, Enoch, Abraham, and others, durst not come at him, lest he would tempt them, and punish them. Most of the Papists say; He deliuered all. But Hermes saith: They came not all forth till the Apostles descended and preached vnto them also. Another saith: Christ deliuered the Sodomites, and Kaine that reprobate. Allen saith: Purgatory doth not belong to any but to the faithfull. The master of the Sentences saith; Iust men goe not into Purgatory at all. Allen saith: The good must passe there-through before they come to eternall ioy. Smith saith: After Christs resurrection, the soules went no more to Purgatory. Allen affirmeth, that the Apostles went thither. Now as touching the element wherewith the soules are purged, some say it is onely fire. Allen holdeth it to be both fire and wa­ter, and that they shall be tormented as well with extreame cold as heate. Sir Thomas More saith: In Purgatory there is no water. Ruffensis saith: In Purgatory there is good store of water. The last question is, whether Diuels or Angels be the executio­ners? Ruffensis and Albertus, say; They be holy Angels: but Sir Thomas More saith: They be Diuels. Therefore (Christian Reader) I now referre the matter to be iudged by thee, whe­ther the Doctrine of Purgatory be such, as any in his right wits will thinke he may build his faith thereon, or beleeue that there is any such purging place? And the rather, for that it tendeth to the vtter ouerthrow of the power of all that Christ hath done for mans saluation; and whereof that errour of prayers for the dead is an appendix.

CHAP. XIII. The conclusion of the former twelue Chapters: Containing an answere vnto two sorts of Papists: the one, affir­ming that we are iustified and saued by the workes of [Page 178]of the Law: the other, that wee are saued by faith and workes together. That because no man can fulfill the Law, no man can be iustified by the Law. That God was not vniust in giuing such a Law, as he knew no man was able to fulfill. That to seeke to merit saluati­on, is the high way to damnation.

1 SO farre and wide (Christian Reader) as the Romish iurisdiction and Kingdome of An­tichrist did extend it selfe, this Doctrine of iustification by faith without the workes of the Law, was impugned. Some teaching that men by their good workes are iustified, and for their good workes saued. Others that we are iustified and saued, by faith and workes together: to both which we answere.

2 All good workes, are said to be the workes of the Law, because God commaunded them in his Law, for di­uers good ends and purposes: the iustification by which, confisteth of two parts. First, in not omitting any one thing, whatsoeuer the Law hath commanded: Secondly, in not committing any one thing whatsoeuer the Law hath forbidden: which as it is in Leuiticus the eighteenth Chapter; Leuit. 18.5. If a man doe, he shall liue in them. But contrari­wise, if he doe not obserue and doe all, and also doe no­thing to the contrary; hee is so farre from being iustified by the Law, that he is accursed and condemned by it.

3 The affirmatiue part is proued in the seauen and twentieth Chapter of Deuteronomie: Deut. 27.26. Where it is said, Cur­sed be hee that confirmeth not all the wordes of this Law to doe them, and all the people shall say: So be it. The negatiue part is proued, Ezek. 18.11.13 Ezekiel Chap. 18. in these words. If he doe any one of these things, though he doe not all, shall he liue? seeing he hath done all these abhominations, he shall surely die the death. By which it is cleare, that whosoeuer omitteth any one thing which the Law requireth, or committeth any one thing whatsoeuer the Law prohibiteth, hee is culpable of the whole. And this is it which the Apostle Saint Iames saith, [Page 179]Chapter 2. Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Law, Iames 2.10. and yet faileth in one poynt, is guiltie of all. Therefore now the question is, whether any man can thus absolutely fulfill the Law? Wee say, no man can: Contrariwise the Papists say, that a rege­nerate man may. And their Doctor Master Harding, will proue it both by the words of Christ, and also of the Apo­stle Saint Iohn. M. Harding in Apol. chap. 19. Diuis. 1. The words of Christ, Matthew 11. after their Translation, be these: My yoke is sweete, and my burden light. And the words of Saint Iohn, 1. Epistle, 5. Chapter, be these: His Commandements be not heauy. Now the words of Christ, that goe before those his words, be these: Come vnto me all ye that are weary and laden, and I will ease you: And then it followeth: Take my yoke vpon you, &c. Shewing, that if any were afflicted in his conscience, and found himselfe con­demned for his sinne by the Law, he should not despaire; because hee himselfe had fulfilled the Law for him: and as Saint Paul saith, Colossians 2. Colos. 2.14. Colos. 1.22. Hath put out the hand-writing that was against him. And thereby Colos. 1.22. Hath made him vnblameable, and without fault in the sight of God. So that hee hauing made the Law so light a burden vnto him, as that, although he cannot but breake it, yet it shall not condemne him, nor presse him downe to hell; the spirituall taste where­of must needs be sweete vnto him. And this I take to be the true sense and meaning of Christ. For if Christ had meant, that the Law had beene easie for vs to fulfill, then could we haue disburdened our selues of our sinnes, and needed not at all to goe for any ease to him. 1 Epist. 5.3. And whereas Saint Iohn saith (after their Translation) His Commandements be not hea­uie. If he did meane that a regenerate man can actually and absolutely fulfill the Law, then it is cleare, he did meane that a regenerate man may be without sinne: but then how doth this agree with his owne words? Chapter 1. where he saith of himselfe, and such as himselfe then was: 1 Epist. 1.8. If wee say wee haue no sinne, we deceiue our selues, and the truth it is not in vs. And Chapter 3. Sinne is the transgression of the Law. 1 Epist. 3.4. There­fore hee did not meane that a regenerate man can fulfill the whole Law. And that indeede it may appeare yet more plainly, they cannot; let vs see what wee can proue by the [Page 180]Scriptures, Rom. 7. Fathers, and their owne Writers.

4 The Apostle Saint Paul, Romans 7 Chapter, verses 14.15. describing in his owne person the state of all the rege­nerate, saith: For we know that the Law is spirituall, but I am carnall, The state of all the regenerate. sold vnder sinne; for I allow not that which I doe: for what I would, that doe I not; but that I hate, that I doe. And Ʋerse 18.19. For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good, For I doe not the good thing that I would; but the euill which I would not, that doe I. Againe, Ʋer­ses 21.22.23. I finde then by the Law, that when I would doe good, euill is present with me: for I delight in the Law of God con­cerning the inner man: but I see another Law in my members, rebelling against the Law of my minde, and leading me captiue vnto the Law of sinne, which is in my members. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliuer me from the body of this death? So that in the person of this regenerate man, the case is made cleare, that no regenerate man, is able so to fulfill the Law, as that he may duly claime to be iustified by it. And hereof haue we also most manifest examples of the old Patriarkes, euen from Noahs time: Gen. 7.1. amongst whom, albeit the Scrip­ture, Genesis 7. report of him, to be the onely regenerate man of the last age of the first World; The Patriarkes guilty of the breach of the Law. yet in the 10. Chap. it is plainely declared, he brake the Law of God, by being drunke. Also notwithstanding Lot be said to be a iust man, and the onely regenerate man among the Sodomites; yet it is recorded, Gen. 19.33, 34. Genesis 19. that he most wickedly brake the Law of God, by committing incest with his owne two Daugh­ters. Abraham, although he be said to be the Father of the faithfull, Rom. 4.16. Romans 4. yet it is reported, Genesis 12. and Chap. 20. Gen. 16.2. that he brake the Law of God twise by lying, Isaac his sonne also brake the Law by lying, Genesis 26. so did Iacob Isaaks sonne, Gen. 12.13. Genesis 27. Also albeit the sonnes of Iacob were the Patriarkes of the 12. Tribes of the Children of Is­raell, Gen. 35.2. yet they committed Idolatry, Genesis 35. And Ruben the eldest of them, committed adultery with his Fathers Concubine, Gen. 35.22. Gen. 34.25. Genesis 35. Simeon and Leui committed a great murther, Genesis 34. Iudah, of which Tribe Christ came, [Page 181]committed adultery with Thamar his daughter in Law, Gen. 38.18. Gen. 37.18. Gen. 42.15. Exod. 4.24.25. Num. 11.10. to the 15. Ge­nesis 38. and most of them consented to haue murthered their brother Ioseph, Gen. 37. Ioseph committed idolatry, by swearing by the life of Pharaoh, Gen. 42. Moses brake the Law, by not circumcising his sonne the eight day, Exod. 4. He murmured against the Lord, Numbers 11. Aaron con­sented to Idolatry. Exodus 32. Exod. 32.2. 2 Sam. 11.4.15. Dauid committed both a­dultery and murther, 2 Samuel 11. And the whole Nation of the Iewes, amongst whom were many thousand regene­rate persons; yet euen of the generall, did our Sauiour say vnto certaine of them, Iohn 7. Iohn 7.19. Did not Moses giue you a Law, and yet none of you keepeth the Law?

5 Wherefore vnlesse the Papists can proue, that the re­generate in these dayes, haue a greater measure of the spirit of grace, then the Patriarkes and Prophets had, and all the regenerate Iewes had; nay, then he whom they faine to be their founder, and the chiefe regenerate man of all the Apo­stles had, they can neuer proue, that any regenerate man can liue so without sinne, but that if he seeke to be iustified by fulfilling the Law, hee shall bring himselfe within the curse and condemnation of it, for that it saith: Cursed be he that fulfilleth not all. And it is most certaine, Deut. 27.26. that if a man could liue so, as that hee deserued to be called righteous Noah, iust Lot, or faithfull Abraham; and to be said of him to haue walked in all the Commandements of God without reproofe, and in respect of men, to be a iust man before God; as it was said of Zacharias and Elizabeth his wife: Luke 1.6. yet shall hee finde in himselfe to haue broken the Law in some one point or other, for which he had neede of a sacrifice, as Zacharias had; who offered continuall sacrifice as well for his owne sinnes, as for the rest of the peoples, as is proued in Leuiticus 16. Luke 1. and Hebrewes 7. Nay, I say further, Leuit. 16.6. Luke 1.8.9. Heb. 7.27. Iob 1.8. that if God himselfe should say of him, as he said of that iust man Iob: None is like him in the earth, an vpright and iust man, one that feareth God, and escheweth euill. Yet if he will be ac­cepted of God as Iob was, hee must confesse with Iob, Iob 39.37. Iob 14 17. Iob 9.3. and say; Behold, I am vile, Chap. 39. Mine iniquities are sealed vp as in a bag, Chap. 14. If I would iustifie my selfe, mine owne [Page 182]mouth shall condemne me: If I would be perfect, hee shall iudge me wicked, Chapter 9. By which it is most euident, that all those that will be perfect by the workes of the Law, God will condemne for vnperfect, for not fulfilling the whole Law. And for this cause it was, that Saint Paul concludeth hereof thus. By the workes of the Law shall no flesh be iustified in the sight of God, Romans 3. And thus much by proofe of Scripture concerning this point: now let vs heare the an­cient Fathers.

6 Saint Augustine writing against the Pelagian heretikes, saith: August. in his first Booke a­gainst the Pe­lagians. Who will grant you that any man can doe that thing that no man was euer able to doe? Againe, he saith; Against that 2. Epistle. It is impossible that the Law should be fulfilled by flesh. Saint Hierome also against the same heretiques, wrote thus: Hier. to Cresi­phontus against the Pelag. Ye will say Gods Comman­dements be easie; yet you are not able to shew vs any man, that euer fulfilled them altogether. And these Pelagians, Saint Augustine called the new heretiques; whereby it seemeth, that they were the first Authors of this heresie. And notwithstanding their great Doctor Saint Thomas of Aquine proueth it an here­sie, by saying; Thomas of A­quin, 3. Galat. It is impossible for flesh and bloud to fulfill the Law: yet commeth their Master Harding, and saith; M. Hard. Apo­log. chap. 19. Diuis. 1. We beleeue that God commandeth vs nothing vnpossible to vs: other­wise how could he iustly punish for not doing that Commandement, which by no meanes we are able to fulfill? Wee are sure that God punisheth no man vniustly: for there is none iniquity in God. To which we answere.

7 God is iust and perfect in nature, and therefore he gaue a iust and perfect Law; and such a one as man might haue kept, had he kept himselfe in that perfect estate wher­in God created him: but if through his owne default, hee hath lost the freedome, both of power and will, so as that he cannot now but breake his Law, God is not vniust in pu­nishing him for it. And it is most certaine, that to the in­tent man might see, what a miserable estate he had brought himselfe into, Gal. 3.19. Rom. 3.20. this iust Law was giuen. For as Saint Paul saith, Galat. 3. It was added because of transgression: and Rom. 3. By the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne. And this is it which Saint Augustine saith: August. in his Preface to the Galathians. The Lord gaue a iust Law to [Page 183]vniust men, to make manifest their sinnes, and not to take them away. Againe, he saith, Vpon the 118 Psal. To this purpose was the Law giuen, that of great it might make little, that it might shew vnto thee that thou hast no strength of thy selfe to fulfill the Law: And so being nee­dy, vnworthy and poore, might flee vnto grace, and cry: Haue mer­cie on me O God, for I am weake. The Pelagians (saith he) In his booke of Grace and Free-will, cap. 4. thinke themselues cunning men, when they say (as we heard right now Master Harding said) God would not commaund the thing that he knoweth a man is not able to doe. To which Saint Au­gustine answereth thus, In his booke of Grace and Free-will, cap. 4. God commaundeth vs to doe some things that we are not able to doe, that we might vnderstand what we ought to craue of him. Also their Saint Bernard, speaking of that which God in his Law requireth of vs to be perfor­med, saith Bernard vpon the Canticles, the 53. Sermon. In commaunding impossible things, God made not men transgressours, but humble, that euery mouth might be stop­ped, and all the world in danger vnto God because no flesh shall be iustified in his sight. And thus much for the answering that sort of Papists, which hold that men are iustified and sa­ued by their good workes: Now let vs see what wee can say to the other sort.

8 Another sort there are, which hold that wee are iusti­fied by faith and workes together. And they ground their opinion vpon the words of Saint Iames. chap 2. Iames chap. 2.24. where hee saith: Ye see how that of workes a man is iustified, and not of faith onely. And hereupon they conclude, that in the sight of God, we are iustified by faith and workes together: where­as it is euident by the words doing before, Saint Iames had no such meaning: and therefore their mis-vnderstanding him, hath caused them to erre. For they not considering that there be two manners of iustifications, the one before God, the other before men, Mat. 23. Mat. 23. suppose that Saint Iames speaketh there of iustification before God; but how can this possibly be, seeing (as we heard before) hee said in the same chap. He that faileth in one point of the Law, Iames 2. chap. 10. and 3.2. is guil­tie of all. And in the chap. following, in many things we sinne all? Now seeing he saith, that in many things wee sinne all, and hee that breaketh one point is guilty of all: it is cleare, he did not meane iustification before God, but before men. [Page 184]And this appeareth also most euidently, from the begin­ning of the 2 chap. to the 17. verse of the same: Where he hauing to deale with the Atheists of his time (such as of whom there are too many euery where) in whom albeit there appeare no fruit of a true and iustifying faith, but the contrarie; yet let any well disposed man reproue them for the same, streight way they breake forth into these speeches, and say: I hope I haue as good a faith as you, and I hope to be saued as well as the best of you all: To such said Saint Iames, Iames chap. 2.18. Thou hast the faith, and I haue workes: shew me thy faith out of thy workes, and I will shew thee my faith by my workes. Now in that he saith, shew me, and I will shew thee, it is without all contradiction, he speaketh of the outward iusti­fication before men, and not that by workes, neither by faith and workes together, we are iustified before God.

9 Againe, whereas against those Athiests, hee opposed that outward signe of Abrahams faith, by offering to sacri­fice his sonne Isaac at the commandement of God; yet al­though his faith thereby was manifested to the World, to be a true faith; hee was neither iustified before God by that worke, neither by it and faith together, but euen by the faith alone. Rom. 4.2.3.4.5.6.7. For as the Apostle Saint Paul saith, Rom. 4. If Abra­ham were iustified by workes, he hath wherein to reioyce, but not with God. For what saith the Scriptures, Abraham beleeued God, and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse? Now to him that worketh, the wages is not counted by fauour, but by debt: but to him that worketh not, but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly, his faith is accounted for righteous: Euen as Dauid declareth the blessednesse of the man, vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes, saying: Blessed are they whose ini­quities are forgiuen, and whose sinnes are couered: Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne. So that hereby we see it most manifest, that iustification before God, consisteth in faith alone without workes: euen as he also proueth as apparantly, where he absolutely, and vtterly excludeth all kinde of workes; for being wholly, or any part of the cause of iustification, in that he saith, Rom. 11. If it be of grace, it is no more of workes: If it be of workes, it is no more of grace. That [Page 185]is to say, it is of the one, but not of both. And therefore in the third Chapter of the same Booke, he closeth vp the do­ctrine of iustification thus: Rom. 3.28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith, without the workes of the Law. And thus much by proofe of Scripture touching this point also. Now let vs heare the iudgement of the Fathers.

10 Saint Augustine saith, August. in [...]s 83. q [...]sti­o [...]s. Quest. 76. Glossa ordinaria. Abrahrns was iustified by faith without works. Saint Hilary saith, Hila. 9. Can. Ma. 8. It moued the Scribes that sinnes was forgiuen by man; for they onely beheld man in Christ Iesu; and that to be forgiuen of him, which the Law could not release (fides enim sola iustificat) for faith onely iu­stifieth. Saint Hierome saith, Hier. 10. cap. Rom. They not knowing that God iu­stifieth (sola fide) by faith onely, supposed themselues to be iust, by the workes of the Law, which they neuer obserued. Theophi­lact saith, Theop. 3 cap. Gal. Because no man is iustified by the Law, &c. Now he doth plainly shew, that (fidem ipsam vel sol [...]m) faith it selfe, yea euen alone hath power to iustifie. Saint Chrisostome saith, Christost 4. Hom vpon the 1. to Tim. chap. 1. Who could hardly beleeue, that enemies, that sinners, that such as were not iustified in the Law, nor by workes, that they by and by, haue (ex sola fide,) by faith onely obtayned the chiefe merite. It seemed to the Iewes (said he [...]) an incredible thing, that a man that had spent all his former life vainely and disor­derly, hauing passed the same in wicked workes, that after­wards hee should be said to be saued (sola fide) by faith onely. Againe he saith thus of them, In his Hom. vpon th. 3. chap. to the Gala. They said who so stayeth him­selfe (sola fide) by faith onely, is accursed: Contrariwise, Saint Paul proueth, who so stayeth (sota fide) by faith onely is blessed. Moreouer, he saith, Vpon the 4. chap. to the Rom. the 8. Ser. That a man destitute of workes, should be iustified by faith, that peraduenture may seeme to be well: but that a man beautified with vertue and good workes, should neuer­thelesse by them not be iustified (sed sola fide) but by faith onely; truely this is wonderfull. And hereof it is that their Doctor Maister Harding, is compelled thus to confesse, D. Har. in his booke, A de­tection of sun­dry foule er­rours, li [...]s, &c. in fol. 357. Wee are iustified freely without workes, that may deserue the grace that God gi­ueth. To conclude, Saint Origen saith, Origen 3. B [...]ke 3. chap. Rom. Rom. 4 5. If we require an ex­ample who was iustified (sola fide) by faith onely, without workes I suppose that the same theefe doth suffice. And indeed this i [...] that remedy [...] whereby God doth saue his elect, which hee [Page 186]calleth at the last houre, whether on their death bedde, or on the gallows-tree. And this it is which Saint Paul saith, Rom. Rom. 4.5. 4. By faith God doth iustifie the vngodly. And as hee sheweth, that faith is the onely meanes, whereby God doth saue the vngodly, Gal. 3.11. Hab. 2.4. whom he vouchsafeth to call, so Galla. 3. aluding to these words of the Prophet Habakkuk, chapter 2. The iust shall liue by his faith: hee proueth that the most righteous shall be saued by their faith onely, or else they shall neuer be saued. And thus much for the answering the other sort of Papists also, which will haue men to be sa­ued by faith and workes together.

11 But now (Christian Reader) what shall wee say? shal we conclude that we are iustified by such a faith as the Papists charge vs with, which is generall with all the wicked, which not onely is without the fruits of a true and liuely faith, but hath the contrary? God forbid. But wee say, that we are iustified by faith; that is, by such a faith, as Saint Paul saith, 2. Thess. 3.2. 1 Cor. 13. chap. All men haue not, 2 Thess. 3. Yea, by that faith which hee saith worketh by loue: and which Saint Iames saith, James 3.17. Is full of mercie and good fruits, chapter 3. Euen by the same faith which is manifested vnto men, and ap­proued of God, to be a true faith, which at the day of iudgement shall be tried by the fruits thereof, and all iudged thereby: at which time, euery one that is found to haue had it, shall as the Apostle Saint Peter saith, 1. Ep. 1. chap. Re­ceiue the end of his faith, euen the saluation of his soule: The rest that had not this fruitfull faith, shall be damned, as appea­reth in the 25. Chapter of Saint Matthew.

12 True it is, that the generall sort, because they be­leeue Christ to be the Sauiour of the world, and haue their names deriued from him, to be called Christians, thinke ve­rily they shall all be saued: Yea though many of them liue worse then the very Infidells. But what reason haue they, so to delude themselues, seeing, that not a few, but many which preach Christ and the Christian faith, shall be dam­ned: because howsoeuer they preach well, and teach the truth, their liues are not correspondent? Our Sauiour Christ, speaking of Christians, and the time of triall, who [Page 187]be true Christians indeed, Matth. 7. saith, Matth. 7.22.23. Not euery one that saith vnto mee, Lord. Lord shall outer into the Kingdome of hea­uen, but he that doth my fathers will which is in heauen. Ma­ny will say vnto mee in that day, Lord, Lord, haue we not by thy name prophecied? and by thy name cast out Deuills? and by thy name done many great workes: and then (saith Christ) I will professe vnto them, I neuer knew you: Depart from mee, yee that worke iniquitie. And here wee see those miracle-mon­gers (the Papists) specially included, who (as we proued in our second Chapter) worke their miracles in the name of Christ, to draw men to Antichrist. And as touching their conuersation of life, their Saint Bridgit bringeth Christ thus reproaching them for the vilenesse thereof, saying, Bridgit in her sixt Booke of Reuelation, 15. chap. Their conuersation and life stinketh like a Where in my sight. So that as she saith in another place, In her first Booke, chap. 50. The simple sort by their bad example, they hurle downe headlongs.

13 But now haply they will obiect and say, are wee sin­gular in this poynt? haue you no such badde Ministers a­mong your selues? I answere, I hope none so bad as our former Chapters haue demonstrated. God forbid wee should; For mine owne part, I know none such: But this I know, that if any amongst vs, will perswade himselfe, that because he preacheth Christ truely, and the true Christian faith, that therefore hee hath the true and iustifying faith, whereby he shall be saued, when as hee hath not the fruites of the true and iustifying faith; let him say what hee will, it is certaine he hath not that faith, and therefore he cannot be saued. For as Saint Iames saith, chap. 2. James 2.14. What auaileth it my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, when hee hath no workes, can that faith saue him? It is one thing for a man to say he hath faith, and another thing to haue it in­deede.

14 Therefore that no man should delude himselfe, Saint Paul thus admonisheth euery man, saying, 2 Cor. 13. 2 Cor. 13.5. Proue your selues, whether yee are in the faith; examine your selues. But how shall a Minister know for certaine, whether he be in the faith? Shall he know it by being furnished with suffici­ent gifts, fit for his calling? no. For as Saint Paul decla­reth, [Page 188]1 Cor. 1 Cor. 12.8.9. 12. A man may haue the gift of knowledge, and not the gift of faith: But may he know it by wel dispo­sing the gift of his knowledge, to the begetting and increa­sing of faith in others? no. For albeit the Word which hee preacheth may beget faith vnto saluation in others, yet as the same Apostle sheweth, Cor. 11. 2 Cor. 11. hee himselfe may be a castaway. But how then shall he know it? truly by none other thing, but by this, euen by hauing the fruits of the true and sauing faith, which grow by degrees in him, by the conscionable and diligent practizing of that which he preacheth to others.

15 God, at the first ordination of Priesthood, as appea­reth, Exod. 28.30. Exod. 28. caused Aaron to set in the brest-plate of his garment, Ʋrim and Thummim, which signified perfecti­on of knowledge, and holinesse of life. So that notwith­standing many doe attaine vnto a very great measure of perfection of Ʋrim, yet wee see by our Sauiour Christ, Matth. Matth. 7. 7. that for want of the like measure of Thummim, they shall be damned. Yea the like measure I say: because our Sauiour himselfe saith, Luke 12.48. Luke 12. Ʋnto whom much is committed, of him much is required. If then those that haue not Thummim answerable to their Vrim, shall be damned, they must needes be damned which haue not Thummim in any good measure answerable, much more they that haue the contrary; and truely no maruell. For it is certaine, that one such, with his badde life, doth more hurt in the Church of God, then a great many, do good by their good Doctrine: Luke 12.47. and therfore as our Sauiour saith, Luke 12. they shall receiue the greater damnation. And not onely because they know their Maisters will, and doe it not, but also be­cause they liue wickedly, and yet will preach. For doe they not know, that the Lord himselfe hath forbidden such to preach, Psalme 50.16. Psalme the 50. where it is said: But vnto the wicked said God, what hast thou to doe to declare mine Ordi­nances, that thou shouldest take my Couenant in thy mouth, see­ing thou h [...]test to be reformed? Wherefore, for that they will take vpon them to execute the office of Gods Ministers, and liue so greatly to the dishonour of God (as the sonnes [Page 189]of Eli did) the Lord will surely say vnto them, 1 Samuel 2. chap. 30. Rom. 3.18. as hee said vnto Eli, 1 Samuel 2. Them that honour mee, I will honour: and they that despise mee, shall bee despised.

16 And now, as we see, that none that preach the Gos­pell, can by their diligent preaching onely, assure them­selues, that they haue a true and iustifying faith; no more can we that be their hearers, by our onely diligent hearing; but by practising that which wee heare the Word of God command, Luke 13 26. Iames 1.22. And therefore it is that Saint Iames saith, Chap. 1. Be ye doers of the Word, and not hearers onely, deceiuing your owne selues. By which wee see it euident and plaine, that not preaching, but practising; not hearing, but doing, is that that can assure a man, that he hath that true and iustifying faith. And that not all in like measure: for it will not be accepted of God, that he which hath receiued Gods gifts in a great measure, should doe no more, and be no more bountifull then hee that receiued them in a small measure. And therefore it is that Saint Peter saith, 1 Epist. 1. Epistle of Peter 4.10. 4 Chap. Let euery man as he hath receiued the gift; minister the same one to another, as good disposers of the manifold graces of God. If any man speake, let him talke as the words of God. If any man minister, let him doe it as of the ability which God ministreth, that God in all things may be glorified through Iesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for euer, and euer, Amen. But if he that is worth a thousand pounds, will doe no more then he that is worth but an hundred pounds, or he that is worth an hundred pounds, no more then he that is worth but an hundred shillings; these are not good disposers of the ma­nifold graces of God: and therefore when the day of rec­koning shall come, how they will answere it, I leaue to God and their owne consciences.

17 And now to returne to our aduersaries: thus I say; that forasmuch as this being the generall doctrine of our Church, that none can be saued by such a faith as is with­out good workes, they doe vs manifest wrong, in charging vs to teach against good workes, and that we are saued by an idle faith that hath no workes: whereas we say, that we are [Page 190]iustified and saued by the faith which hath good workes, but without the workes; because faith onely doth apprehend the matter of our iustification, which is not possible for workes to doe. For as Saint Paul saith of Christ, Acts 13. Be it knowne vnto you men and brethren, that through this man is prea­ched vnto you the forgiuenesse of sinnes, and from all things from which ye could not be iustified by the Law of Moses, by him enery one that beleeueth, is iustified. Many when they heare vs speake of iustification, doe not consider the point: for they suppose that wee speake of the matter, when indeede wee speake onely of the meanes. For to speake properly of the matter, it is neither faith of it selfe, nor faith and workes together, that doth iustifie vs before GOD: but as we see, it is Christ Iesus onely of himselfe, and by him­selfe, that doth both iustifie and saue.

But as touching the meanes, wee say it is faith alone. And hereof it is which Saint Ambrose speaking both of the matter and the meanes, saith: Ambrose vp­on 1 Cor. first Chap. In Christ Iesus is grace giuen: for as much as this with GOD is decreed, that who so beleeueth in Christ, is saued (sola fide) by faith onely without workes, receiuing freely forgiuenesse of sinnes. And thus wee see the case to stand cleare, that faith without workes, is the onely meanes of iustification and salua­tion.

18 Now then (Christian Reader) this doctrine of iustification by faith in Christ, without workes, being so easie and clearely to bee proued the truth; is it not a Worlds wonder, to see that so many wise and learned men, should impugne it: And that a Cardinall, one of the Popes Pen-men, Master Allen, should ascribe so much vnto good workes, as to say: In D. Fulkes answere. Page 239. They cleanse before hand, stayeth the soule from death, and lifteth it vp vnto eternall life. Regard not the iangler, that will say mens workes doe not purge sinne, and winne heauen? Which doctrine being true, what is it, but that wee are iustified and saued by the workes of the Law, whereby not onely all those testimonies of the anci­ent Fathers are proued false, but also all those Scriptures [Page 191]which before we cited, are confounded; and these that fol­low, which shew that we are iustified and saued onely by faith in Christ, without workes, are to no purpose.

19 Saint Paul Ephesians 2. saith. Ephes. 2.8. For by grace are yee sa­ued through faith, and that not of your selues, it is the gift of God, not of workes, lest any man should glorie in himselfe. Also, Galatians 2. he saith; We which are Iewes by nature, Galat. 2.15.16 and not sinners of the Gentiles, know that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ: euen wee I say, haue beleeued in Iesus Christ, that we might be iustified by the faith of Iesus Christ, and not by the workes of the Law, Galat. 3.23.24.25.26. because that by the workes of the Law, no flesh shall be iustifi­ed. And chap. 3. he saith. Before faith came, wee were kept vnder the Lawe, and shut vp vnto the faith, which should after­wards be reuealed; wherefore the Law was our Schoolemaister to bring vs to Christ, that wee might be made righteous by faith. But after that faith is come, wee are no longer vnder a Schoole­maister; for ye are all the sonnes of God, by faith in Christ Ie­sus. And therefore as he saith, Romans 4. Roman. 4. If they which are of the Law, bee heires, faith is made voyde, and the promise of God is made of none effect. And yet as he saith. Galatians 2. I doe not abrogate the grace of God, for if righteousnesse be by the Law, then Christ died without a cause. So that by the do­ctrine of the Romish Church, we see plainely, that faith is made voyde, the promise of God made of none effect, the death of Christ needlesse, and the whole matter of our iustification and saluation, to consist onely in our owne deseruings. And indeede to the very same effect, are these words of their Cardinall Allen, Allen in Fulke. pag. 154 The death of Christ doth not discharge vs of satisfaction for our sinnes, nor of any other good worke whereby a man may procure his owne saluation. Al­so the Pope saith thus in Bernardine Rosetus, Bernard. We can demerite eternall life with works: Therefore we ought to presume, and hold for a certaintie, that after this life wee shall assuredly haue eter­nall life, for the reward of good workes. And in the Summary de Grat. Sanct. Good workes demerite three things; namely, e­ternall life increase of grace, and remission of sinnes.

20 Truely I cannot but admire, to see that men which [Page 192]would faine be saued, will either be saued by that onely meanes, whereby they shall be damned, or else they will not be saued. For by the workes of the Law, wee see they will procure their owne saluation, purge their soules from sinne, deliuer them from death, and lift them vp into e­uerlasting life. And therefore, as they depend vpon the Law, so they must looke to haue the reward of the Law, which is the curse and condemnation of it. For as Saint Paul sayth, Galat. 3.10. Galatians 3. As many as are of the workes of the Law, are vnder the curse: for it is written, Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things, which are written in the Booke of the Law, Galat. 5.4. to doe them. And chapter the fift he sayth, Yee are abolished from Christ: whosoeuer are iustified by the Law, yee are fallen from grace. Rom. 9.30.31. And Romans 9. he sheweth this to be the cause of the condemnation of the Iewes. For sayth he; What shall wee say then, that the Gentiles which followed not righteousnesse, 32. haue attained vnto righteousnesse, euen the righteousnesse which is of faith: but Israel which followed the Lawe of righteousnesse, could not attaine to the Law of righte­ousnesse? Wherefore (sayth hee) because they sought it not by faith, 33. but as it were by the workes of the Law: for they haue stumbled at the stumbling stone, as it is written. Behold, I lay in Sion a stumbling stone, and a Rocke to make men fall: and euery one that beleeueth in him, shall not be ashamed. But therefore the same iudgement is fallen vpon them, Iohn 9.39. which Christ sheweth, Iohn 9. himselfe came to inflict vpon those ob­stinate Iewes, and Scribes, and Pharises, who sought salua­tion by the workes of the Law, and not by faith in him. I am come (sayd he) vnto iudgement into this world, that they which see not, might see, and that they which see, might be made blinde. And this blindnesse we see to be now in the Papists. For notwithstanding the Apostle Saint Paul saith plainely thus of Christ, 2 Corinth. 5. God made him to be sinne for vs, that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him: they cannot see how this righteousnesse should serue the turne. For as their Cardinall Allen sayth, In the said booke, pag. 154 The death of Christ doth not discharge vs of satisfaction for our sinnes, nor of any o­ther good worke whereby a man may procure his owne saluation. [Page 193]And further, for those that cannot attaine vnto satisfaction, the second part of our first Chapter doth shew, that the want that is in them, is made out by the ouer-plus of the righteousnesse of others. For as the sayd Cardinall saith, In the said book, pag. 239. The Church of God hath instructed thee, that all workes whereby man may procure helpe to himselfe or others, be the workes of the faithfull. And thus we see, that the same iudge­ment which Christ laid vpon the Iewes, Scribes, and Phari­ses, he hath laid vpon them, that they so little accounting of him, should trust to be made righteous by themselues and others, that so they might be depriued of his righte­ousnesse.

21 Againe, the Apostle Saint Paul 1. Corint. 1. 1. Cor. 1.30. saith al­so thus of Christ: God hath made him vnto vs wisedome, and righteousnesse, and sanctification, and redemption: that accor­ding as it is written: Hee that reioyceth, let him reioyce in the Lord. But it seemeth that Cardinall Allen liketh not of this kinde of reioycing: for as we heard before, hee chea­reth vp his Chickens, to reioyce in their owne righteous­nesse; assuring them, that that is it, which before hand (in this life) maketh sure worke for the purging of sinne, and after this life, for the deliuering the soule from death, and for lifting it vp into euerlasting life. And therefore if their doctrine be true, they haue as great cause to reioyce in their owne strength of saluation, as in all whatsoeuer Christ hath done for the strength of mans saluation; and in themselues, as in the Lord. Neuerthelesse, besides this which wee haue already alleadged, our Sauiour himselfe hath stricken downe their proude peacockes tayle, in say­ing, Luke 17. Luke 17.10 Matth. 25.30. When yee haue done all those things which are commaunded you, say, we are vnprofitable seruants. And Ma­thew 25. Cast therefore that vnprofitable seruant into vtter darkenesse, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth: Shew­ing plainely, what is our due by our owne deseruings. And thus much by proofe of Scripture concerning this poynt also. Now let vs heare the auntient Fathers.

22 Saint Bernard saith, Bernard in his booke of Free­will. Who is he that is ignorant of the righteousnesse of God? He that iustifieth himselfe. Who is hee [Page 194]that iustifieth himselfe: He that presumeth of merites, any other where, than of the grace of God. Saint Augustine saith, Augustine in his Booke of Predestination of Saints the 1. chapter. I do confesse, that I am grieued, that there is no place giuen to so ma­ny, and manifest authorities of Gods word, whereby the grace of God is commended (which is vtterly no grace) if it be giuen for our merites. Saint Bernard againe saith, Bernard 67. sermon vpon the Canticles. There is no meane for grace to enter, where merites keepeth and occupieth place. Therefore saith Saint Augustine, Augustine 31. psalme. If thou wilt be a stran­ger from the grace of God, boast thou of thine owne merites. A­gaine, he saith, Vpon the 70 psalme. Thou art nothing of thy selfe, call vpon God, thy sinnes are thine owne, merites are of God; punishment is due vnto thee. Whereby wee see all our iustifiers condemned. First, of ignorance. Secondly, of presumption. Thirdly, of blasphemy, in making grace no grace, by affirming it to be giuen vnto vs for our merites. Fourthly, of most pal­pable peruersenesse, by thrusting in their corrupt merites, whereby the grace of God is vtterly excluded out of the worke of iustification. Fiftly, by boasting, and bringing in their merites into the worke of iustification, they haue thrust themselues out of the fauor of God. Lastly, for that they dare stand out with God, to claime remission of sins and eternall life by their merites, and to seeme vnto them­selues to be that which they are not (such as vnto whom by desert the kingdome of heauen is due) they shall receiue their due; which as Saint Augustine saith, is punishment, to wit, destruction both of soule and body. And there­fore, how true it is, that they will either be saued by that meanes whereby they shall be condemned, or else they will not be saued; let the Reader iudge.

23 Saint Augustine reprouing such Heretiques as would looke to be rewarded with euerlasting life, for their me­rites, said thus vnto them, Augustine 70 psalme. When the reward shall come, he will crowne his owne gifts, not thy merites. That is, after wee haue gotten possession of heauen by the onely meanes of faith; then according to the measure of grace, which God did giue to euery man in this life, to worke his will, and to set forth his glory, hee will crowne them with de­grees of glory. Luke 19. And this is it which Saint Paul [Page 195]saith; 2 Cor. 5 We must all appeare before the iudgement seate of Christ, that euery man may receiue the things that hee hath done in his body, according to that hee hath done, whether it be good or euill. At which time Saint Augustine saith: August. in his Booke of the Spirit and the Letter. Cha. 33. God will crowne with fauour and mercy that shall be done at the last iudge­ment: whereas when the iust King shall sit in his Throne, to render to euery man according to his workes, who shall boast that hee is cleane from sinne? or who shall boast that his heart is chaste? Therefore (saith he) it was needfull to make mention of the mercy of our Lord. Indeed he may well say, God will then crowne with fauour and mercy, and not according to our deserts. For whereas that iust man Iob, Chapter 9. saith thus of man: If God should dispute with him, he could not answere him one thing for a thousand: yet at the day of iudgement, as plainely ap­peareth in Saint Matthew 25. the Lord will repeate the things which the faithfull had well done, not once mentio­ning any one thing they had ill done, were the actions ne­uer so vile. And there also in that Chapter is plainely demon­strated vnto vs what sort of Christians shall be saued, and what sort damned. Those that shall be saued, doe vtterly dis­claime their owne righteousnesse, and those that shall be damned, doe iustifie themselues, by challenging to them­selues the performing of all those Christian duties, which Christ required to be done to his members. Now therefore Christian Reader, be thou iudge, of which of these two sorts the Papists are. Also in that Chapter is plainely decla­red, that men are not saued by the bare name of faith, but by the true faith, that hath the true fruites.

24 They will not in any case be saued by that way where­by we seeke to be saued, namely, by endeauouring to the vt­ter most of our powers, to obserue and doe all whatsoeuer we are commanded; and then when wee haue done our best, ro confesse the truth against our selues, that we are vn­profitable seruants, as our Sauiour himselfe commanded, and to relie wholly vpon the mercy of God in Christ: but they will be saued by fulfilling the Commandements, or else they will not be saued. Neither will they doe their good workes, to the end whereunto God ordained and appointed [Page 196]them to be done, as we doe. First, to shew our loue to God, in walking as it becommeth his children, Iohn 14.15. Se­condly, by them to glorifie God, Matthew 5.16. Iohn 15 8. Thirdly, to make our election certaine to our selues, 2 Pe­ter 1.10. Fourthly, to winne others to Christ by our godly conuersation, 1 Peter 3.1. Lastly, to assure our selues for certaine, that by hauing the true fruits of the true faith, wee haue that faith whereby we shall be saued, Iames 2.14. But they will doe their good workes, first to purge their owne sinne. Secondly, by the ouerplus of good workes, to purge the sinnes of others. Thirdly, to stay their soules from death. Fourthly, to purchase Heauen. And lastly, to lift vp, and place their soules in Heauen. They will haue all by their owne deseruings, or they will haue none: all by merits, or else no bargaine: therefore let vs see what wee can say fur­ther vnto them touching this point.

25 Our Sauiour Christ, Matthew 5. saith; Blessed are the poore in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdome of Heauen. Now this word Poore, is a metaphor, taken from a man that is so very poore, as that hee hath not wherewith to sustaine his owne life, but is faine to seeke to others for succour. And such are they which finde themselues so greatly destitute of soules sustenance, as that they are glad to seeke to others for reliefe, euen to God for his mercy, and to Christ for his merites.

26 Such a blessed poore man was Saint Basil, as may ap­peare by these his words: Basil. vpon the 32. Psalm. He that trusteth not in his owne good deeds; nor hopeth to be iustified by his workes, hath the onely hope of his saluation in the mercies of God. Also such a blessed poore man was Saint Augustine, as appeareth by these his words: Aug. vpon the 142. Psal. Lord, for thy name sake shalt thou quicken mee in thy righteousnesse: Not in mine; not because I haue deserued it, but because thou hast mercy on me. Also such a blessed poore man was Saint Hierome, as appeareth by these his words: Hier. 64. of Esay. If we behold our owne merits, wee shall be driuen to desperation. Yea, and notwithstanding Saint Bernard acknowledgeth himselfe al­so to be one of these poore Publicans, in that he saith of him­selfe: Ber. vpon the Psal. qui habi­tat. My merites is the mercy of God: yet they will rather be condemned with the proud Pharises, then be iuslified [Page 197]with the poore Publicans. To be briefe, whereas their Ma­ster Harding saith: D. Harding in his booke, A direction of sundry soule, errours lies, &c. in fol. 357. Wee are iustified freely without workes, that may deserue the grace that God giueth. Here he hath con­demned their doctrine of iustification by workes, to be most false and erroneous: but in that that hee includeth, that workes may deserue the grace that God giueth, he hath pro­ued himselfe a notable heretique. For as Saint Augu­stine saith, Aug. in his 46. Epistle. Ʋnderstand that the forenamed Epistle (to Six­tus an Elder of the Church of Rome,) is written against the Pelagians, the new heretiques, which affirme the grace of God to be giuen according to merits: that he that glorieth should not glorie in the Lord, but in himselfe: that is, in man, and not in the Lord. And therefore in another place hee saith, In the same Epistle. Let no man say, that for the merits of his workes: or for the merits of his prayers, or for the merit of his faith, the grace of God is giuen vnto him: And so that which those heretiques say, be counted true; namely, that according to our merits the grace of God is giuen: then the which, nothing can be more false. But as he saith in another place, In his booke of predestina­tion of Saints, chap. 9. They that glorie, should not glorie in their owne merits (which they perceiue to be like vnto the merits of them that shall be damned) but should glorie in the Lord. Whereupon, saith Saint Ambrose, Ambrose in his 1. booke and 5. chapter of the calling of the Gentiles. Like as there is none so detestable outragious, as can restraine the free gift of grace, so can there be no worke so excellent, that this (which is freely giuen) should be due vnto them by action of debt: for then the redemption of Christ, should in deed be no thing worth, neither should the worthinesse of mans workes be in­feriour to the mercie of God. Whereupon their Writer Wal­densis saith, Walden in his booke against Wilelesse. I take him therefore to be the sounder Diuine, the faithfuller Catholique, and more agreeable to the holy Scrip­tures, that vtterly denieth all such kinde of merits.

And thus much for the conclusion of the twelue Chap­ters, referring the whole matter to be iudged by all that shall reade them. Whether they can possibly be true Ca­tholique Christians, which in stead of one God, will haue hundreds, (as appeareth in our first Chapter;) and in stead of one Sauiour, to haue many thousands, as appea­reth in the same Chapter. That will haue the Pope to be the [Page 198]very Vicar of Christ, whom in our second Chapter, wee proued to be that great Antichrist, shewed by Saint Paul 2 Thessa. 2. to be the Arch-enemie of Christ and all true Christians. That will haue Rome to be the Mother of all Christian Churches, which in our third Chapter, we pro­ued to be that Babylon which the Angel in the seauenteenth Chapter of the Reuelation calleth, The mother of Whor­domes and abhominations of the earth. That will haue his Church (as it is now Christian) to be the true Church of Christ: Which in our fourth Chapter, we proued to be the same idolatrous Church, professing Christ, mentioned by the Angell in the 13. Chapter and 17. Chapter of the Reuelation. That will haue their Church to be the most auncient Apostolique and Catholique Church, which in our fifth Chapter, we proued had no being at all, for the space of sixe hundred and sixe yeares next after Christ. That will haue the succession of Vniuersall Popes, to descend from Saint Peter; which we proued in our sixth Chapter, to descend but from Boniface the third Bishop of Rome, of that name, made Vniuersal Pope, by that Murthe­rer Phocas [...]he Emperour, in the yeare of Christ, 607. In which yeare the first Vniuersall Pope being made, the Po­pish Church must needes first begin: For, as before Christ was, there could be no Christian Church; so, before there was an Vniuersall Pope, there could be no Popish Church: Therefore their Church hauing her first beginning but sixe hundred and seauen yeares after Christ, the antiquity thereof is ouerthrowne, & our Church proued to be more ancient by sixe hundred and sixe yeares. That will haue the Popes supreame title and dignitie, approued of, by gene­rall consent of Councells and Fathers; which in our sea­uenth Chapter, we proued to be gain said, and withstood by Councells and Fathers, till the yeare of Christ, 607. That will haue Peter to be made supreame Head of all the A­postles, by Christ himselfe: the contrary whereof, wee proued in our eighth Chapter by Christs expresse Com­maundement; and therefore the Pope cannot claime his Supremacie from Peter. That will haue the true Church [Page 199]knowne by retaining seauen Sacraments; which in our ninth Chapter we proued, that to Saint Chrisostomes time, which was about foure hundred yeares after Christs In­carnation, it was knowne by retaining onely two Sacra­ments; and afterwards, no Christian Church knowne by the iust number of seauen, till Antichrist was borne in Rome. That will haue the idolatrous Masse to be the or­dinance of Christ; which in the same Chapter, we proued cannot be, because it tendeth to the vtter ouerthrow of the power of Christs death and passion: as also, because it was not begun to be framed, till about one hundred and nineteene yeares after Christ, and not finished of more then sixe hundred yeares after. And confessed by their Iohannes Boemos, to be inuented by certaine Bishoppes of Rome, whose names wee haue produced in the same Chapter, as himselfe nominated them. That will haue those words in the sixt chapter of Saint Iohns Cospel touch­ing the eating his flesh and drinking his bloud, to bee meant of a corporall kinde of eating; which heresie, wee proued in our tenth Chapter, Christ reproued the carnall Capernaites for. As also, will haue those words in the sixe and twentieth Chapter of Saint Matthews Gospel, Take, eate, this is my Body, to be literally vnderstood, that they might worship the bread for Christ, and make an Idoll of it. That will haue Saints prayed vnto, and worshipped; which, as we proued in our eleuenth Chapter, is to robbe God of two speciall parts of his glory. Lastly, that will haue men to make a better satisfaction for sinne, then Christ hath made for them, & be better purged from their sinne in the fire of Purgatory (then Christ hath by his bloud) or be holden from life and libertie for euer: which, as we proued in our twelfth Chapter, tendeth to the vtter ouerthrow of all that Christ hath done for the saluation of man kinde. To conclude, we see in this Chapter of Con­clusion, they will haue men to seeke iustification by the workes of the Law, that so they might be brought vnder the curse and condemnation of it, for not fulfilling all that the Law requireth. They will haue men to purchase hea­uen [Page 200]by their owne deseruing, thereby to proue his death to be needlesse, and faith in him of none effect. And not­withstanding that case to stand cleare, that these be pa [...] of those Antichristian lies, wherewith Saint Paul, 2 Thess. 2. shewed the great Antichrist should deceiue those that loued not the truth. But had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse. They bash not to say, The Pope cannot be holden with any Religion of a lie.