Haereo lac inter meditans interque cruorē inter delicias Vberis et Lateris.

That is:

HEarken thou blessed Apostle Paul, (if thou in heauen canst heare the blasphe­my on earth,11. Cor. 2.2.) thou that didst preach and write, that thou desiredst to know nothing but Iesus Christ & him crucified: thou that didst teach the Churches onely to know & beleeue in Christ for saluation: & almost 20 times in thy Epistles hast magnified his Blood, without once mencioning the virgin Mary or her Milke.

Heare and be astonished at this, that some who pro­fesse [Page 38] to be thy Disciples or thy fellowes rather, cannot tell whether to choose that bloud of the mediator, or the milke of a woman: At least harken thou blessed spirit of truth, thou that canst and wilt heare, thou that didst inspire those holy truths into that holy Apostle: behold a religion risen vp in the world, that dare compare the bloud of that God who was by thee conceiued, with the milke of that woman, who was the mother of his humanity and was saued from hell and damnation by that bloud, and that dare allow her professors to make doubt whether to esteeme the greater delight of their soules her milke or his bloud: and we for repro­uing this, must be accounted heretickes: heare from heauen we beseech thee and Iudge betwixt vs.

The blasphemer proceedeth.

That is:

What before he deliuered more darkely, now he maketh plainer: if any doubt what milke what blood he meant, hee answereth our Ladies Milke, and Iesus Christ his blood: but what, doth popery make question whether of these two is better? is this their holy Ca­tholike Romane faith? If not, let their words be Iudge, I stand musing saith he and cannot tel whether to take, milke or blood: If I looke at her paps, then I long for milke, If to his sides, then I would haue blood.

Marke how indifferent a papist is, whether he receiue the one or the other: is not this euill enough? a man would thinke so, yet hearken what followeth, and we shall heare worse: but let vs do it with feare and reue­rence of that glorious name, and pretious blood which are blasphemed.

in English thus,

Hetherto he doubted, now he is resolued: but such a doubt, and such a resolution, Christian eares neuer heard of: he doubted whether were better, the blood of God, or the Milke of a creature (the diuell himselfe [Page 40] neuer doubted hereof) but now what is his resolutiō, doth it make amend [...]? yes doubtles as the Pope vseth to make Christ amends, when he hath dishonored him: I was at a stand (saith he) whether to take, and now I resolue I will haue both: both are so good I will re­fuse neither, her milke his bloud both so precious, both so powerfull, both so vertuous, as I will haue both. Both are good, and so good as hardly can I finde diffe­rence, but if there be any, it is that the milke is more excellent, and therefore with my right hand, I will make it sure mine, if I may be so bolde as to touch it, or if it be lawful for a sinners soule to taste so glorious, so vnualuable and deuine a liquor as is the Milke of the Mother: and as for the childe it is well for him if he may follow his Mother, and haue the next place to her: therefore if he please to giue me leaue I will lay holde with my left hand on his wounds.

O glorious God, the eternall sonne of the eternall Father, thou blessed Iesus Christ the stay & comfort of all Christian soules, heare in heauen thine holy ha­bitation this hainous blasphemy, and iudge thy owne cause: And if it fal out that any contagion of sin catch holde on me the writer or any the readers hereof, by not trembling or not sufficiently detesting such fear­full impiety as this that is past or that that is to come: vouchsafe in mercy to forgiue it, and to wash it away with that most precious bloud of thine, whereto all the creatures in the world are not worthy to be com­pared:

And though this that's past, be abhominable, yet [Page 41] with reuerence to thy holy name and pretious blood, giue vs leaue to discouer the height of their iniquity, which still goeth forward in more horrible & feare­full manner: for thus singes the Iesuit.

that is,

So now Christ Iesus shall haue satisfaction, if there were a fault afore, for if he complaine that the mother of his flesh, a woman and a creature, haue the right­hand when himselfe and his merits must take the left or none, heere they will make him amends, for that he may haue no cause to complaine, for want of place or precedence, her milke and his blood will he mingle both together, and so make a soueraigne compound cordiall for his soule. But what? a mixture of milke and blood, of the blood of God with the milke of a crea­ture? and is now the blood of the Lambe of God but one of the simples in that cordiall Antidote, that must both restore and preserue the life of mans soule? ye hea­uens be astonied at this, so may we well say, for so said the Prophet at a matter of farre lesse wonder, hearken O Christendome, and al ye people, nations, & languages [Page 42] to whome the blessed name of Iesus Christ hath soun­ded: that poore paschall Lambe of the Iewes that was but a shadowe of our Sauiour, the signe and sacra­ment, and in some sort the meanes and instrument of the Israelites temporall preseruation, might not, nay needed not to haue any thing mingled with the blood thereof,Exodus. 12.5. &c. but the blood alone being sprinckled on their dores deliuered them from the stroke of the destroying An­gel: this was their passouer, & saith the Apostle, Christ our passouer is sacrificed for vs: 1. Cor. 5.7. shall this then be true, of their passouer, a lambe taken out of the fold & flock, & onely dedicated by Gods institution, and shall not the blood of our passeouer the Lambe of God, God and man Iesus Christ (whose Godhead is consubstantiall and coequall with the father, and his humanity perso­nally and indiuisibly vnited to the deity) being sprinc­kled on our hearts & soules, suffice to preserue them from the infernall stroake of hell and damnation, vnlesse it be mingled with the milke of a creature? pardon this blasphemy O blessed Iesus Christ, if it be not a blas­phemy against the holy Ghost, and a despighting of the spirit of grace: pardon it in as many of them as do not sinne vnpardonably, for thy mercies sake. Amen.

But say (I pray thee) tell vs in good earnest, (If so we may presume to call a Iesuites proctor to his an­swere) is there not a more soueraigne Antidote for a sinful soule, then a mixture & cōpound of Maries milk and Christ his blood? then tel vs who can make this mix­ture? who hath the skill sufficient for this confection? who giues the true dosse? who apointes the quantities, [Page 43] Mithridats and triacles for the body are not composi­tions for euery conceit, nor matters for euery hand to make, but rather beseeming the skilfullest, and require the ouerviewing eye of the whole Colledge of Phisi­tions, shall then the heauenly Antidote of the soule be compounded without a heauenly Phisition? say then (Man) if thou dare stand to thy deedes, who was the Phisition that prescribed and gaue thee this receipt, was it God the father, the fountaine of holinesse and happinesse? himselfe saith no, for thus proclaimed he twise from heauen of Iesus Christ, This is my welbelo­ued sonne in whome I am well pleased: In none as in him,Math. 3. At his bap­tisme: &c. Math. 17 At his trans­figuration. nay in none, no not in his mother, but in, for, and by him. Thus the father of heauen hath testified that the blood of his sonne is one sufficient & soueraigne sim­ple, for a heauenly Methridate. Now shew thou, (and take the Pope to helpe thee) where euer he testified so much of her milke: but if no such thing, nay nothing at all, then he was not the Phisition that prescribed this mixture.

Who then, was it Christ himselfe the sonne of God and the sonne of this woman? No, for of himselfe he saith, My flesh is (spirituall) meate indeede, Iohn. 6. and my blood is (heauenly) drinke indeede: but of her he saith that euery true beleeuing Christian,Matb. 12.4.6. is his mother (as well as she) in the best sence, and much more then she, had shee beene no more but the mother of his flesh: surely then if this be a lawfull mixture, which this papist makes, the sonne was much to blame to say so much of his owne blood, that it is drinke indeed, and that it giues [Page 44] the drinkers eternall life, &c. and not one word of his mothers milke: Not a word sayd I? I recall that, for when once a certain woman hearing him preach, not for any thing she saw in her, but for the powerfull and gratious words, that came from him, would haue had her wombe blessed that bare him, Luke. 11.27.28. and her paps that gaue him sucke: (the worst whereof is better then her milke) he instantly answered her, that much more blessed was euery man that heard Gods word and kept it. If no extraordinary blessednes belong to the wombe that bare him (in that respect onely, because it bare him carnally) If none to the wombe nor paps, which shal endure for euer, then how much lesse to the milke that fed him, which is va­nished & shall be no more: If Christ would not match her wombe or paps with a man that feared God, what will he say to them that make her milke a match for his owne blood, the milke being a matter farre inferiour, ei­ther to wombe or paps. Thus they may see that Christ is not a fit Phisition to make this mixture.

What then, was the holy Ghost the Phisition that framed this receipt?

No, for he by his deuine power, conceiued Christ in that holy and miraculous maner, that Christ was fully without originall sin, and therefore his blood might well be a pure and perfect simple to make the Aqua Caelestis that must quicken dead soules: let them approue as much of her if they can, they speake and write that she was conceiued without sinne originall, and haue a holy day for it, but they can not prooue it: it is an Article of our faith, and grounded on plaine [Page 45] wordes of Scipture,Learned Pa­pists hold that the Popes Buls and the decree of the counsell of Basil do not conclude it as an article of faith. that Christ was conceiued without sinne: and though the whore of Babilon, af­firme as much of her, yet was she yet neuer so impu­dent, as to conclude it an article of the faith. Thus God the father, the sonne, and the holy Ghost, doe all disclaime the composition of this Antidote, as nei­ther prescribed nor allowed by them.

Who then may be imagined to be this Phisition, was it Moses? no,Exodus. 12. for he allowed nothing to be ming­led with the blood of the pascall Lambe: was it E­saias? no, for he auoucheth that with his stripes, Esay. 53 are wee healed, and his stripes were not without blood.

Was it Zacharia? Zacha. 9.11. no for he teacheth that the Church is saued by the blood of her couenant, which is grounded onely on the Messias.

If any other Prophet, let them shew him: was it Iohn Baptist: no for he testified that not the mother of his Lord, but his Lord Iesus Christ was that Lambe of God that takes away the sinnes of the Worlde. Iohn▪ 1.29.

Was it St. Paul? no for he teacheth the Romaines, that we are iustified freely by his blood: (beholde yee Romanists, Ro. 3.24.25. theres no milke) and the Ephesians that we haue redemp­tion through his blood: yet there is no milke,Ephes. 2, 13. Coloss. 1.14. and the Col­lossians, that he set vs at peace through the blood of his crosse not the milke of her paps:Hebrews 9.12 and the Hebrewes that not with any milke, but with his owne blood he obtained eter­nall redemption for vs: to conclude, 13. times at least in his Epistles doth he mention the blood of Christ, to the same purpose, and with the same honour as afore, & not once did he so much as name our Ladies milke: surely either this was an intollerable omission in Saint [Page 46] Paul, not once to name it, else, presumptuous impiety in the Papists to match it with blood of the sonne of God.

Then who is it, was it St. Peter whome you bragge to be the founder, nay the foundation of your Church and head of your herarchie? No, that blessed Apo­stle renounceth it, for he proclaymeth to all the worlde,1 Pet. 1.2. that we are elect through the sprinkling of the blood of Iesus Christ, 1 Pet. 1.81. heere is no milke: and as we are elect and sanctified, so redeemed also not with things cor­ruptible (therefore not with milke) but with the precious blood of Iesus Christ. Behould ye Iesuits and be asha­med, Peter is all in Blood, blood, he knowes no milke.

There remaines but one (for St: Iames and St. Iude if they name not Christs blood, I am much more sure they name no milke: was it St. Iohn the beloued disciple, to whome Christ committed her, (as his mother, but not his Sauiour) no verily, for he is plaine, that not the milke of the virgin Mary, 1 Iohn. 1.7. but the blood of Iesus Christ his sonne clenseth vs from all our sinnes: and that there are three which beare witnes on earth, 1 Iohn 5.8. the spirit, and water, and blood: behold three witnesses on earth of our sanctifi­cation and redemption, and of them blood is one, but milke is none, yea water is and yet milke is not: surely if the fathers of the society or the inquisition might be Iudges, St. Iohn were sure to be censured to remember water, and forget milke. But see how St. Iohn and the Ie­suits differ, they dare match and mixe her milke with his blood, hee will neither mixe nor match it so much as with the water, shewing that the very water issuing out of his pretious side, was more of worth and value, [Page 47] then all her milke, euen that which fed the flesh of Christ when he was an infant: Nay, the Apostle hath not yet done,Reuel. 1.5. but tels vs that Christ loued vs and washed vs (not in his mothers milke, but) in his blood: and that the Robes of the Saints are made white (euen white, & yet not in white milke, but) in the red Blood of the Lambe: Reuel. 7.14▪ See heere, if euer milke had bene apt it had bene here, if euer it had bene seasonable to haue named it, here had bene the place: for what should make white, milke or blood? and yet the whitenesse that must clothe the Saints; must be dyed not in the milke of our Lady, but in the blood of Iesus Christ, if his beloued and blessed Apostle Iohn, nay if his owne holy word may be belee­ued. If none of all these, was it then her selfe that pre­scribed this potion and made this mixture? no assu­redly: They say we hishonor & disgrace her, yet I dare venture euen my soule vpon it, that her hart neuer cō ­sented to such a thought, as to match & mixe her milk with his blood:Luke. 1.28. for seeing the Angell saith she was belo­ued of God, I am sure that no creature can be beloued of God, that durst offer to match the best thing in him (if it were his very harts blood) with the blood of his Son; no his soule would hate him, his wrath break out vpō him & his vengeance pursue him to destructiō. Farre ther­fore was she from so vile a thought:Luke. 1.47. nay her soule re­ioyced in him her Sauiour, so farre was she from making her selfe in any part a sauiour of her selfe: yea rather, if a Saint in heauen doth heare a blasphemy on earth, then doutlesse that blessed soule of hers, that magnifi­ed her sonne and reioyced in him as her Sauiour, will neuer [Page 48] cease to cry and call vpon him, to reuenge so high im­piety: which is so much more haynous, in as much as they make the mother the dishonorer of the sonne. And if her prayers be as powerfull with him as their doct­rine teacheth, assuredly she will not cease to prouoke his iustice against them, till she haue laid their totte­ring kingdome flat on the earth, for erecting vp her as an Idoll against her sonne, and for mixing her milke with his pretious blood.

Thus then, if neither God the Father, nor Christ Ie­sus, nor the Holy Ghost, nor Moses, nor the Prophets, nor the Apostles, nor the blessed Virgin her selfe, did any of them prescribe this potion, nor make this mixture: It followeth, that either the Diuell was the deuiser of it, or else that they framed it out of their owne braines and therefore are to be iudged Mountebankes, and spi­rituall deceiuers, who make shew to the worlde, they haue a confection of miraculous vertue, when indeed it is a perfect poyson to all that take it: for if S. Paul say true, [...] Galath. 5.2. that if we ioyne circumcision to Christ, Christ shall profit vs nothing: then without all controuersie, if we mixe the milke of a creature with the blood of the mediator, that blood of his hath lost the vertue, and shall ptofit vs nothing: And thus the Church of Rome hath spunne a faire threed, she will needes haue both the sonne and the mother to be hers, in such a maner, as she hath lost them both, and made them both her enemies, the mother to be her bitter accuser, and the sonne to be her angry Iudge. But thus hath God in Iustice blin­ded her, that whereas for these 2: or 300. yeares past, [Page 49] she came to this height of blasphemous deuotion, as to trust more the piety of the Mother, then the mer­rits of the sonne, & often to appeale from him to her.

This is ord [...] nary in many otheir bookes especially Ber­nardine de Bu [...] to his mariale [...] & reuelationes Brigere, and others.Now at last by this dealing they haue taken the di­rect course to turne her against them also, and to make her curse and abhor them and their superstition, who dare make her name and her milke to be the disho­nourers of her sonne, her Sauiour, and his pretious bloud.

Thus we haue heard and seene the strangest peece of phisicke, and most vnequall mixture that yet was euer heard of, The blood of God, and milke of a woman are mixed to make a cordiall potion, But now what will this potion do, what is the operation of it, hear­ken to the Mountebankes proclamation, and he will tell you. Thus he cries,

That is,

Now he tells vs what his phisicke will doe, and that perticularly in both his simples, the blood & the milke: and as for the one of them that is the blood and wounds of the mediator, if he had ascribed much more vnto them, he might haue past with praise (for vs) for hee cannot sufficiently extoll the merit & vertue of them, but as for the other, that is the milke of a woman, (tho it be the blessed virgin) or a confection of both, there he sheweth himselfe both impious in making such a mixture, as also a vaine deceiuer, proclayming great and soueraigne power in that which is nothing worth; for I say againe, if it be true that to him that ioyneth circumsision to Christ, Christ is no Sauiour: then we dare boldly say to him that ioyneth a creatures milke in e­quallity with Christs blood, Galath. 5. that blood of Christ is of no vertue: for circumsision is of the fathers, nay it was Gods owne ordination. Genes. 17, But her milke is meerely apart (and no essentiall part) of her body, which is a creature, and as for the mixture of it with his blood, it is an impious deuice of prophane pollititians, not derogating from the dignity, but euē quite abollishing the glory of the mediator: then if his passion may not be ioyned with circumsision, may his blood be mixed with her milke? [Page 51] But what is it that he proclaymeth vulnera restituent, &c. Christs wounds will restore & heale the spirituall sores of a sinfull Lazar, we beleeue it wil, they wil do so & much more; yet not for his sake that saith so, for we knowe that deuills thēselues for a vantage would beare witnes to Christ. But for his sake that said,Math. 8.29. He was wounded for our transgressions, He was broken for our iniquities, Esay. 53. the cha­stisement of our peace was vpon Him, & with His Stripes are we healed: and for his owne sake especially, who said it and did it, I lay downe my life for my Sheep. Thus he hath said well and truly of the wounds;Iohn. 10. but the wounds of Christ will not serue his turne: He therefore addeth.

And will they so? who taught you that Diuinitie? will a creatures paps quench and satisfie that soule that hungreth and thirsteth after righteousnesse? Say ye chil­dren of iniquitie, haue you not read Esay the Prophet, who tels vs He was despised, He was afflicted,Esay 53. He was broken, He was plagued, and all for vs: His stripes healed vs, and not a worde of her nor her Milke, but al of him, his stripes and his wounds: what will ye say, wanted he knowledge of her worthinesse? or deuotiō to her deserts? Can ye say the first without blasphemye to God, or the second without iniurie to the Prophet? could it be he knew not her who knew her sonne, Indeed the Papists haue taught so in former times so saith their maraile could he foresee him and not her? or could any such mistery be kept frō him who spake and wrote, as he was inspired by Gods spirit? [Page 52] and to conclude, was it not he that saith, Beholde a virgin shall conceiue and bring forth a sonne, euen Emanu­ell Iesus Christ? so that it's plaine as the Prophet knew a Messias should come and should saue his people by dy­ing for them; so also he foresaw and knew he should be borne of a virgin: If thē the prophet had knowledge of her, dare ye say he wanted due deuotion? and yet one of these you must say, and for want of one of these you must condemne him, who names none but Christ, or else your selues, who dare mixe her milke with his blood.

But is this all? No,

One can heale spirtuall pestilence, the other spirituall feuers; see what difference there is by their religion, be­twixt her milke and his blood: are not these men great and deuout honorers of Christ, and his suffering that can finde other helpes to heale their soules besides his blood? But if it be thus that both can heale so wel, how comes it to passe they haue so many sicke soules in po­pery, euen sicke of all spirituall diseases, espetially see­ing by their owne doctrine and daily practise, it is ap­parant they can neither want the one nor the other of these 2. simples: for first they say they make Christs blood euery day, then they haue blood at hand conti­nually: If they say that the laytye may not haue that, but onely their Preists (who indeede drinke it vp all) [Page 53] yet then they may take their Ladies milke whereof (if themselues say true) they haue so much in seuerall pla­ces, as some that liued 100. yeares agoe do write,Erasmus and others haue spoken more plainely and fully then I d [...] that in those dayes, it was more then a woman vpon one childe can giue out, though the childe sucked none at all: If that that is kept, and shewed, and worshipped in so many Citties of Italy, France, Spaine, Germany, be not her milke, then where is the truth and honesty of that religion, so to deceiue the world? if it be then, why are their soules so full of spirituall diseases? why are they not healed seeing this Iesuit teacheth that it will heale as well as Christs blood? as wel as Christs blood will some say, why do you them that wrong▪ they are ne­uer so wicked to speak such blasphemy. No? then iudge by that which followeth.

That is:

Heere iudge and spare not (without all partiallity,) whether that I said be not true, that her milke wil heale as wel as Christs blood, and this they affirme, not in ge­nerall tearmes but in plaine perticulers: if saith he An­ger swell, if Lust inflame me, blood will quench them & so wil milke: are there two stronger passions, two more conquering corruptions, two more raging and raigning sinnes then Anger and lust? yet euen these two are quenched & conquered by her milke as well as Christs blood: hearken ye Children of the Romish Sinagogue, hearken I say what instruction your father giues you, heare I pray (but learne it not) a creatures milke will cleanse your soules from sinne, as wel as your sauiours blood: O spirit of error and blasphemy, whither wilt thou goe? O Romish impiety, when wilt thou make an end? wilt thou not cease till thou hast puld downe the fire of Gods fury, from heauen vpon thee? O Ba­bylon we would haue healed thee but thou wilt not be healed, for who can heale him that will needes kill himselfe? so who can heale thee,Ierem. 51.9. whose blasphemy hath woun­ded and yet benūmed thy heart, gone ouer thy head, & is ascended vp to heauen, & in the presence of God crieth vengeance vpon thee; & as for you seduced soules (my deere coūtrymen) you who are deceiued with shewes of holynesse and deuotion, behold heere a peece of popish holynesse, and of the doctrine of their deuoti­on, [Page 55] that the sinnes of the soule are cleansed and taken away aswell by a creatures milke as by Christ his blood! is this the catholike doctrine they brag so much of? is this the ca­tholike Church that teacheth such diuinity? is this the chaire of S. Peter, & the seate that cannot erre? If it be so, then what didst thou meane thou St. Iohn Euan­gelist, to teach that it was Iesus Christ that faithfull wit­nesse, Reuel. 1.5. that first begotten from the dead, and that Prince of the Kings of the earth (euen he, and not any creature) who hath loued vs and washed vs from our sinnes in his blood: sure either must thou recant this doctrine, els they that boast themselues to be successors of thy brother Peter may be ashamed of theirs, who tell vs that our sins are washt away in her milke as well as by his blood: and you that are the dutiful and deuoted children of that Romish sear, be Iudges euen your selues in this case, what can be said heereunto: how can it stand with scripture, or with the tenor of true catholike faith? or how can it any way be defended that a creatures milke can quench the fire of sinne in the soule as well as Christ his blood?

Can ye say that heere is onely ascribed to her and her milke, a deriued vertue from another, and that the original and fundamentall power, is onely and wholy in Christ and his blood? if it were so it were lesse e­uill (though Christ Iesus may not, nor will not bestow the prerogatiues of his Mediatorship on any creature) but looke and wade ouer the words againe and again, expound them with any fauour that the wordes may beare, and you shall not see the least difference.

If Lust burne, Anger boyle, Enuy fret, Vaineglory swell I can helpe it with blood, so can I with milke: I can helpe it with milke, so can I with bloud: there can be no grea­ter equalitie made betwixt any two thinges in the worlde, then here they make betwixt this Bloud and Milke.

Can it be said that the Author is a Poet, and said thus but to make vp the Verse, which otherwise wold not haue falne so fitly? surely no, for a yong versifier can soone shew how the verses might haue run aswell as they do, if he had not purposely laboured to sort his verse to his matter, and not the matter to the verse:

For thus he might haue said, ‘Detergere queo sanguine Christe tuo.’ with very little alteration.

And so of the rest: but he as truly endeuoured to magnifie the milke as the bloud, and therefore with­out any necessitie of the verse, giues the same power, place, & preheminence, in euery respect to the milke as to the bloud: but had he bene as sound and sincere a Christian as he is a good Poet, he might in as good verses haue giuen all the honour to Christ as he deser­ueth. Therefore (my deere country-men) be no lon­ger seduced by a Religion so fraught with Atheisme, blasphemy & impyety: doe but looke into the Scrip­tures, Counsels, or Fathers: yea aske the honestest & learnedst of your owne religiō, (or any except Iesuits [Page 57] or such other like them, who frame a religiō to their owne purposes.)

If this be tollerable Diuinitye, that the Milke of the Virgin doth cleanse mans soule from sinne aswell as Christ his bloud.

If it be not diuinity but blasphemy, no Christian doctrine but impiety, and yet suffered, yea approued in the Romane Church, both by doctrine and practise; then returne to that truth and holy religion, which out of Gods word, and according to the purest anti­quity is established amongst vs: & with heart & voice ioyne with vs to imbrace and say Amen, to that holy doctrine of blessed St. Iohn, who saith, it is Iesus Christ that loued vs, and washed vs from our sinnes by his blood, to him be glory for euer and euer, Amen.

This was his religion, this is ours; oh that it were yours also! he sucked this diuinity out of that blessed brest of Gods sonne, whereon he leaned: and if he had sucked thence this diuinity of the Iesuits, that the vir­gin Mary washed vs from our sinnes by her milke, surely he would neuer haue concealed it from vs, nor haue de­priued her of the honour, nor vs of the comfort that thereby might accrewe both to her and vs: for he was her sonne by her owne adoption, yea her sonne by the gift and nomination of her sonne and sauiour, yea her sonne in loue, duty, and all respectiuenesse could he then, or would he in any sort obscure her due glory? would he giue too much to her sonne, and too little to her? would he giue all that to her sonne, which in parte was hers? can this, may this, or dare this be immagi­ned [Page 58] by any Iesuit? If not, then how dare they extend their deuotion beyond his, and ascribe that to her which he neuer did, yea that to her, which he appro­priates to Iesus Christ?

If they thinke that Peter had more deuotion then Iohn, 1. Pet, 2.24. hearken then what he saith: Iesus Christ his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his body on the tree: let the words be pondered, Iesus Christ saith he bare our sinnes: true (say they) but so did the virgin Mary also, No (saith Pe­ter) he himselfe, his owne selfe bare them, yea in his body, he bare them in his body: (say they) that is true, but he beares them in his mysticall body, in his members, much more therefore in his mother, which is more then ma­ny members of his body; nay saith St: Peter, he bare our sinnes his owne selfe in his body: but what body? euen that body that was on the tree: therefore if St: Peter preach true diuinity, then is this doctrine of your Teachers hainous blasphemy.

All that may be imagined for their defence at the best is this, that all this is but poeticall, & hyperbolicall, or proceedes from the passion & height of deuotion: but that in truth and earnest he ascribes all to Christ, & to his blood, makes his prayer to him, and puts the confidence of his heart in him alone: but least any man should haue the least suspition of him this way, or thinke so good a thought of him, he deales yet more plainely and to preuent all such thoughts and obiecti­ons, he makes his prayer both to the mother and the sonne, without any difference in the world, to the one for her milke, to the other for his blood: for thus he saith.

That is:

Heere is plaine dealing, it is not the Sonne and his blood that will serue his turne, he must also haue the mother and her milke, is not this good catholike doct­rine and deuotion? but further is it not strange to see how he marshalls them in the order of his iudgement and affection? he prayeth to the mother and the sonne; but first to the mother, hee will haue both milke and blood, but first milke: thus Mary hath the precedence of Christ, and her milke of his blood: But you will say it is not that he so esteemes them in his iudgement, but onely for the necessitie of the verse: the answere is that a grammer scholler, can soone shewe how the verse is as good, and giue Christ his precedence, as it is doing him this wrong: ‘Ergo Nate parens (que) meis aduertite votis,’

But he stil keeping Christ in wardship and vnder age, held it not fit that he should haue the place before his mother onely, and therefore without all necessitie e­uen wittingly and wilfully, he puts Christ in the se­cond place. But now let vs hasten to an end of this (if it be not endlesse and bottomelesse) impiety.

Vpon these fearefull premises thus he proceedes,

In English thus,

Now from blasphemy he proceedes to plain Athe­isme, not fearing to expose the greatest mysteries of Christian faith, and euen our blessed Sauiour himself, to the ridiculous & scornefull contempt of prophane men: Speaking vnto Christ, God coaequall with the father, and whose very humanity raigneth now in glory at Gods right hand, as to a seely infant in his mo­thers armes: and to him whose very humanity is fedde with the gloryous presence and contemplation of the deity, as to a poore childe sucking his mothers brests: such conceits are common, and such words and wri­tings rife with them, of our blessed Sauiour, who ne­uer speake of the Virgin Mary, but with the title of Queene of heauen, Lady of Angels, the gate of Paradice, the fountaine of mercy, or some such other titles, fitting none but him that is God, or at the least she is alwaies a cō ­maunding Mother, and he an infant gouerned and an obedient childe: But let vs consider his words a little better. Paruule &c. youngling (saith he) thou pretty babe, that playest in thy mothers armes, and sometimes suckes [Page 62] her brestes till they be emptie, and againe stayest till they be full. &c. Is this good and sound Diuinity, that Christ our Redeemer is now this present yeare, at Halla in Brabant, an Infant playing in his Mothers armes, & suc­king her brests?

If it be so, then sure St. Paul was much to blame to teach vs, that euen the man Iesus Christ, after he had offred one sacrifice for sinnes, sitteth for euer (not in his mothers armes, but) at his Fathers right hand: and what doing? not playing in her armes, nor sucking her brests, but there he euer liueth to make intercession for vs. Intercession! to whome? not to her in whose armes they will make him play, but to him, at whose right hand he sitteth for euermore.

And much more to blame St Peter, who (not fore­seeing, it seemes what doctrine his pretended succes­sor would teach after him) teacheth vs that Iesus Christ is at Gods right hand, gone into heauen, to whome Angelles, powers & might are subiect. Are Angels, powers & might subiect to him? & must he be subiect to a mortall & hu­mane creature? Nay, is he now an Infant, playing in his mothers armes, and hanging on her brests? is not this good Catholik Rōish doctrine? & is not this good pure Romish deuotion, to pray to him who is God of glory, & whose manhood is now at Gods right hand, Angels and powers subiect to him, in such wordes as these: Thou pritty Childe that playest in thy mothers armes, & han­gest at her brests? Is this a saluation fit for the Sonne of God, who is the Sonne consecrated for euer? the heire of all thinges, the brightnes of Gods glory, and the ingrauen [Page 63] forme of his person? or is this a Christian like description of him, who hauing by himselfe purged our sinnes, fitteth at the right hand of the maiestie in the highest places? But this is naturall to Popish religion, to disgrace the me­diator they care not how, so that they may aduaunce some creatures, and magnifie their owne deuises: but though they neuer so much abuse most of Gods ordi­nances, and nullifie the very Offices of the Mediator, Yet me thinks they should be a little feareful how they touch the person it selfe of the mediator and sonne of God, and should shrinke and shame to expose the person of Iesus Christ, to the base conceit of the vn­godly: for what can the carnall man, much more the Atheist, the Turke, and the Iewe imagine of Christ, when he that is his pretended Vicar suffers his followers to speake and write of him, and pray to him, as a playing childe, and sucking infant, and to describe him in his be­hauiours as a very childe, greeuing and crying that a­ny should touch his mothers paps but onely himselfe? alas what will this religion of Rome do at last? the word of God and Sacraments and other his holy ordinances they haue prophaned, the officer of the Mediator haue they nullified, and yet not content: heere they labour to make rediculous to all irreligious men, the very person of Iesus Christ himselfe: could this be done by any but them that are the Children of that mother of for­nication, that sits vpon the beast full of names of blasphemy? arise O Lord, maintaine thine owne cause, deliuer thy holy name from that pollution, and thy religion from that contempt which they bring vpon it. To con­clude: [Page 64] it may not be amisse heere to obserue the oppo­sition betwixt God in his holy scripture, and the Pope in this his religion.

Out of all this followeth a conclusion of good vse: It hath bene often obiected to the Romish Church, that they haue not true Christ left amongst thē, but an Idoll of their owne rearing, erected in their owne carnall fancies: now that this is no slaunder, no cauill, no hybolicall nor figuratiue speech, nor an accusati­on forced vpon them against their wills, is apparant by their owne doctrine and practise in this place: for the Christ of God and of his Church, is God equall to the father, and can do all things himselfe: the Christ of the Romish church is a childe inferiour to his mo­ther and may deny her nothing. The true Christ, being man grew in stature and wisedome, and being growne a man, so liued and dyed, rose againe and was glorified, and neuer decreased: but theirs is now become a childe againe and a playing infant: the true Christ sitteth at the right hand of God his father, theirs is borne in the armes of Mary his mother.

Hence the conclusion is euident, that therefore the Romish Christ is not the true christ of God and of the true christian church. This conclusion I demonstrate thus: the title of these verses is this, To our Lady of Hall, and the Childe Iesus: this childe they speake of is either Iesus Christ indeed or it is not: if not, then they pro­claime [Page 66] them selues lyers and impostors: if it be, then my conclusion stands good: for this Iesus, in all the fore­named respects, and many more, differeth from the true Iesus and sauiour of Christian men: let them take whether they will, the better is to bad. But now let vs see what is that he saith to this childe Iesus.

Why (saith he) doest thou frowne on me (thou prety childe) art thou angry with me for desiring thy milke? doest thou chide me that I dare presume to aske the milke of thy mo­thers teates? this is all the cause he layeth of Christ his anger, what shold a man say to this? what would a Iew say, what will an Atheist thinke of it? surely they will deride and laugh at that religion that allowes it, if our Christ be such a one as is angry at such a cause: But say I pray thee thou Romish Iesuit, (thou wantest neither wit nor learning to giue answer) speakest thou in iest or earnest? If in Iest, then, knowest thou with whome thou iestest? considerest thou that it is Iesus of Nazareth, the great one of God, he of whose kingdome there shall be no end, he that is the brightnes of Gods glory and the ingrauen forme of his person, he at whose remem­brance the diuels tremble, & to whome all knees bowe in heauen, earth, and hell' and darest thou exercise thy wit, and whet thy stile, and practise thy poetical vaine vpon him? and vnto him that now hauing conquered sinne, death, and hell? sitteth now at the right hand of Ma­iesty, in the highest places? darest thou present such a pe­tition as this? O pretty childe doe not enuy me that I should touch thy mothers paps, with which I perceiue thou wilt suffer [Page 67] none to play but thy selfe: oh be not angry that I long for that which is thine, namely, for the milke of thy mothers teats? didst thou euer finde in scriptures or sound antiquity, that any holy man did euer conceiue of him, or speake to him on this fashion? no for its rather asporting speech fit to be spoken to a playing childe, then a salutation fit to be tendered to the sonne of God & Sauiour of the world:

But if thou say thou speakst in earnest according to the truth of religion, and soundnesse of diuinity, then tel me I pray thee in earnest, is this any part of christi­an faith, or is it catholike diuinity, that Christ Iesus is offended with that man that shall desire to touch the Virgin Maries papps, or to taste of her milke (not in this regard that its a thing not possible, and therefore in­deede not to be wished by a Christian, but) because they be peculiarly & propperly his paps & his milke, still as they were when he was an infant? If this be Romish diuinity, alas for the sheep that are fed in such pastures, and filld with such doctrine: for this is funda­mētally both false & impious, false, for if it be true that the holy scriptures teach,1. Cor. 5. that Iesus Christ is now no more to be knowne nor conceyued of according to the flesh, that is as a meere and mortall man, but as a glori­fied man, a spirituall conquerour of his enemies, and a spirituall head of his Church. If this I say be true, that he is no longer to be knowne as a man, as he was vpon earth, then it is false that he is still to be concey­ued of and spoken vnto as a playing childe: Besides it is impious and irreligious, and a step to Atheisme to [Page 68] imagine that Christ our God and Sauiour, is offended for such an imaginary toy as this is, to touch his mo­thers paps, or to desire her milke: and what enemies of our religion would not loudly laugh at this our Christ whome we so magnifie, that we make him the rest of our soules, to be such a one as he is heere described? namely one that chides him that dare touch his mo­thers paps, for so saith the verse: ‘Tune meas Mammas improbe tune meas?’

That is: ‘Darest thou desire the teates, my food lyes in?’ Alas how shall the mouthes of Turkes and Iewes be stopped from blaspheming, and saying: Is this your Christ? is this the glory of christianitie? is this he whome you make a God? are these the sins he is offended withall? Surely no wayes can such and fowler blasphemyes be preuented, but that the Christian world publikely re­nounce, condemne, and curse, this damned doctrine, as being the priuate and impious blasphemye of the Machiuillian Iesuits, but not the Catholike doctrine of christianity: For we cannot deny but there is a gene­ration of vipers, bred of the corruption and putrifacti­on of an olde and sinfull world; calling themselues Ie­suites, or Priests of the societie of Iesus: who as they come nearest to God in their mouthes; so are they in their hearts (if their courses can discouer them) the furthest from him. With these fellowes it may be it is a doctrine or a peece of deuotion, that it's a great sin for a man to desire frō Iesus some of his mothers milke: [Page 69] but if they be asked who made this a sin, they must an­swere, themselues: if what law? euen their owne fan­cies: But as for the catholike & christian Church, she dooth renounce it.

But to proceede, is it not strange that a witty and learned Iesuit, should frame such a speech as this vnto Iesus Christ, for thus to begin, Oh blessed Childe why art thou angry at me, and offended with me? oft hast thou said to me being angry at my sinnes, &c. would put a man in hope that some great matter followed: for vpon so good a beginning, would not a man presume that some good confession of sinnes should follow? as this, I must con­fesse o Lord I haue sinned in ignorance, in selfe-loue, in security, in hardnesse of heart, in incontinency, in mallice, in hatred, in couetousnes, in omission of my duties, in commission of euill &c. for these O Lord, and for any of these, thou mightest say vnto me, thou miserable wretch, how darest thou thus pollute my name, and as farre as in thee lyeth, crucifie me againe, by these thy sins? how darest thou dust and ashes, thus vilifie my eternall law, the curse whereof thou hast heereby incurred? how darest thou beare my name, or looke me in the face, whome thou hast thus prouoked? oh that our eares might haue heard a Iesuit saying thus, and surely in reason a man would haue expected some such cōclusion from such a beginning. But why should we looke for either reason or religion from a Iesuite?See Watson the Preist hi [...] iudgement the Iesuit [...] ten in his quidlibets. Costerus in [...]chiridio: cap calibatu sa­ [...]d: [...]cerdos si for­catur aut d [...] ­ [...]i cōucubinam [...]eat tamet si [...]us sacrilig­se ob [...]tringet raeuius tamen [...]ccat si malit [...]enirum con­ [...] hat. [...]his is also by [...]efended both [...]retser the Ie­ [...]it in his hi­ [...]oria ord. Ies. [...]d by Igna­ [...]us armandus [...]e Iesuit, in [...]s Epistles to [...]hamier: vid. [...]. Iesuiticas. [...]r the points [...] swearing & [...]oly daies, see [...]ollet in his [...]structiosa­ [...]r dotum: & [...]zorius in his [...]stitutiones orales Sixtus fiue made that a [...]int at King [...]helops request [...]r recōpence expresly) of [...]is inuasion [...]f England. [...]88. (if that be true which their brother Watson the Priest hath written of them.) To haue supposed Christ to be angry with him for breaking the morrall lawe had [Page 70] bene good diuinity, and no poeticall immagination, but these holy fathers haue no such faults: nay see how innocent Lambes the Iesuits be, that when christ is most angry with a Iesuit, and rebukes him for sinne, he hath none to lay to his charge, nor finde any wher­of he is guilty, but a little holy presumption, or rather height of ardent deuotion, that he dare touch the papps, and beg the milke of the virgin Mary: o fearefull pre­sumption, o carnall selfe-loue, o hellish pride, and well beseeming the Iesuiticall broode! is not this the generation that praiseth it selfe, and (as Salomon saith) is good in his owne eies? But say in earnest, is this all the fault that thou thinkest christ can finde with thee? then belike there is either no breaches at all of the morrall law, amongst Iesuits, or els the breaches of Gods lawe, are lesse sinnes amongst them, then are the brea­ches of their owne deuises, and well may it be so: for he was a Iesuit who taught that a Priest sinneth lesse if he keepe a whore, or lye with another mans wife, then if he mar­ry a wife of his owne, I say he was a Iesuit that wrote it, and he was a Iesuit that defended it.

Againe, they teach that its a lesse sinne to sweare in common talke by the holy name of God, then it is to eat an egge in lent: for the latter say they is a mortall sin, the first is but a veniall. Againe, that he sins no more that workes vpon the holy Saboth day then hee that workes vpon the feast day of St. Didace the Spaniard whome Sixtus made a Saint, not yet 20. yeares agoe: they whose doctrines these & such others be, no mar­uell tho they holde that the breach of a duty of their [Page 71] owne deuising, is a greater sinne then the breach of the morall lawe: for so must he holde that wrote this, or els that christ can finde no greater fault in him, but that he durst beg his mothers milke: or els that Christ would passe by al other faults in compari­son of that, let him chuse which of the three dooth please him best, for one he must needes take, or else confesse that all this while he is but in iest.

I would leaue this point, but that my loue to you (my deere country-men, the papists of England) pro­uoke me to one word more, to you and for your sakes.

Consider I pray you what these men are, who be the Fathers and founders, at least the guiders and go­uernours of your faith: A generation that knowes no euill by it selfe, but this that I dare stand to is no euill at all, but of their owne making, a generation against whome Christ hath nothing but this ridiculous alle­gation which you haue heard of: which if it be true, as they are a societie of all the world to be honoured, so being false, they are a broode of hypocrites, of all the worlde to be detested: Then see how, you are dayly be­witched by their inchauntments, and caried vp and downe as they please to lead you: but consider I pray you what will not those men say of thēselues to you in priuate, which speake thus insolently of themselues in publike? what meruailous, miraculous, and incredi­ble things wil not these fellowes buz into the eares of their nouices (whome they endeauour to binde pren­tises to their Belzebub?) who dare offer to publish to the eyes and censure of all the world, that Christ lay­eth nothing to their charge vnlesse it be an extremity [Page 72] of deuotion, to his blessed mother: O beloued coun­trymen, be not seduced by such impostors! let not such vipers eat out your hearts; but discouer the hypocrites and send them home vnmasked to hell where they were hatched, for they that dare thus dally with our Sauiour, no maruaile tho they be so bold with your soules and your consciences, your children, and your estates and all that belongs you.

Now to goe forward, he hath tolde vs the great quarrell that Christ hath to him, and the hideous fault for which he chides him, that he offers to touch his mothers teates, and will needes haue some of her milke: but now let vs see what he answers & how he defends himselfe.

To a strange accusation heere is a more strange answer: for now the tide of his blasphemy is almost at the highest: the quarrell he supposed Christ to haue against him, was that he durst presume to touch his mothers paps, or desire to taste of her milke: a fearefull sinne doutlesse, yet neither forbid­den in the Lawe nor the Gospel, but a sinne of the Popes making. But what is his answer hereunto? he [Page 73] plainely pleads not guilty, alleadging for himselfe, that he is not so bold, so rude, so presumptuous, as to dare to entertaine any such thought, or attempt any such thing, as to touch her sacred paps, or to drinke of that glorious milke: no his ambitiō reacheth not so high, he onely prayeth to haue part of his wounds and blood, that he desireth as being a thing of an inferiour nature and not comparable to the other.

O miserable times of ours, that we should liue to see that any mans heart should conceiue, any mans tonge vtter, especially any mans penne should publish such horrible blasphemy against the blood and person of our Sauiour! what, must the Virgin Mary be first compared, afterward equalled, & is not that inough vnles now she be preferred before, and aduanced a­boue Christ? is his blood inferiour to her milke? and is it lesse presumptiō to be bold with Christ then her? whither will Romish religion goe at the last, that al­readie comes to this?

But to come to a more perticular consideration of the wordes: the answer that here the Iesuits makes, containes apparantly both absurditie and impietie, & both in the highest degree: The absurditie appeares in the euident contradiction of himselfe; for now, as tho he had either forgottē or cared not what he said afore, He denyeth that which afore he spake almost in euery verse: dare you not now touch her paps, nor taste her milke? then who was it that afore said, I am doutfull whether to take paps or side, milke or blood: If I looke at the paps, I long for milke: if at the wounds, I would haue blood: [Page 74] seeing therefore both are so good, I will haue both: I will catch the milke with my right hand, the blood with my left. Didst thou this euen now, & now saist thou dare not touch it? Nay, was it not thou that saidst I will mingle the milke of the mother with the blood of the Sonne, and so make a soueraigne cōpound to heale my soule, & now darest thou not touch the milke nor paps? was it not thy mouth that said, if Anger, Lust, or any sinne vexe my soule, blood will help it, and so will milke: therefore mother and Sonne heare my request, I must haue milke, I will haue blood, I will haue both? and dost thou now say, oh I will haue blood indeede, but I dare not desire milke? was it then deuo­tion to take it, and taste it, and drinke it, and mingle it with Christs blood, and apply it to the soule, and is it now presumption to desire it? can one mouth send out such grosse contradictions? but let it passe, for no absurdity nor contradiction can be so vile as should euer haue moued me to haue set pen to paper at this time, (for they are sufficiently discouered already in these and other points,) but when dishonour and blas­phemy is offered to the blood & person of Iesus Christ, how can a christian hold his peace? for if that be true which the learned father saith,Hieronim. that in accusation of he­resie he would haue no man patient, wheras heresie is but the shame and hurt of the man that holdes it? then sure in the case of blasphemy and impiety, touching the very crowne, and striking at the head of Iesus Christ our lord and redeemer, who can be patient, who can but speak? neither thinke that heerein I chalenge ought to my selfe aboue my bretheren, but knowe contrariwise, that though I only write, who first, or with the first that [Page 75] discouered it, yet speake I, and write I in the person of many millions more, who all with one heart and voice detest this Romish impiety.

The impiety that bewrayes it selfe in this answere is such as goeth beyond all we yet heard, and wherein it seemes the blasphemer thought to exceed himselfe. That we may the better discouer it marke the currēt of his speech: O Christ (saith he) oft hast thou being prouoked with my sinne, rebuked me and said: darest thou sinfull wretch presume to touch my teates or medle with the milk that feedes me? he answereth, oh no blessed childe I dare not, nor I will not so farre presume, I neuer was so rude, nor so vnci­uil, as to imagine that I might touch those precious papps, or taste the blessed milke of thy mother: I onely beg a little of thine owne blood, from thy side, thy hand or foote: that shall con­tent me: what is this we heare? you are content to haue Christs blood, but as for the virgin Maries milke thou da­rest not desire it: what, is her milk more pretious, more dainty, more sacred then the blood of the mediator? Yee heauens be astonied at this, and all yee creatures of God (in your kindes) renounce and detest this hay­nous blasphemy. And you (my poore countrymen) that are the devoted children of that church, beholde heere a peece of popish diuinity and deuotion, a crea­tures milke is of more esteeme then Christ his blood: a christian by the power of his ordinary sauing faith, may be partaker of the benefits of Christs blood, but not of the blessed milke of our Lady. The blood he may boldly challenge, the milke he scarce may name: in the blood he may diue and wash his soule, the milke he may not presume to touch: oh new diuinity, for [Page 76] merly it seemed strange that her milke was but com­pared to his blood, but when after it was made equall to it, and mingled with it, and held as fit to heale the soule as it that seemed incredible, till we sawe it: then what is this that now we heare, that her milke is not onely comparable nay equall but euen more pretious, more sacred, more excellent then the blood of Iesus Christ: oh miserable religion of popery, whether wilt thou draw thy deceiued children in the end? what will be­come of thee and thy followers? If the diuels confessed that Iesus of Nazareth was the Christ of God, that is the onely Sauiour of the world, and the onely ānointed of God, to be the mediator, and yet for all this are diuelt still and no better: then what are they and what a reli­gion is that, which makes his blood not so good, so ver­tuous, so soueraigne, so pretious as her milke, and so by consequent will neither let him be the onely nor the principall Sauiour. Now the same glorious God and Sauiour Iesus Christ, whose merrits are debaced, whose person dishonored, and whose blood little bet­ter then troden vnder foote, either conuert in mercy, or in iustice confound all that shall consent, defend or giue countenance to so fearefull a blasphemy: and the same God giue you grace poore seduced Englishmen to relinquish that religion, which is the mother of such monsters as vpon this theater of the Iesuits, are pre­sented vnto you: and espetially to detest that Iesuiti­tical sect, whose honor it is to dishonour Iesus Christ, and who bring vpon the great theater of their honour, the blood of Iesus, so dishonoured, as it yet neuer was by [Page 77] any sect or profession, Turke or Iewe, Atheist, or here­tike, deuill or man, since the world began.

But let vs see what remaineth.

After the discourse imagined (as we heard before) to be betwixt Christ and him, contayning Christs ac­cusation and his defence touching the high pre­sumption of being as bolde with his mothers milke as his blood: now sodainely he turnes himselfe from Christ to Babylon and supposeth that Babylon that spirituall strumpet allures him to her vnlawfull lusts [Page 78] and vilde idolatries, and that her temptations haue bene both frequent and forcible. And surely heerein we easily beleeue him: for what is spirituall Babylon but the Kingdome of sinne and Sathan, of impiety, I­dolatry, blasphemy, superstition, prophanes: and where is that as in Popery, and where to be found so fully as in the bowels of the Popish state, whome they well know all the world either cleerely con­demnes, or at least iustly suspects to be that spirituall Babylon so fearefully accursed and condemned in the Reuelation. For what Citty is so notoriously knowne to stand vpon the notable and famous hills as Rome is? what Citty in all the world did raigne ouer all the Kings of the earth, then when St. Iohn wrote, but onely Rome? and the text saith (as plainely as can be) that the woman, the great whore, great Babylon the mother of fornications, is that great Cittie that raigneth ouer the kings of the earth: & lastly there is no place, person, state, nor power, in the world, in whome the number of 666 so fully concurreth, in so many languages, in so many respects, so directly; and with so little strayning as in the Popes.

I will specifie but fewe for many, the Pope or none but the Pope chalendgeth to be the Prince of al the clergy in the world, and therefore in these latter yeares hath calld himselfe vniuersall Bishop, and pa­stor of Pastors: Now it falls out that this his pride doth proclaime his shame to all the world, for the number of the beast is in this name, without adding, altering, or any strayning, as he shall finde that will reckon.

DVX. CLerI

500. 5. 10. 100. 50. 1. Totall: 669.

Againe, the Pope glorieth in this title and honour, that he is Gods generall Vicar on earth: this is the founda­tion of all his pretended power and vsurpation: this he and his imps fight for as for their liues.

This his seduced creatures, English Priests and Ie­suits, doe in England dye for (excepting some that dy­ed for horrible treasons) and no maruel, for they know they loose all if they loose this, and yet the Pope can­not holde it, but withall he must haue the number of the beast ingrauen in his forehead, so as he that runnes may read it: for put downe this title in the latine tongue, (which is the tongue by him aduanced aboue Greeke or Hebrew, wherein he writes his Letters, giues his lawes and his Bulls, and workes all his feates) and it containes the number of the beast, and neither more nor lesse.

GENERALIS VICARIVS DEI. 50.1. 5.1.100. 1.5. 500. 1. IN TERRIS. 1. 1.

50. 1. 5. 1. 100. 1. 5. 500. 1. 1. 1. totall 666.

Thus its cleer, that as the Pope will needes be Gods generall Vicar on earth, so he cannot haue it, but he must beare the marke and number of the beast. If a­ny man say he calls not himselfe Gods Vicar, but [Page 80] Christs Vicar, I answere Christ is both God & man, and he holdes himselfe Christs Vicar, euen as Christ is God, and full little would he thanke him that holds him Christs Vicar, onely as he is a man: But I answer further, that who euer reads his owne decrees & pub­like constitutions, shall easily see that he calls himselfe ordinarily the Vicar of God, and suffers others so to stile him: and that the world may see they haue not reformed it,Tuccii Tuccii patritii lucen­sis & protonet Apostol: com­ment in cant. lug. 606. 4. In titulo libr [...]. the Pope that now is, Paul the 5. hath suf­fered one of his owne creatures in a booke dedicated to him, to call him the Vicar of God. Thus he will needs be Gods vicar, but his pride is well paid for, for as he will be Gods Vicar against Gods will, so God makes him beare the diuels marke, in the number of the beast a­gainst his owne will.

If therefore it be so likely that Rome is Babylon, and her doctrines and deceits, superstitions, and Idolatryes, the fornications of that whore of Babylon, then we easi­ly beleeue this to be true, that oft times did Babylon allure him with her entisements, and wooe him to her spirituall fornications: so hath she done many more, and pre­uailes with too many.

But what, with him? No, he wil haue none: it is wel said. Oh that you would do as well, that is the worst we wish you Iesuits, though you wish vs nothing but fire and gunpowder: oh that you would turne into your selues and see your error in beleeuing her, and in being deceiued with her inchantments, and dronk with her fornications that you would no longer be the sonnes of her that is the mother of abhominations least [Page 81] you be also children of abhomination: oh that you would forsake her and discouer her skirts, and teare her in pieces as she hath deserued, and then returne to be the children of the Church, & seruants of the liuing God! this is that we wish you from the Lord, whome we al­so pray that thou whosoeuer thou art, that wrote this and all other of thy faction in the worlde, may haue grace to performe that which heere thou promisest.

Well then, if he will haue none of Babilons dainties what will he haue? for he saith he thirsteth, and must haue his thirst quenched, but how?

But alas these are children of Babilon, they wil not be healed: for loe he sings his olde song againe, he must haue blood, he must haue milke: loe heere the hun­ger and thirst of a papist, it is for milke as well as blood: our Sauiour proclaymeth to the world,Math 5. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnes, I would heere aske a reasonable papist, a briefe question, whether this righteousnes can be attained by any meanes, but by the blood of the Mediator: If he thinke it may, let him that saith so, take time to consider of it, and he wil answere otherwise: But if not (as if they be Christians they must needes answere) then what a kinde of thirst is that, that thirsteth for the milke of a creature, as wel as for the blood of the Mediator: But whilst they take time to answere this question, let vs goe forward, and trace this Iesuit to his vnhappy iourneyes end.

That is,

Now if you please to obserue a little, you shall see a new peece of popish deuotion: his ground already layd is, that he must haue milke from the mother: blood of the sonne.

But how will he come by them? he hath found a [Page 83] ready way, he will make the sonne mediator to his mother, and the mother to her sonne: Christian Religion hath euer taught, that the sonne is our Mediator to the father: and Popish religion hath long taught that the Mother is a Mediator to her sonne: But now they begin to teach, that the sonne is also a mediator to his mother: what will it come to in the end? And heere obserue, that as euer heretofore when there was any honour in precedence, the mo­ther had the first place: so now when it is a burden and a duty, the sonne must haue it, but not till then, for so he now saith.

First indeed he intreates the sonne and then the mo­ther: but what intreats he him? to be a meanes: to whome? to his mother: for what? for her milke: so that vpon the matter, her milke is it that is first in his thoughts, its that he longs for principally, and Christ Iesus shall be preferred to goe a message to his mother, and to entreat for him, that he may haue it: as tho he had said, o Iesus my soule so thirsts for milke, that I cannot be without it: now because thou hast re­buked me for my presumption, in offering to take it as boldly as thy blood: I haue therefore no other way but to intreat thee to be a meanes to thy mother, that so by thy mediation and her mercy I may ob­taine it, therefore I beseech thee Iesus say to thy mo­ther &c.

Is not Christ honoured and wel aduanced by Popery [Page 84] that makes him mediator to a woman for her milke, and for the benefits and merrits of it, and that for such a one as will not be content with the benefits and me­rits of his owne blood shedding: But behold good rea­der seriously what diuinity heere is! A Christian man in his deuotion may (saith this Iesuit) desire Iesus Christ to goe intreat his mother for him, and to complaine that his poore brothers soule thirsteth, desiring her to quench and comfort him with her milke: what is this we heare? Is Christ a mediator to a creature? and for something in that crea­ture to quench the spirituall thirst of the soule? If this be true, then what meant Christ to say Come vnto me all that be weary, Math. 11. and I will ease you: for if he send them that be thirsty and weary to his mother to be ea­sed, surely in that word, Christ either spake too much of himselfe, or too little of his Mother.

If Christ held that they might come onely to him­selfe, then it appeares the Iesuits religion and his be contrary: If he knew that they might come to her, as well as him, or to her by him, then what meant he to say Come vnto me, and not rather Come vnto her or vnto me: what can they, what dare they say? was he vndu­tifull to his mother? or enuied he her dignity? or for­got he her when he thus spake? or was he swayed with too much selfe-loue? if none of these without blasphemy may be imagined, then what may be said, that there were any such thing due to her, and he knew it not? If this also be impossible, then there remaines but one that he named himselfe, but excluded not his mother, he bids come to him, and forbids not to come to her: [Page 85] I answer, first heere he bids vs come to himselfe, let them shew where he bids vs goe to her, if he no where bid it, it is as good as forbidden: againe, he that in one case of truth said, I and my father are one, would not haue spared in this case if it had bene true, to haue sayd I and my mother are one, and he who out of his holy hu­mility, and knowing the difference of the fathers dei­ty and his owne humanity, freely confessed my father is greater then I, I [...]hn. 14. would neuer haue scorned (if it had bene true) to haue acknowledged, my mother is as great as I: whereas contrarywise, leauing out her and all crea­tures in the world, he saith directly, Come vnto me: And whereas he came to fulfill all righteousnes: and the fift commaundement we know commaunds aswell reue­rence to Parents, as obedience: therefore doubtlesse he who went hence saith the text and was obedient to them, would also most readily haue yeilded her this reuerēce if it had bene due vnto her, or if it might lawfully haue bene giuen her: But he knowing the contrary, doth in this case passe by her, and commaunds Come vnto me: If yet they will reply and say he saith indeed come to him, but meaning to send vs from himselfe to her for ease & comfort, who is the Mother of mercy & of grace: I answere, so indeed is she called in their seruice booke,Maria mater gratiae [...]ter mi [...]rec [...]e: t [...] nos ab hoste [...]rot [...]ge, et ho­ra mortes [...]us­ [...]. Officium beat [...] [...]triae. but Gods booke takes that name to himselfe onely, & giues it to no creature, therefore let them an­swere it that giue it to her: Againe, the ground of this replication is false, for as he saith Come to me, and names no other, so neither sends he vs to her for ease, but saith plainely and directly, and I will ease you. [Page 86] Further, they not onely make Christ a mediator to his mother, and that for spirituall ease and comfort, but they doe it in such a fashion, as they make Christ one that either is not able or not willing to helpe vs him­selfe: for if he were, then why doe they say that he complaines to his mother, that we thirst, and for the ease of our soules, do yeeld her milke? If heere they were asked this question, I wonder how they would answer it? if Christ be not willing or not able to ease the thirsty soule, then how is he a perfect Sauiour? If he be, then how is it likely that he would send him that humbleth his soule to him for helpe, to another to be eased, seeing he asketh of him, who said, come vnto me all that are weary, doth he aske that that Christ hath to giue, and is it likely he will deny it? dooth he aske that that Christ hath not to giue, and is it pro­bable that his mother hath it? then they may aswell say that she hath more grace and mercy, or more power & ability then Christ himself hath: let thē answer these questions, how they will, heere will be found strange diuinity, which we see is currāt in the Romish Church.

But whilst they prepare their answere, let it please the reader to obserue how contrary the Romish doct­rine is to the doctrine of Christ and of the holy scrip­ture.

These and such like oppositions are common be­twixt Christs Gospell and Romish diuinity, may not this giue strong suspition that their religion is Anti­christian, which in the foundations of it are so repug­nant to Christs, as these and others which stand con­firmed with more authority then yet these doe? well, thus Christ is made a mediator to his mother, now the Iesuit proceedeth, and to make him amends hee makes the mother a mediator to him,

That Christ Iesus hath the ransome of sinfull soules [Page 88] in his hands is good diuinity, and we heartily imbrace it, wishing it were as heartily and truly (without Equiuocation) intended, by this papist: if he and all other papists doe so hold it, we heartily reioyce, but then we desire them to answere to a fewe questions.

Who payeth this ransome? is it not Christ? who ac­cepts it? is it not God the father? is it not mercy, grace & loue, that either the one will accept it, or the other pay it? can any pay it but the one? can any take it but the other? are not thē they the foūtains & fathers of mercy, which haue done so? if all these be true, then what a religion haue they, who in their liturgies & daily prayers, call a creature the mother of mercy, and mother of grace, oftner then either God the father, or Christ the redeemer, or both put together▪ we desire some conscionable papist to answere vs seriously: was the virgin Mary a Creator or a creature? if a creature, was she any more then an excellent creature, set apart for the most excellent vse in the world? & was it not in Gods election to haue chosen any other woman, at his owne good pleasure to haue bene the mother of Christ? and was it not his owne free mercy, that he regarded the low estate of her his handmaid? if this be so, then did she anything in our saluation, which any woman had not done, if God had taken her to be his mother: was there any thing in her to moue God to chuse her, which was not Gods owne gift in her and to her? she may be then a vessell of grace but she can be no way a fountaine of grace: for what had she but she receiued it: but if (as they say) she be the fountaine of mercy and mother of grace, then she [Page 89] giues but receiues not, as the fountaine receiues from no other, but hath of it selfe, and sends out to others: & the mother takes not of her children, but layeth vp for them. Now if it be as their liturgie saith, it is that she is the mother of mercy and grace, &c. as aboue: of grace and mercy, then sure she hath the ransome in her hands: but if it be in Christs hands, as heere they say it is, then how is she the mother of mercy? hardly would these be reconciled, but that they haue equiuocations, reseruations, or destinctions, that will make any thing seeme good inough to serue their turnes.

Thus then they haue not onely made Mary Media­tor to Christ, which is common in their religion, but (which was scarce euer heard of before) they make Christ their mediator to her, her to him for his blood, but first him to her for her milke: now to leaue this point, obserue (in one word) how in these two messages of mediation, here is no difference, but she that is a crea­ture and saued by her sonne, is made to speake to him in the same tearmes as he to her, and with no other words or signes of reuerence: and he her sonne and sa­uiour, yea God himselfe made to speake to her with the same reuerence as she doth to him: as thogh there were no difference betwixt him and her, and as though he being God and her sauiour, was asmuch beholding to her for her milke, as she being a creature is to him for his blood: Loe what popish deuotion is heere? now if they be ashamed of this, then why are they not asha­med of the other? But they are farre from that, for [Page 90] where are the intreatings, the cries, the humble re­quests and submissiue beseechings to him for his blood? heere be none such: but contrariwise as though there were no difference in the world, betwixt either the persons entreating, which are Christ and Mary, or the things desired which be his blood & her milke, he saith to Christ.

And to her he saith,

Thus Popery makes of Christ and Mary, one no grea­ter a person then the other, and of his blood and her milke one, no greater a matter then the other: Christ with no more reuerence to be implored then Mary, his blood with no more vehemency to be desired, with no more difficulty to be obtayned then her milke: If this doctrine may be defended vnder pretence of deuoti­on, then will not there want a cullour for any blasphe­my: But the Iesuit goeth forward and saith to Christ.

It may be doubted in whose name he speaketh these words, whether in his owne, to both Christ & his mother, or in Christs name to his mother, and in hers to him: if in the first, they containe blasphemy, if in the second, absurdity: for if he suppose the virgin Mary saith thus to Christ,

It is fouly absurd to imagine that she being so dignifi­ed as she is (yea rather as they holdHoratius. T [...] sellinus Iesu [...] in histor. lautanae in praf [...] almost deified) should make an if, or a question whether Christs blood excell the rest or no: and much more absurd is it to make Christ seeme to be ignorāt of his mothers power and state how great it is: be it more or lesse. But if so be he speak these words himselfe to thē both, then behold the haynous iniury done to the pretious blood of the mediator. Cōcerning which this wicked papist makes as much & equall doubt, whether it excell the blood of other creatures, as he doth: whether the milke of the Vrgin Mary excel the milke of all other women: let all christian men shrinke and tremble at so great a blasphemy, for al the learned Papists in the world may be challēdged to proue (if they can) out of Gods word & the grounds of Religiō, that she was any more then another holy woman, (sauing this prerogatiue, that she was his mother acording to the flesh) or any more then a Saint of God sanctified by the spirit, and saued by the blood of Iesus christ, whose mother she was in regard of his flesh: or that her milke had any vertue in the world, but to nourish his body as doth the milke [Page 92] of other women, their children: for was not he a man like vnto vs in all things (sinne excepted) and if Christ take it no preiudice to himselfe, to be like vnto men, shall it be a wrong to her to be like to other women? Nay we dare goe further and aske them, if God haue vouchsa­fed once in the whole new testament, so much as to name the milke of the virgin Mary? whereas altoge­ther and almost in euery chapter, he extolleth the blood of Christ, and is euer magnifying the vertue, merrits, and efficacy of the same: if this be so, then what shall we say to that religion and to those men, who make it as questionable, whether Christ Iesus his blood excell the blood of other men, as whether the virgin Maries milke exceed the milke of other women? is this Romish religion? is this popish diuinity? then see what follow­eth. But it cannot be proued either to reason or to faith that her milke excelleth other womens, in any spiritu­all or corporall vertue or operation: therefore it is not to be proued that Christs blood is more pretious then other mens: see here my deere countrymen, how you are misled, see what doctrine you are fed withall by your teachers! open your eyes and be no longer deceiued; offer not this iniury to him that gaue his life for you, to make this vnequall comparison: If they wil not teach you holy and found diuinity, then leaue them, and learne from vs, or rather with vs from the holy scriptures, that his blood is the price of our redemptiō: but as for her milke we know no such thing, since she liued on the earth: acknowledge with vs that it is a fundamentall ground of Christian faith that his blood [Page 93] is more worth then ten worlds: but that her milke is now of any vallue, can neither be perswaded to reason nor belieued by faith: and yet dar [...] this malignant si­nagogue make that as likely as probable, as certaine as the other: If enemies of Religion take hold heere, and say, that therefore the grounds of our Christia­nity are vncertaine, and so blaspheme the blessed blood of our Sauiour, we can say no more but our Church is innocent, our hearts are free, our hands are cleere of it: woe be to them by whome the offence commeth. But now let vs see how the Iesuit concludes, and whe­ther his end be any better then his beginning.

In English thus:

Now comes to his conclusion, but alas his iniqui­ty is as much at the last as at the first: for still he per­sists in his impiety, without repentance, without re­morce, without sorrow or sence of the euill he hath done, for still he sings his olde song: ‘O when shall I sucke the milke of these brests, when shall I drinke the blood of these wounds.’

His soule thirsteth, but for what? for milke and for blood: but first for milke and then for blood: If this be tol­lerable diuinity, nay if this be holy deuotion, then what did our blessed Sauiour meane to cry out to all weary and thirsty soules, If any man thirst let him come vnto me and drinke: I wish the Iesuits would tell vs what they thinke, whether he did well or no, to leaue out the Virgin Mary: for if this diuinity of theirs be good, then he ought to haue said, If any man thirst let him come to my mother or to me to drinke: and surely if her [Page 95] milke be thus equall in value, price and merrit to his blood, then we do no longer maruell that they teach how the Virgin Mary did rise from the dead, and was assumed into heauen corporally that as Christ rose & ascended to apply & make good the merit of his death, so did she also to make effectual the merit of her milk. But then good Paul how farre art thou to blame, that esteemd all things in the world, doug, and drosse, & only that thou maist know the vertue of his resurrecti­on! for then it seemes, thou wilt giue little or nothing to know the vertue of her assumption. Nay it may be thou art halfe an hereticke, and beleeuest not any such assumption: but if thou couldest be taken within the reach of the holy inquisitiō, thou shouldest pay wel for such thy hereticall incredulity. If now thou wert aliue thy better and more holy bretheren the Iesuits, could reproue thee for many indiscreet passages, and teach thee better diuinity then thou seemest to know, for whereas thou durst say, thou esteemdst to know nothing but Iesus Christ, and him crucified, they can tell thee thou art farre short in thy duty, and but cold in zeale in re­spect of them, for they stand in doubt whether to e­steeme more the blood of his wounds, or the milke of her paps: and whereas thou wilt giue all to knowe the vertue of his resurrection, they can but wonder at thy ig­norance, who carest not to know the vertue of her re­surrection & ascention also, Be thou content to know the one, they for their parts will know both: and if thou be so precise for thy Maister, that thou canst not be cōtent to say, that he purgeth our sins, but must exclude [Page 96] al other, and say, that he by himselfe purgeth our sinnes: know thou that they dare be so bold as to put out that word by himselfe out of the text: and when they read thy Epistles they are halfe ashamed to see what a bloo­dy man thou art, for thou art all in blood, blood, inso­much as twenty times at least thou art stil vpon blood as though there were no saluation but by blood, and as though blessed Maries milke had no merit at all. It seemes that as thou wert a persecutor, and deligh­ted in blood afore thy conuersion, so thou beares stil a bloody minde: but now behold these meek, & milde and merciful men (the Iesuits,) a generation that loues no cruelty, nor seekes to shed no blood (as most nati­ons of the world can wel beare witnesseWitnesse in England the Powder trea­son: In France the last Kings death: the pre­sent warres in Sweden and broyles in Po­land, &c.) these sweet and gratious fathers being possessed with a better spi­rit, are weary of blood and do rather choose and desire milke to quench the spiriuall thirst of their soules.

If they would vtter what their prophane hearts thinke, or discouer openly what they mutter amongst themselues, we should heare them publish euen such diuinity as this is: a taste whereof besides the present poems, you shall read anon.

But now for his conclusion, this blaspheming Ie­suit dare proceed and turne his speech to God, and not fearing the commaundement that forbids him to take Gods name in vaine, vnder paine of standing guilty, at the barre of Gods iustice, he dare offer to a­buse the name of God, with such a prayer as this.

O Lord thou must pardon me though I cry aloud, for it is not blood wil serue my soule, I long for milke, and am so a thirst, that I may not keepe silence: and why Lord shouldest thou so long keepe me a Petitioner in this case? I am bet­ter then the nayles, yet they had blood inough: I am not so vilde as cloutes, yet they wanted nei­ther milke nor blood.

Wat kinde of men are these Iesuits, or what a God is their God, to whome they dare present such a prayer as this? surely they thinke as basely of him as they doe highly of thēselues, or else they neuer durst thus insult ouer him, & thus abuse him, as after he hath told him plainely that his blood is drinke indeede, and com­maunded them that are athirst, to come and drinke of that well of water of life, to come and tell him to his face that their soules thirst for milke, and they must haue it? belike these crawling frogs thinke that they haue such a God as they may leape and play vpon at their pleasure: But O thou that dwellest in heauen laugh thē to scorne, haue them and their wickednes in derision: and ei­ther work them to repentance and visible conuersion, or bring them to vengeance and iust confusion.

The Iesuit concludes with a comparison of himself to the nailes and launce that pierced Christs blessed body, and the cloathes that toucht him in his infancy and death: & indeed the first comparison is not much vnequall, for the Iesuits are most like to nailes & laun­ces in Christs body; for seeing the holy Ghost tells vs [Page 98] that wicked men by their sinnes did and do pierce Christ: then the Iesuits who by their Atheismes, cru­elties, periuries, equiuocations, treasons, haue beene sharper nailes and launces in Christs body, and grea­ter dishonourers of his religion, then any other sort of men, (if the voyce of all Christendome, & the testi­mony of their owne bretheren be true) then the Iesu­its I say are not vnfitly resembled to nayles and laun­ces: and indeed they that are thornes in the eyes, and pricks in the side of all princes and states where they come: lesse maruell though they be like the nailes and speare in Christs body! therefore let the Iesuit please himselfe in this comparison, as long as he will, we en­uy it not.

But for the second, that he is better then the clothes that were about those two blessed bodies, I say but this: that either the Iesuits are farre more holy then the Prophet Esay, or els he farre more humble in his owne eyes then they: for he professeth in his own & the churches name, that they were no better thē the filthiest cloute that euer was, euen a menstruous cloth. But saith the Iesuit, I am better then the best cloth that euer was, for though we holde that God hath gi­uen lasting vertue to his word and sacraments, but none that we know to rags, or clouts: yet we acknow­ledge that as farre as clothes may one excell another, those that touched the bodies of our Lord & his mo­ther, are the most pretious, and if we could be sure we had them, we would esteeme them aboue cloth of gold: we therefore wonder how a man comming be­fore [Page 99] the Lord his God, dare in his prayer make himself better then those clothes, especially hearing the Pro­phet cry before him, O Lord al our righteousnes is like a menstruouse clout. If our best be so filthy, what is our nature, what is our sin? if he answer that this is but a ca­uill, for he meanes that being a man he is therfore ca­pable of grace & saluation, which the clothes are not, I thinke so also: But then why doth he enuy that milke and blood should touch them? If he meane the mate­riall and reall milke and blood that were in the bodies of Christ and his mother, then he is more then mad, to enuy the nayles, the launce, the cloutes, for they did touch them, and yet he cannot, and if he complaine that he may not, we aske him why then did not the A­postles take more carefull order to gather vp and pre­serue that milke and blood, or if they did not, at least why did they not complaine of the want of them, as he doth heere? surely either they had too little deuo­tion, or the Iesuits too much superstition.

But if he meane the vertue, merite and efficacy of the blood & milkë, then let him answer vs two short questions: First, what spiritual vertue and power had that milke, what did it worke in our saluation, (more then the milke of another woman coulde) what did it merit for vs? what the blood did we knowe and most willingly acknowledge: but what the milke did or can doe, if the Iesuites can tell and teache vs, we will not refuse to learne: But supposing that it had much ver­tue as the blood (as the Iesuite affirmes, but farre be it from vs once so to thinke) then secondly wee aske [Page 100] him doth he thinke the nayles, launce, & cloutes were partakers of the vertue and merrit of that blood, if he doe, let him shew where he receiued such diuinity: if not, then to what end complaines he to God in such a fashion.

Lord I am better then the nayles and cloutes, and yet they had blood and milke inough, but I dye for thirst.

If this be not to take Gods name in vaine, and that in a high measure, we appeale to all Christian men of reasonable iudgement.

And thus at last are we come to an end of this Iesu­iticall Gospell, the impiety whereof I now remit to the censure of the Christian world:

And for my conclusion, least any should say that this is but one priuate Iesuits deede, and therfore may not preiudice the whole society of Iesuits, and much lesse the religion of Popery.

To these I answere, the booke is allowed and hath bene twise printed, and stands approued by Posseuine, amongst good and catholike authors. 2. Shew what Iesuit or other popish doctor hath reproued, or what Inquisitor or other popish magistrate hath censured this wickednesse. 3. Which is worst of all, It is no more in effect then others of them haue taught or ap­proued, though not in so open & apparant a fashion: But let any Christian man iudge what diuinity is laide downe in these points that follow.

1. The Papists haue a booke called the Mariale, It hath [Page 101] bene obiected vnto them that in that booke it is thus said: Salomon saith, the name of the Lord is a strong tower, This hath bene long a­goe laid to their charge in Catalogo, te­stium veritati [...] edit toais 1 [...]08 Prou 18.10. But Salomon knew little of the Virgin Ma­ry let vs therfore say, the name of our lady is a strong tower, let the sinner flye vnto her, and he shall be saued: and againe: thou art a sinner, flye then to the name of Mary, that alone shall serue to heale thee: and againe,

The Lord was with Mary, and Mary with the Lord in the same labour and same work of our redemption for the Mother of mercy helped the father of mercy, in the worke of our saluation: and therevpon was it spoken of the first woman, It is not good for man to be alone, let vs make him a helper: But why then saith God, Esay 63 I haue troden the wine presse alone, and of all people, there was no man with me: the booke answereth, It is true Lord that thou sayest, there was no man with thee: but there was a woman with thee, which bore all the wounds in her heart, that thou didst beare in thy body.

Loe heere a peece of rare diuinity! Salomon is blamed for ignorance, that he knew but little of the Virgin, & in a sort is rebuked for saying the name of our Lord, and not rather the name of our Lady is a strong tower: and though no man did, yet a woman (namely Mary) did helpe Christ to tread the winepresse of Gods wrath, and was fellow worker with God, in the worke of our redemption.

This booke stands vnconfuted, vncondemned, vn­reproued, by the Iesuits or the Romish Church, till this day, for ought that I can yet find, yet hath it bene [Page 102] many yeares laid to their charge.

2. Againe, the Papists haue a booke, they call our La­dies psalter,Vide Psalte­ [...]ium beate Vir­gin [...]s Mariae: [...]mpressum cum Psalterio Cutercienfi, Par. [...]rca an. 1520 Extat etiam i­dem Psalteriū, [...]d verbum. a­pud Chemniti­um, in Exa­mine concil Trident: in parte [...]. pag. 149. e­diti onts franco furt. 1596. printed at Paris in the yeare 1520. or thereabouts, wherein euery one of the 150. psalmes are in whole or in part turned from Dominus to Domina, that is from God or Christ, to our Lady, as In the first psalme.

Blessed is the man that loueth thy name O Virgin Mary, &c.

In the 19 Psalme.

The heauens declare thy glory O Virgin Mary &c.

In the 29 Psalme,

Bring vnto our Lady O you mighty, bring vnto our Lady worship and honour &c.

In the 51. Psalme,

Haue mercy vpon me O Lady, thou that art called the Mother of mercy, and according to the bowels of thy mercyes, cleanse me from all my sinnes, poure out thy grace vpon me, and take not thy wonted mercy from me, &c.

In the 57 psalme.

Haue mercy vpon me O Lady, haue mercy vpon me, for my heart is ready to search out thy will, and in the shadow of thy wings will I rest &c.

In the 68. psalme.

Let our Lady arise and her enemies shall be scattered, &c.

In the 72 Psalme.

Lord giue thy iudgement to the King, and thy mercy to our Lady his mother.

In the 94 Psalme.

God is the God of reuenge, but thou O Lady the mo­ther of mercy, dost bowe him to take pitty &c.

In the 96 Psalme.

O sing vnto our Lady a new song for she hath done maruailous thinges, &c.

In the 110 Psalme.

The Lord said vnto our Lady, Sit thou mother at my right hand &c.

Thus I might goe ouer all the Psalmes, but as he be­gan he ends in the last words of the last Psalme.

Let euery thing that hath breath praise our Lady.

Now this booke stands not onely vncontrolled,Gregor. de Va [...] in vol, de reb [...] fidei controuersis, sect. 5. lib. [...] Idolotria cap. 10. Bernardinus de Bustis, in Marials part 3. ser. 3. but rather euen defended by the Iesuits, and those of the principall.

3 Againe, a famous Fryer & well approued amongst them, preacht this doctrine in the pulpit (amongst ma­ny other, little better.)

A man may appeale from God himselfe to the Virgin Mary, If any Man feele himselfe agrieued at the iu­stice of God, seeing God hath deuided his king­dome with her, for whereas God hath Iustice and mercy, he hath reserued Iustice to himselfe, to be exercised in this world as it pleaseth him: but Mer­cy he hath committed to his mother: If therefore any man finde himselfe agrieued in the Court of Gods Iustice, let him appeale to the Court of mer­cy, of his mother.

This diuinity was so well relisht in the Romish Church, that after he had preacht it, he publisht it vnder the Popes owne Patronage: and the booke was againe printed within these three yeares: but what say the Iesuits to it, they testifie that this booke is a learned and godly booke, full of goodnesse and piety.

Fourthly, Horatius Tursellinus himselfe, a Iesuit of good esteeme amongst them,Horatius Turellinus: in Hi­ [...]toria virg. lau­ [...]tanae in prefat writes thus,

Almighty God hath made the Virgin his mother, as farre as he may lawfully, partaker of his diuine pow­er and Maiesty.

Now surely if God haue made her fellow with him of his diuine maiesty, lesse maruel if Christ haue made her fellow in the worke of redemption.Posseuinus in [...]it H. And this booke written by a Iesuit, hath publike allowance, and is dedicated to Cardinall Aldobrandino.

Fiftly, a great Spanish Doctor, and professor of di­uinity of his order, writes thus.

Iohn. Chri­ [...]ostomus a visi­ [...]atione, de vertis domine to 2 [...]ib. 2 cap. 2.We haue often seene and heard of very many, who in their extreame dangers haue called vpon Mary, and presently were deliuered: for oft times safety is sooner obtained by calling vpon the name of Mary, then by calling vpō the name of Iesus Christ the sonne of God.

Posse [...]inus [...] apparatu [...]icro lit. lAnd this booke is both dedicated to Pope Clement the 8. & receiues publike allowāce by the Iesuits: his name is Chrisostome, as tho he were a golden mouthed speaker: but if this be his doctrine, that her mediation is as powerfull, or rather more then is her sonnes, it is pitty but he should be calld and accounted a leaden [Page 105] mouthed wretch:

By all these & many more that (as the learned know) might easily be produced, it may appere that this blas­pheming Iesuit Bonarscius, in this his detestable com­parison, of her milk with Christs blood, saith no more in effect then others both of his religion & perticular sect, and therefore it may be iustly concluded, this is the doctrine and diuinity not of him alone, but of the Iesuits, and of the popish Church it selfe, as long as it stands approued or vncondemned by them: Now then if this be the diuinity of the Romish Church.

1. That a Creatures milke may be mingled with Christs blood in the matter & merit of our saluation.

2. That it helpes and heales spirituall sores of the soule as well as the blood.

3. That though no man did, yet a woman did help God in the worke of our saluation.

4. That the Psalmes may be turned from Lord to Lady.

5. That a man may appeale from God to the Vir­gin Mary.

6. That God hath deuided his kingdome with her, keeping Iustice to himselfe, and surrendring Mercy to her.

[Page 106]7. That God hath made her pertaker with himselfe of his diuine power and Maiesty.

8. That a mans prayers are often heard, rather by and through her, then Christ Iesus.

If these I say be the doctrines of the present Church of Rome, then let the Christian world be pleased to obserue,

1. How farre the present Romish Church, is degene­rate from the antient.

2. How great cause we and al Churches of God haue to seperate from such a sinagogue.

3. How iustly they may be pronounced Antichristian, who thus hainously disparage the person and office of the Mediator.

4. How vntrue it is that by many is suggested that the present religion of Rome is much reformed & re­fined at this day: for it is most certaine, in the for­mer times these would haue beene condemned as blasphemies euen in the Romish Church it selfe.

And lastly you of this most Honorable and reuerend assembly of the church & Cōmon-wealth of Eng­land may here see what cause there is to pronounce the true Papists Hereticks, considering the present [Page 107] Church holds not onely these but many other fun­damentall errors, both for matter of faith, and of gouernement, which are perticularized in my E­pistle.

And considering that all meanes haue beene vsed, to reclaime and reforme her, but all is in vaine, (for she is that Babilon that will not be healed: wherefore it is our duty to forsake her and leaue her to the iust hand of God.

Thus shall we follow the counsell of the Prophet in the like case, who saith: we would haue healed Babylon but she vvould not be healed: let vs forsake her and goe euery man to his owne Countrey, for her Iudgement is come vp to heauen and lifted vp to the cloudes.