A SURVEY OF THE NEW RELIGION, DETECTING MANY GROSS ABSURDITIES WHICH IT IMPLIETH.  
Set forth by Matthew Kellison doctor and Professor of Divinity.  
Divided into eight books.  Math. 7. 
Nunquid colligunt de spinis vuas, aut de tribulis ficus?  
Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?  2 Tim 3. 
Vltra non proficient: insipientia enim eorum manifesta erit omnibus.  
They shall prosper no further: for their folly shall be manifest to al.  
Printed at Douai, by LAURENCE KELLAM, at the sign of the holy Lamb. 1603.   

Approbatio.  
VISIS trium S. Theologiae Doctorum Anglorum testimonijs, quibus testantur hunc librum cui titulus: A Survey of the new religion, à Rdo. D. Matthaeo Kellisono S. Theologiae Doctore & Professore conscriptum, nihil continere, quod fidei, aut bonis moribus adversetur: sed plurima, quae ad fidem Catholicam stabiliendam, & Sectariorum errores profligandos faciunt; dignum censui, quem & ego calculo meo approbarem.  
Astum Duaci 25. Julij 1603 Georgius Coluenerius S. Theologiae Licentiatus & Professor: & librorum in Academia Duacena visitator.   

TO THE MOST HIGH, AND MIGHTY Prince, JAMES the first, by the grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, defender of the Faith.  
YOU will marvel peradventure (most dread Sovereign) how a Priest, whose very name hath now of long time, been odious in your Realm of England, dareth be so bold, as to appear in the presence of so Mighty a Prince, sitting in a throne of Majesty and terror, crowned with a Diadem of greater glory than hitherto hath stood upon the King of England his head, & holding in his victorious hand a new Sceptre, by which he commandeth all the Bretaigne Islands, & like a Neptune, is Lord of the Ocean sea, which honour was reserved for your sacred Majesty, the first King james of England, the only King james of England, and the only King of Scotland, and England. And it will seem strange unto your Highness, to see one of my coat & condition, amid the congratulations of all the Princes of Europe, saluting you with so long a poem; and even then when their honourable Legates, have so great and so importaunte affairs, to communicate unto your Majesty from their Lords and Masters, to intrude into your Chamber of Presence, so rude a Messenger, and evil-spoken Legate of mine, who speaketh only by signs of written words, and demandeth audience in his masters name, who is fain to send because he dares not come: not that he doubteth of your Grace's Clemency, or his own innocency, but because such as he is, having been for so long a time, forbidden all access both to their Prince and country, he dareth not approach so near unto your Gracious presence, though he be assured, that you are as mild a Prince, as mighty, and now as mighty, as any Prince of Europe. Yea, I may be thought peradventure, to want both Face & forehead, who neither blush, nor am abashed, to present so great a Prince with so little a present, as is a book of Paper ill printed, because in a strange Country, and as ill indited, because by one who hath lived longer out of his country then in it; and even at that time also, when all the Princes of the Christian world, present your Highness, with the rarest and richest gifts, which sea and land can afford. But if it shall please your Highness, to give ear to your lowest subject, he will not doubt but to clear himself of all these three incivilities, which maybe supposed to have been by him committed, and he will count it no small honour, to be permitted to speak for himself, before so Potente a Prince, and dares avouch it to be no dishonour for your Highness to stoop to so low a subject, because Princes, who by ascending can mount no higher, as being in temporal jurisdiction next unto God, by condescending to their subjects, do arise in greatness, because therein only, they are greater than themselves, in overcoming themselves. And from the first the Emperor Adrian will excuse me, who commended unto Minutius his Proconsul of Asia, as a thing of importance, ne nomen condemnaretur sed crimen: that the name should not be condemned, but the crime. For, 
Tert. Apol●. c. ●.  saith Tertulian against them that hated Christians, in whom they could find no other thing to hate, but the name, christian, which they should have loved: S● nominis odium est, quis nominis reatus? quae accusatio vocabulorum? nisi aut barbarum quid sonnet, aut infaustum, aut maledicum, aut impudicum. If the name he hated, what is the guilt of the name? what accusation is there of words? unless they sound of barbarism, or unluckines, or malediction, or unchasteness. And therefore if Preesthood be no offence, the name Priest, is devoid of harm, and if Preesthood be no treason, a Priest in that he is a Priest, can be no traitor: Unless we will account Christ and his Apostles traitors, who were Preestes, and the first priests of the new law, & esteem after the same manner, of all the ancient priests both of England, and other countries, whom Kings and Emperors have honoured as their worthy, and have loved as their most faithful subjects; who were so far from being enemies to the crown, that from their hands all Christian Kings almost, have hitherto received their consecration, crowns, and Sceptres. As for the second supposed, or rather presumed incivility, that is so far from deterring me at this time, that I think now to be the very time, when the Legates of the Kings of earth, in their Lords & Master's name, wish you a long and a Prosperous Reign, to salute you from the Great Monarch of heaven, whose Legate I am, in that I am a Priest, though a miserable sinner, in that I am a Man, and your majesties lowest subject, in that I am an Englishman. Nether can I think, that the Legate of the great king of heaven, whose Legacy you shall understand a none (your Highness will pardon such High speeches, because it is the manner of Legates to use them, for their Master's honour) shallbe denied audience of your so gracious Majesty, when the Ambassadors of the Kings of earth, who are but his Viceroys, lieutenants, and tenants at will, are hard with so favourable a countenance, and such attentive ears. And if I were never so base, yet is now the time of Coronation, when it is lawful for your basest subject, to congratulate your new and high dignity, and when the poorest man in the Realm hath as good leave to cry Vive le Roy, God save King james, as any noble man or Pere of your Realm. Nether is the third obstacle any obstacle at all: because although my present be small and your parsonage great, yet to accept of a subjects little present, is not to diminish, but to a grandize your Greatness; because in that, you are greater than your self, and likest the Greatest, who took in as good part the widows mite, as the richest offering. But yet I would not have your Majesty to esteem of this my book, only as of a bare bundle of papers; because I present you withal, that humble heart, and sincere affection, which a subject can bear, or own unto his Sovereign, and with my affection, I offer myself as your majesties most lowly & faithful servant; which is a gift so great, be the giver never so vile, that the great King of heaven requireth, yea desireth no more at our hands, but esteemeth that we give all, when we give our selves, and that we give no little, when we give our All, be it never so little. Nether is my present itself to be misprised, neither can it of such a Prince, because the book is not my present, it is but the box, the present is that which it containeth. And if your Majesty demand of me what that is? I answer; not gold, nor ivory of India, not rich, and orient pearl, for with such treasures your England, like an India aboundeth; but it is that which is more worth, and which your India only wanteth; and what is that? It is religion? the worship of God, the Salvation of your soul, the safety of your Subjects, the health of the body of the Realm of which you are the Head, the strength of your Kingdom, the peace of your people, and the richest pearl of your crown. This is the subject of my discourse, these are the contents of my book, and this is my gift and present, which amongst so many gifts, which by so many and so mighty Princes are presented unto your Highness, I offer with all humility, hoping, yea persuading myself, that such a gift as Religion, can not but be grateful unto that Prince, who is the defender of the faith, & Protector of Religion. And because this unhappy age hath been more fruitful than profitable, in devising of religions, in so much that, as all is not gold that glisters, so now all is not religion, which is called so; lest I may be thought to offer Counterfeit for currante, and heresy for true religion, it is the Catholic Religion (most noble Prince) which I present, and which my book containeth, and by many arguments as occasion serveth, not only proveth, but also convinceth to be the only sincere, and true Christian religion; and unmasking the new religion by a severe, yet sincere Examination, declareth it to be nothing else but error, and heresy, though under the painted face of a Reformed Religion, it hath deceived some part of the world, and especially your little world, England; which the Poet chose rather to call a world by itself, separated from the greater world, then, a part or parcel of it; because like a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and little world, it containeth compendiously, and in a lesser room (which also is a grace) all commodities and perfections, which in the greater are dispersed. But because I am more in examining and refuting the new religion, then in confirming the old (because the good corn groweth easily, when the weeds are extirpated) I entitle it a survey of the new religion. And if your Majesty demand of me, why I dedicate such a book unto you? I can not want an answer, because I can not want a reason. Flavius Vegetius will tell your Highness, that it hath been ever the custom, to dedicate books to Kings and Emperors (as he himself did to Valentinian th'Elder) because (sayeth he) neither is any thing well begun, unless after God the King favour it, neither do any things, beseem Kings better, than books, who as they govern all, so if it were possible, should know all. For as in the head which guideth the whole body, are all the senses, so a Prince, the head of the people, should be endued with all sciences; and as the Son, because it illuminateth the planets which under it rule, and guide the inferior world, is replenished with more light than they, so the King who is the Son of his own world and Kingdom, from whom not only the people, but inferior Princes also, are to receive their light and direction, should be illuminated with a greater light, and knowledge, than any of his subjects: and therefore Cirus was wont to say, that he is not worthy an Empire, who is not better, and wiser than the rest; which also in effect King Solomon surnamed wise, affirmed, when he gave that wholesome counsel to his fellow-Kinges: 
Sap. 6.  Si delectamini sedibus, & sceptris (o Reges populi) diligite sapientiam, ut in aeternum regnetis: If you be delighted in thrones and sceptres (o Kings) love you wisdom, that you may reign for ever: and to signify this by an Emblem, God himself gave his people for their first King, no other than Saul, who was higher than the rest of the people, by the head and shoulders. And seeing that your Majesty is not only a King, but a learned King also, as by many monuments of your rare wit, and learning, which the learnedst admire, doth plainly appear; to whom ought I of duty to consecrate this my work, but to such a King, who for his authority, can protect it, and for his wisdom, can judge of it. Yea the very subject of my book which is religion, seemed to require of right no other Patron, than your most Excellent Majesty, who by office, and Title, are the protector of Religion, the champion of the Church, and defender of the Faith. This common congratulation also, not only of your own little world, but also of all the Christian world, this universal joy, these triumphs, these bonefyers, which the frenchman calleth feux de joy have moved and stirred me up, to show some sign also of my affection and joy, wherewith my heart is so full, that my tongue can not be silent. All rejoice (most Gracious Prince) at your Coronation, as though it concerned all, and the hope, which is generally conceived of your Grace's Bounty, hath not only passed your seas, but the Alps also. The world admires the sweet providence of the Almighty towards your Majesty, who even from your infancy hath protected you from many imminent dangers, as though he had reserved you (as no doubt he did) for the crown of England. The world expected either civil wars, or foreign invasions, after the death of her Majesty of late memory, because the Heir apparent was not named, and though all men had their eyes, and expectations, and desires also, fixed on your highness person, yet they feared that which they desired, and hoped not without fear; and yet conscience directing your Nobles, and God governing their conscience, without any blood shed, without contradiction, yea with great applause of all, your Highness is placed peaceably in your Regal throne; and which is rare, England was so enamoured with your Princely virtues, and so moved by your undoubted Title, that she sent for you, as for her loving spouse, and hath betrothed herself so fast unto you, that the death of your person, can not dissolve this Marriage; because her marriage with your person, is the spousage with your noble posterity. These great favours and benedictions of th' Almighty towards your Majesty, make the world to think, that God hath culled you out for some good purpose, and that your Highness to show yourself grateful unto him, will employ yourself in some honourable service for that Church and faith, of which you are called the defender: in so much that if the general voice grounded only on the great expectation, which commonly is conceived of you, were as true as common, I should not need at this time to be the Suppliaunte for the freedom, and liberty of your distressed Catholics. And although your Catholic subjects at home, have not yet obtained so great a benefit, yet so rich hopes, and so firm confidence, do they repose in your Grace's Bounty, that from the first day of your reign, they hoped, that your Majesty will prove another Moses, who shall deliver your Realms and Kingdoms, from a worse than Egyptian captivity, I mean heresy, which makes the understanding a slave to error, under a show of verity; yea that you will be unto them another losue, who shall bring them to their land of promise, the Catholic Church, which is the land of all God's promises; and that after a long famine more than jewishe, or Saguntine, not of body but of soul, you shallbe another joseph, who shall store us by your wisdom and authority, with the spiritual provision of the true word of God, true faith, and sacraments, by which the soul is nourished; Yea that you will be another Constantine to appease the boisterous storm of a long persecution, and to repair the ruins of the Catholic faith and Church of your Realms, of England, Scotland and Ireland. And I also armed with the same hope, and bidden by your Bounty, and constrained by necessity, to be bold: in the name of all your Catholic subjects of whom I am the least; in the name of the Catholic Church, of which I am a member and you a defender, in the name of all Catholic Princes, yea of all the Christian world, which hath conceived such an expectarion of your Gracious Goodness; in the name of the Great King of heaven and earth, by whom you reign, and by whom you were preserved and reserved for this Crown & sceptre; that it would please your Majesty, to cast a Gracious regard upon the great affliction of your loyal, natural, and most ancient subjects, the Catholics of your Realm, and to bend your most compationate ears, to their humble & suppliaunte petition, who desire neither lands, nor livings, nor offices, nor pardon for offences, but liberty for their conscience, whose restraint they count more grievous, than imprisonment, yea death of their bodies, and not to contristate them with a heavy repulse, at this time especially, when even thieves and murderers, are pardoned so Graciously. Our zeal towards Christ, & his Church, the love of our Religion, the desire of the salvation of your majesties Person of your loving Spouse, our most Gracious Queen, of your Royal Children our Noble Lords, of your Kingdom also our dear Country, moveth us to desire your Highness, to restore wholly tha● Religion, which your Glorious predecessors maintained with Crown, Sceptre, & Sword, as for the defence the● of, they were all sworn at their sacred Coronation. But if it shall not stands with your Grace's pleasure, to grant v● so much, we most humbly desire o● our knees, liberty only of our conscience, and Religion, which the nature o● both requireth, Nether (as we hope) will your Majesty condemn us of to great presumption, for demanding that, which hath been so long denied us, because there is no Prescription against conscience, when conscience is enforced and your princely Prudence well perceiveth, that necessity on our part is importune, Bounty on your part imbold●neth, and the Religion on your most Noble progenitors part, for which we plead, promiseth a Gracious grant For if it much skilleth, fro● what tre● the graff or fruit is taken, why shall it not much import, to come of a Catholic Race? True it must be, which the Poet sayeth: 
Forts creantur fortibus, & bonis; 
Hor Flac.   
Est in ●●uencis, est in equis, Patrum  
Virtus, nec imbecillem feroces  
Progenerant Aquilae columbam.  I grant that Religion is supernatural, and is not transfused with flesh and blood, but infused by God, with consent of our will, and operation of Grace; but yet children are naturally bend, to like of that in which their parents have excelled. And truly, for zeal towards the Catholic Religion, almost all the noble Kings of Scotland, which were your highness progenitors, are most famous; as the Valiant and noble Malcolmus, and the blessed saint Marguerite his spouse, 
Histoire abbregée par david ●hambre.  King David who builded 15. Abbeys, & erected 4. Bishoprickes, james the fourth your Great Grandfather, surnamed protector of the faith, james the fift your Grandfather, a most just King, and liberal to the poor; to omit divers others not only of Scotland, but also of England, yea and France also, and namely that warlike and most Catholic House of Guise, to which you are allied; but of all, your Glorious Mother is most renowned; who, as for her goodly parsonage, she deserved to b● Spouse to a King of France, and for he● Princely qualities and Royal blood, wa● worthy a double crown in Earth; so fo● her Zeal in religion, and more than manly Fortitude showed for the defence o● the same at her death, She deserved the third Crown in Heaven, called Aureola Martyrum. Is it possible then, tha● your most Excellent Majesty, beholding such rare virtue in your Mother should not desire it in yourself? Or tha● you should not love to live in that Religion, for which she loved to die? I have hard of some that were belonging to her, and entertained by her, when she was rather detained, then entertained in England, that she spent many howen in prayer, shed many tears of sorrow gave great alms of charity, and used divers means of providence, that your Majesty might be made a Catholic, and amongst other She devised the means that you should be baptised, 
Nicol Burn in his preface to king Iames the sixth.  and confirmed by a Catholic bishop. That ran still in her mind, that was deepest i● her heart, and oftenest in her mouth, fo● that she fetched many a sigh, and sighe● out many a wish: and as living for thi● she shed many tears, so dying, no doubt, she offered no little part of her innocent blood; which as it crieth vengeance before God against her enemies, so like a pleasing sacrifice (as we hope) it crieth for conversion of your Majesty, and your Kingdoms, to that religion, for which it was shed. So that, as saint Ambrose said once to saint Monica, who was always praying, weeping, and wishing for saint Austin's her sons conversion, who then was a Manichee; Filius tantarum lachrimarum perire non potest, I may say of your Highness; to wit, that the son of such a Mother, and Prince of such a Princess, and Inheritor of such virtues, such examples, such tears, such wishes, can never perish, that is can not but be a Catholic. This her zeal towards religion, these her desires & wishes, these her prayers, and tears, and above all, her Glorious Martyrdom; will ever be before your Grace's eyes, to move your heart, if not to admit wholly the Catholic religion, at least to permit it, at least not to persecute it, which she loved her self so well, and wished to your Highness, so heartily. And truly (most Gracious Liege) such is our repose in your goodness, that if there were no other motives, than your Glorious mother's example, your Catholic subjects misery, and your own innate clemency, we would not at all despair, of a grant, of our petition; but seeing that, the thing we request, concerneth not only our good, but your grace's honour also, and the true felicity of your Kingdom, we hope confidently, not to suffer a repulse in that, in which your Highness also hath a part, and for which not only we, are humble suppliants, but yourself also, to your self, and for yourself, are an Intercessor. And first, he grant of our petition, shallbe most honourable for your most Excellent Majesty. King Lucius was the first king Christian of our Country, and the first king, that laboured in the conversion of it, with Pope Eleutherius, by whose Counsel, and preachers which he sent, he extirpated idolatry, and planted Christian Religion: and for this glorious fact, his name and fame, is, and ever shallbe, most renowned, both in heaven and earth. King Ethelbert was the second king, who by the means of Pope Gregory (by Popes always countries have been converted) and twelve Monks of saint Benedictes Order, the second time restored this Country again, unto the same Christian, and Catholic Religion, the which by the invasion of the Saxons, was again become Idolatricall, and pagan; and he is no less glorious, before God and men, for so honourable an enterprise. But if your Highness shallbe the third King, who shall again reduce this country to the same ancient Religion, you shallbe as much more glorious, and your name as much more renowned, 
Th' 2.2.4.10.4.6.  as heresy is worse than Paganism, and more hardly extinguished. William the Conqueror, from whom your Majesty is worthily descended, is reckoned amongst the Worthies of the world, and written in the list, and catalogue of the most Warlike Kings, for that famous conquest which he made of your little world. But if your Highness shall get the conquest of heresy, your honour shallbe as far more greater than his, as the conquest of men's souls and minds, is more glorious, then subduing of bodies. In such a Conquest, the war is Christ's, the victory is his and yours, the crown yours only, not in earth only, but in heaven also. You have the occasion offered (o mighty Prince) by which you may make your name and fame immortal, let not such an opportunity pass; if you can achieve so glorious a Conquest, as you can if you will (because the body of your Realm will follow the will of their head) you shall be more Glorious than all the Kings of England before you. If it please your Majesty, to set before your eyes, those Glorious Champions of the Church, Constantine, Theodosius, Pepine, Charles, all surnamed Great, more glorious for their victories over heresy and idolatry, then for conquests of Countries, more renowned for propagating the ancient Catholic Religion (for it was not Lutheranisme nor Caluinisme which they promoted) then for enlarging their dominions; you will easily perce●e, that it is much greater honour, for your Highness to consort with them, rather than with Constantius, and Valens, those Ariane Emperors, enemies to that Church, which they defended, & enriched, and Leo Isauricus, & Constantinus Copronymus, those infamous Image breakers. And if you please to call to mind the Catalogue of the noble Kings of England, Lucius, Ethelbert, Egbert, oswald, oswine, Alfred, and many others before the Conquest, with William the Conqueror, and so many Henry's, Edwards, and Richard's, after the Conquest, all your Noble predecessors; so mighty in force, so rich in treasure, so noble of birth, so fortunate in wars, so courageous in fight, so glorious in victories, so wise in Government, so just in punishing, so mercitall in pardoning, so upright in life, so zealous in Religion; who built so many goodly Monasteries, erected so stately Churches, founded so learned Colleges, enacted so wholesome laws and wise statutes, and got so many, and so strange victories in France, and other Countries, even unto Palestine; your Princely wisdom will easily see, that greater wilbee your honour to joiney ourself to these worthies, then to stand so nakedly accompanied, with three only of your Predecessors, who have protected the new Religion, and ruined what they have builded; whereof the first was not wholly for the new Religion, because by Parliament he enacted six Catholic Articles, and at his death founded a Mass for his soul, the second was so young, that he was rather overruled than ruled, the last was but a woman: and though they wanted not Gifts of nature, which might beseem princely authority, yet for persecuting the Catholic faith, and following other paths than their predecessors had trodden, their names are not eternised with that immortal fame, which their predecessors have purchased by their Religious Acts. Secondly (Redoubted Prince) the Catholic Religion will be greater security, for you temporal State. For● your Highness dare rely upon them who by Religion, 
Cal. l. 3. Inst c. 19 §. 14. l 4. ●. to § 5.23. 27.  may disobey you● Laws and Ordinances (as I have in my sixth book demonstrated) much mor● may you put your trust and confidence in your Catholic subjects, whom conscience and religion, bindeth to obedience. For they are taught by Religion, that Authority is of God, 
1. Pet. 2. Rons. 13.  and that in conscience they are subject unto it, and bound to obey kings, though otherwise difficile and hard to please, not only for fear, but for conscience also. And this obedience they give not only to Christian, but also to pagan Kings, such as all were, when saint Peter, and saint Paul commanded us to obey them, 
E●. Eus.  We are taught (said saint Policarpe to the Proconsul) to give to higher powers that honour which is dew to them, and not hurtful to us. 
Apol. c. 3. & 〈◊〉 S. apulan.  We (said Tertulian to the ethnics) pray for the Emperor, and reverence him next to God, and more than we do your Gods. To be brief, (as I should be with a King, if the matter did not enforce me to be longer than I should be) give us (sayeth saint Austin) such judges, such magistrates, 
Epist ●. ad M●r ellinun.  such soldiers, such subjects, as our Religion requireth, and Princes shall reign securely, and their kingdoms shall flourish more happily, than Plato's common wealth. And because Religion, good, or bad, beareth a great sway in the rule of man's life; the Professors of the new Religion, must needs be more prone to disobedience, and rebellion, than we; because Religion, which serveth for a bridle to us, is a Spur to them. Wherefore by Catholics, all your Predecessors have been served with great fidelity, both in war and peace: and your glorious Mother, if she were living in Earth, as she is better living in. Heaven, would not let to witness, what affection she hath found amongst the English Catholics, and would warrant your Grace, that they will never be false to the Son, who have been so true to the Mother. But if your highness doubt of our fidelity, we will bind ourselves by corporal oath, to obey your laws in all temporal causes, and to defend your Royal Person, your Dear Spouse our Gracious Queen, and your towardlie Children, our Noble Lords, with the last drop of our blood: and this our oath we shall be contented to divulge to all the Princes of Europe, yea all the Christian world. And as your Grace may account of us as of your surest, so not of your fewest nor weakest subjects; for notwithstanding this long persecution, we are so many, 
Apalog. c. 37.  that as Tertulian said to the Pagans, of the Christianes' of his time; we fill your Courts, your Universities, your Cities, your Towns, your Villages, yea your prisons, not for thefts or murders, but for Religion; only we have left the Churches to the Ministers, because in them is practised and preached a Religion, which our consciences can not brook. Yea a greater part are we, than any particular sect in your majesties Realm, and we are linked in Religion to all Catholic Princes and countries about you, who will be more loving neighbours, if they see that we their brethren, sinned this desired favour at your Grace's hands: and the noblest and mightiest of them, will be more desirous to join in marriage with your Royal posterity: whereby how your Kingdom shallbe strengthened, and your Dominions enlarged, your Princely wisdom easily perceueth, and you have an example in the noble House of Austria. Your Noble Brother of France that now reigneth, may be a precedent in this matter, who though he was once an enemy to the Catholic Religion, yet findeth more faithful correspondence in his Catholic subjects, then in all the rest, and by permitting both, is served of both, and serveth himself of both. Thirdly (most Gracious Sovereign) to admit the Catholic Religion, or at least to permit it, is your greatest safety for your conscience. For as you are a Prince, so are you a Christian Prince, and therefore a champion, 
cap. 4.9.  and (as the Prophet Esaie sayeth) a Foster-father of the Church; and as the Kings of France even from Clodoveus, the first Christian King of that Realm, have been called Christianissimi, for their good offices towards the Catholic Church, 
Genebrar l s. Chron. Baron. to 9 Annal.  and the kings of Spain, From Ferdinand, yea from Alphonsus, yea as some think, from Recaredus, for extirpating Arianisme, and propagating the Christian faith, 
Geneb l. 4. Chron. Sleid l 3. Georg. Lilius in Chr. Angl.  are surnamed Catholic; so the Kings of England, from King Henry the Eight, your Grace's great uncle, for his Catholic, & learned book, written against Luther, & other his most honourable services, which he performed for the Catholic Church, are called defenders of the Faith, that is, the Catholic faith. Wherefore your Majesty, first because you are a Christian King, Secondly because you● are a defender of the faith, are to see that the right worship of God, and the true Christian religion, be practised in your Realm. This the honour of God, under whom you reign, this the good of his Church, whose Champion you are, this the salvation of your people, whose King you are, this the spiritual health of the body of your Realm, whose head you are, requireth. For if in any country it be true, that the inconstaunte people, changeth with the King, in England it is most true, as we have seen by diverse changes of religion, in this Unhappy age: and so, in your Majesty, it lieth, to save or not to save your people, which so admireth your authority, and Princely virtues, that your will is their law, and your la, their rule of religion. And where can your Grace find a securer haven, for the Salvation of yourself, and your subjects, than the Catholic Church? In which so many Martyrs have died, so many Doctors have taught and preached, so many virgins have lived in flesh, like Angels, and so many saints have wrought so strange and wonderful miracles: by which so many heresies have been condemned, so many Counsels called, so many Ecclesiastical laws enacted, and such goodly order and discipline established: For which so many monasteries, Churches, Colleges, Universities, and hospitals, have been builded & founded. In which so many Emperors, Kings, and Princes have lived, reigned, died, and (as it is to be hoped also) have been saved; and against which, so many cruel persecutors, in vain have raised forces, and used torments, and so many heretics have raged and railed; which is descended from the Apostles, & can prove a continual succession of her pastors, and religion, from them, unto this day. Whereas the new Church began but yesterday, and her Preachers with her, who also can not prove their mission, nor distinguish themselves from false Prophets; whose doctrine hath all the marks of heresy, and is rather Antichristian then Christian, plucking at Christ's Divinity, spoiling him of many Honourable Titles, to wit, Redeemer, Spiritual Phifitian, Lawgiver, aeternal Priest, judge of the quick and dead, equalizing every Christian with him, making him an ignorant, desperate, and damned man: which hath neither Priest, nor sacrifice, nor in effect, any sacrament, no prayer, not so much as our Lord's prayer, no, nor a sermon, according to their doctrine, nor any of the essential parts of Religion: which is blasphemous in many points against God, injurious to State and Authority, favourable to vice, and bending to Atheism; all which pointe● I have proved in this book. But if you● majesties pleasure, or leisure, be not such as by perusing this book, to inform yourself, which is most likely to be the true Christian religion, if it shall please your Highness, to command a conference or disputation, which hath ever bee● the usual means to determine controversies, (as appeareth by the disputation's o● Helias with Baal's Prophets, 
● Reg 18.10 8. Act. 7.9 17. 18 19 20. Aug ep. 47. Ruf. l. hist  of Christ with the jew, of Saint Paul with Iewes and Gentiles, and of the ancie● doctors in Counsels, and out of Counsels, with Ethinkes and heretics) you● Majesty shall find divers of your Catholic subjects, both at home an● abroad, who will present themselves a● such a disputation, if you shall but please to command. Lastly suppose your Highness should persecute the Catholic religion (as God forbidden, so Glorious Prince should receive so fowl a disgrace) besides the dishonour where wi●● your noble Crown and Name shoul● be obscured, besides that you can not persecute this Religion, but you must mak● war against your Noble progenitor even your Glorious mother, you shou● sooner make a conquest of all the Cou● tries about you, then extirpate this Re●gion; whose nature is to gather greater force, when greatest fury, is armed against it. This palm-tree (O Mighty Prince) the more it is pressed, the higher it groweth; this Camomile the more it is trodden, the thicker it groweth; This wallnuttree the more it is beaten, the more fruitful it waxeth; this corn, by treshing, is severed from the chaff; This gold, by a fiery persecution, becometh purer, and brighter; This Ark by a raging Deluge, mountethe the higher; Killing of Catholics (most Clement Prince) is but cutting of boughs, from that tree, which reacheth from sea to sea, and this cutting is but lopping, the tree afterwards in height is taller, and in boughs fuller; and this spilling of Catholics blood, is but watering of Christ's vineyard, in which, for one Catholic cut of, many an hundred springeth up in the place. Those nero's, Domitian's, Diocletians, and Maximians, can bear witness of this, of which the last twoe, having gathered great force, and provided all the Engines and Instruments of cruelty, that a cruel heart could devise, made full account of a conquest of the Christian race, and engraved this their presumed victory in Marble pillars in Spain, with this Inscription: Diocles. iovius, Maximin. Hercules, Caess. Aug. amplificato per Orientem & Occidentem Imperi● Rom. 
Eus l. ●. c. 13.25▪ 6 29. Zon 3. par. Annal. Sur. 10.6. die to Decemb. Aidus Man post Schol in comm Caes. Bar ann 204  & nomine Christianorum deleto, qui Remp. evertebant: But they counted their Chickens, before they were hatched, triumphed before the victory, gave a blaze before their light went out, and exalted their hearts before their ruin; depriving themselves of their Empire, for the disgrace, which they conceived in such a foil, and dying a death so miserable, that it seemed the beginning of their Hell. And those your Predecessors, who have persecuted the little Flock of the Catholics of your Realm of England, would assure your Grace, if they were living, that this little part of the catholic Church, followeth the nature of the wholle● because notwithstanding so many confiscations of their goods, so many confininges, & imprisonmentes, and banishmentes of their parsons, so many tortures, and deaths of their bodies; Catholics, and Catholic priests, are more at this present in your Realm, than they were forty years since. It must be true which saint Leo avoucheth: Non minuitur persecutionibus Ecclesia, 
Sir in nat. Apost.  sed augetur, & semper Dominicus ager segete ditiori vestitur, dum grant quae singula cadunt, multiplicata nascuntur: The Church by persecutions, is not diminished but augmented; and always our Lord's field is clad with a richer Harvest, whilst the grains which fall, spring forth again more multiplied. And the reason is, because that must be performed, which Christ promised: 
Mat. 16.  Portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus illam: the gates of hell shall not prevail against her. Her enemies are dead, rotten and forgotten, she standeth sure upon a rock, always the more glorious, the more she is assaulted. But I crave pardon mosthumbly of your Gracious Clemency, for my tedious petition. The misery of our state, and the importance of our humble supplication, required a longer, but your rare Clemency and humanity (which hath already won you the hearts of your people) demanded a shorter. Wherefore I shall desire your Highness, only to imagine, that in this petition, your Catholic subjects are not alone; your noble progenitors and Predecessors, your most Glorious Mother, all the Catholic Princes, to forasmuch you are allied, and their Catholic Countries which border upon you, the whole Church of God, the saints of your Realms, the blood of Martyrs, shed in the same, & for the same, the misery of your most ancient subjects, your highness honour & security, both for the temporal & spiritual state of your Kingdom, demand this also with us. Yea this your own self, so Gracious a Lord towards all, requireth of yourself: wherefore using no other Intercessor, than yourself, we desire your Grace to hearken to yourself, which if it shall please you to do, we make no doubt of our most humble petition. In the mean time we shall pray to him who hath the Hearts of Kings in his Hand, 
Prou. 21.  to bend your compassionate heart towards your Catholic subjects, and so to rule it and inspire it, that you may be a King according to his heart, that you under him may rain long and prosperously in the Realm of England, and he by you in the Church of England, and that so you may reign under him here for a time, as you may reign with him hereafter for all eternity.  
Your highness most humble and obedient subject MATTHEW KELLISON.   

TO THE CHRISTIAN READER.  
THE inanimate and unreasonable creatures (Gentle Reader) because they have neither sufficient knowledge to direct themselves to their end, neither will to move themselves unto it, are by the proudident Governor and Menager of all, endued with natural inclinations, propensions, or instinctes, by which they are carried every one directly to their end, as though they knew it, and desired it. For as the Arrow, though it know not the mark, yet, because it is directed by one that knoweth it, flieth as directly to it, as if it knew it, and as swiftly, as if it were in love with it; so these creatures although they know not their end, yet because they are directed by natural propensions, & instinctes, which God, whowell knoweth it, hath put into them, aim always at their convenient places, ends, and perfections, as if they not only knew them, but also most earnestly desired them. The heavens, as we see, do move so uniformly, as though by common consent they were aggreeed, to be the never erring dials, which measure our actions, and distinguish our times, and seasons. The Sun riseth at a just time, as if he were Man's cock, to call him up to his work, and his candle also to give him light by which he may see to work; and he setteth also at his time, putting man in mind, that then it is time for him, to take his rest, and to cease, from labour. The Moon in her Change, is unchangeable, and constant in her inconstancy; and both the Sun and Moon, are so sure moderators of times and seasons, that winter and Summer, Spring, and the Fall of the leaf, never change their order; not that these Planets know their time, but because they are moved by one that knoweth. Brute beasts as soon as they are able to nibble upon the grass, can choose the herbs, which are most convenient for them, as though they were cunning herbistes, and you shall seldom or never see them die of surfitting, or mistaking one herb for another: not that they know the virtues of Simples, but because God hath given them an instinct of Nature, to take that which is agreeable to nature. The birds of the air, Keep a certain, and a most convenient time for breeding, and building; and their nests they build as artificially, as if they were Carpenters by occupation, and their youngones they feed with that discretion, as if they were expert Nurses. The spider will not yield to the Fisher, who as coningly weaveth his web, & placeth it as craftily to take the fly, as he doth his netteto take the heedless fishes. The Bee when the wind riseth, taketh clay in his mouth, least the wound have to great force over his little body. I will say nothing of the so well ordered common wealths of Bees and Ants, nor of the staunge operations, of other living creatures, because of them I am to treat in divers places of my book. plants and trees, seldom, or never deceive the husband man, but after the dead of winter, all which time they also seemed dead, they send forth, first their leaves, and afterwards their blooms, as messengers to foretell the fruits, which for his labour in pruning them, they mean to bestow, upon him. And never shall you see them bud in the midst of winter, but in the spring only, when the air is so warm, that their yonug ones can take no harm; not that they know the most convenient time, but because God who Knows it, hath engraven such an inclination in them. But more bountifully, hath the almighty dealt with man, then with any other corporal creatures, because he is more noble than them all, and is an abridgement of all; for to him he hath given understanding to know his God, his Good, his End, and Felicity, and a will also, to desire and pursue the same. And lest his understanding should banger, in approving falsehood, for truth and verity, he hath engraven in it a natural propension to verity, and lest his will should embrace evil, and bad for good, she also hath the like inclination to good. In so much that, as the eye seethe nothing but light or colours, and the ear heareth nothing but sound, so the understanding aimeth only at truth, and the will desireth nothing else but good; and as the eye can not perceive sound, nor the ear colours, so the understanding can not give his assent to a known untruth, and the will can not affect evil, as evil. Hence it is that we can not with heart think that the crow is white, or the swan black, because this is a known untruth, and where neither the truth nor falsehood is apparent, there we doubt, and suspend our judgement, which is the cause why we neither judge the sands of the Sea, nor the stars of the sky, to be even or odd in number, because we have no more reason to think the one, than the other. The will in like manner can not affect a known evil, as evil, because her object is Good, 
lib. de divinis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ●.  and therefore Dionysius Areopagita said, that no man intendeth evil as evil, but even then when he embraceth vice, which is the greatest evil, he aimeth at some apparent good of pleasure, or profit, which he imagineth in that evil. Wherefore all known Goods, such as knowledge, virtue, & felicity are, every man desireth and loveth even in his enemy whom he hateth, though he like not of the difficulties, which are to be devoured, before he attain unto them. Who now would think that man, either should or could approve errors and heresies, for true doctrine, and fall in love with vice in which is no true goodness to be liked? But nothing is so good which may not be abused. God hath given man free-will, not to sin, but to merit, which if he had not, his well-doing would deserve no God a mercy, and his evil deeds should be worthy no blame, because they who of necessity do otherwise then beseems them, are rather to be pitied, then blamed. And yet from hence proceedeth all iniquity, from whence, virtue, merit, and laudable actions, should have had their source and beginning. He hath grafted in our nature passions of love, fear, anger, and such like, that by love we might embrace Good, by fear, avoid evil, and by anger, chastise vice and evil: and yet whilst we give passions the head and bridle, passions rule, reason is overruled, man is overthrown, and ruined by that, by which he should have stood. He hath imprinted in us a natural love, and liking of Beatitude, in so much that no man is so barbarous, who, if you ask him whether he will be happy or Noah, can, or will say, Noah, with heart and mind. Wherefore saint Austin sayeth, 
l. ●●. Trin. c. ●●  that the jester, who promised that he would tell every one the thing which his heart desired, had hit the nail on the head, if he had said, omnes beati esse vultis, miseri esse non vultis: you will all be happy, miserable you will not be; and yet whilst by this natural propension, we seek for felicity in honours, riches & pleasures where it is not, and not in God, where it is, that is made our bane which should have been our good. And so God hath bountifully bestowed on us understanding, wholly bend to truth, and only to truth, and yet by abuse, that is made the fountain of all errors, which should have been the offspring of verities. For whilst like Aesop's dog, we snatch at the shadow, instead of the flesh, that is, seek after truth in those things in which is no truth at all, but only a show and shadow, we make our natural propension which we have to truth, a cause of our error, which should have been our best direction, and with as great a vehemency we embrace our errors, as we are propense & prone to truth, even as that dog, the more greedily leapt at the shadow, the more desirous he was of the flesh. And hence proceed Idolatries, superstitions, sects, and heresies, to which we would never give so obstinate an assent, did we not imagine some truth to be, where only is deceit and error. He hath given us also a will, wholly bent to Good, and altogether averted from evil; and yet whilst with those foolish birds, we peck at Appelles' painted grapes, that is seek after good in pleasures, riches, and honours, where is but a painted hew of good, we embrace vice our greatest evil, instead of our greatest good, and so much the more greedily, by how much we are more inclined to Good. And hence proceed fornications, advouteries, thefts, and murders, which we would never desire so vehemently, did we not apprehended in them, Good, that is pleasure, or profit. So that the bangers of our will, proceed only from mistaking of bad for good, and the errors of our understanding, proceed not from any prones which we have to untruths, but from mistaking of apparent, for true verities. And this is the cause (most gentle Reader) why I have made so exact a Survey of the new Religion, because I know thy understanding to be so naturally inclined to truth, and so averted from all untruths and errors, that to lay open unto thy view, the manifold and gross absurdities, which it implieth, is to refute them, and to make them known unto thee, is to dissuade thee from them. For truly I find many points of this religion, so opposite to light of reason, that I dare anouch, that no man can be either Lutheran or Caluiniste, unless he want wit, or having wit, enter not into consideration, or be carried away with passion, or partial affection. I will not deny but that many a good wit may be found amongst the Professors of this Religion, but yet I say, that these good wits, if they laid a side passion and partiality, & would vouchsafe also to enter into due consideratoon, could be neither Lutherans nor calvinists, because to evident untruths, the understanding can give no assent nor approbation. And what more evident untruth than Lutheranisme or Caluinisme? First of all their preachers can say no more for proof of their authority or doctrine, than Simon Magus, Ebion, Cerinthus, Basilides, Nestorius; Eutiches, Arius, Wicleph, or any other heretic could have said, and enerie false prophet hereafter may say, preach he never so absurdly, as I have demonstrated in my first book most evidently. For neither can they prove their mission to be ordinary by succession, nor extraordinary by miracle, and so if you give ear to them, you must bind yourself to hearken to all false prophets, wh● will say and swear that they are sent from Christ, and if you put them to the proof of their mission, they will say you are partial, who reject them, and yet receive Luther and Calum, wh● can not prove their mission: But no man can with any show of reason admit all false Prophets, because some of them teach contraries, ergo he can not have reason to receive Luther and Caluin, as the true Messengers and ministers of Christ, and consequently, he can not in heart receive them, because the understanding can not approve a thing for which she hath no probable reason. Secondly their doctrine, if it be well considered, is as evidently false, as that virtue is vice, or black, is white, but the understanding (as is already proved) can not approve manifest falsehood and evident untruths, ergo no man of understanding and consideration, can admit Luther's and Caluins' doctrine. Now that their doctrine is evidently false, I can not only evidently, but also easily prove. For to a Christian it is evident, supposing the verity of Scripture, that heresy is error and falsehood, but in my second book I have demonstrated, that all the marks of heresy, aggree as fitly to this new doctrine, as to Arianismen any old heresies, ergô to a Christian it is evident, that this new doctrine is error, and consequentby, it can not be approved by a Christian of judgement and consideration, because the understanding can not give asseni to an open untruth. It is evident also to a Christian▪ that Antichristian doctrine, which is dishonourable, and repugnant to Christ, can not be true, but Lutheranisme and Caluinisme, is altogether opposite to Christ, because it pulleth at his divinity, and makes him neither Redeemer, nor spiritual Physician, nor la maker, nor eternal Priest according to Melchisedechs' order, nor judge of the quick and the dead, but rather aequali Zeth every Christian to him in grace and sanctity, and maketh him ignorant, feigneth him also to have despaired, at length bringeth him to hell and damnation, and hateth all ●inges which have been beloved of him, or belonging to him; all which the third book convinceth, ergô a Christian of wit and consideration, can not in heart brook such a religion. In like manner to a Christian yea to every man that believes that there is a God and religion, it is evident that Religion can not stand without Preestes, sacrifice, sacraments & prayer; but it is evident also, that in the new religion, none of these essential parts of religion can be found, especially according to the doctrine of the same Religion, as my fourth book maketh manifest, ergô a Christian of wit and dew consideration, can not aepprove it for true Religion. Likewise it is evident to reason, that all lawful authority is of God, that Prince's laws bind, that their tribunals are just and lawful, and that correspondence betwixt the Prince, and subjects, and betwixt one subject and another is necessary to uphold society, to which God and nature incline us, all which is proved in the fifth book, but the reformed doctrine, despoileth Princes of authority, bringeth their laws and tribunals in contempt, and ruineth all Society, at is evidently also proved in the same book, ergo a man of common sense and judgement, who entereth also into a dew consideration, can not with heart admit of this religion. lastlly, as evident it is, that this new religion is absurd, as that God is not the author of sin, and the only sinner, that he is not unreasonable, cruel or Tyrannical, but according to the reformed doctrine, all these blasphemies are verified of God, as my sixth book teacheth, ergo the reformed doctrine is evidently absurd. Vice also, and Atheism, by light of reason, are evidently Known to be repugnant to reason, wherefore seeing that this new Religion leadeth to all vice, and Atheism, and that by many points, and principles of the doctrine of the same, as is in my seventh and eight book demonstrated, it is an evident absurdity, evidently repugnant to reason, and consequently can not be approved by a man of reason and consideration, because the understanding can no more assent unto ●n evident untruth, then can the will affect and like of evil, as evil, as I have already proved. Wherefore (most gentle Reader) if thou be a Catholic, and vouchsaffe to peruse my book, I hope thou shalt be more confirmed, if thou be a follower and professor of the late and new religion, when thou seest the fowl absurdity of thy own religion, and the plausible verity of the Catholic, I hope thou wilt reject the one, & embrace the other, because my book will make manifest unto thee, both the one and th'other. At least, as this I intended so this I have endeavoured. And if my intended purpose be well brought to pass, God was the Principal Agent, I only his unwieldy instrument, and so he only is to be praised; if ill, mine is the fault, yet such as I hope shallbe excused, because it was not voluntary. If thou reap commodity by my labours, I count them well bestowed, because they have the reward I looked for: if thou do not, yet are they not lost, quia aliquid est voluisse, because some thing it is to have desired thy good, and I have taken no more pains than thy good deserved. If the style of my book please thee-not, refuse not gold, because it is ill fashioned, and remember, that though the author be thy countryman by birth, yet he is more a stranger than an Englishman by education. If thou find faults in the printing, yet find not fault with the Printer, he knew what he did, because he understood not what he printed; and I had not the leisure always to over see his labours. If I seem to speak to sharply some times, it is not for any tooth against any person, but for hatred of heresy. And if thou take this my impolished work in good worth, thou wilt give me the occasion and courage to take in hand another, in which I shall explain (as I have in part already) and make as plain, and plausible, those points of the Catholic Religion, (to wit Indulgences, Merit, Satisfaction, worship of saints, Images, and Relics, with many such other) which seem to the deceived, to imply injury to Christ, or absurdity, as I have discovered the gross errors of the New Religion. But now for a Vale and friendly farewell, I beseech the to take this counsel at my hands. Build not upon that, not so flattering, as false opinion, where with many use to comfort themselves, to wit that thou mayest be saved in any religion. My second book will assure thee, that without a true and entire faith, it is impossible to please God, and that out of the true Church, 
See the second book, and 4. chap.  there is no salvation: As God is but one, the truth but one, so his Religion, Church, and worship is but one. This Church and Religion is not to be found amongst the reformers, as my second book will tell thee, because it hath all the marks of heresy: It is only to be found amongst the Catholics, who are Nicknamed Papists, as thou mayest see by the same book, and by some chapters of the first book, and by other parts of the other books, evidently demonstrated. The Catholic Church then is the haven of Security, to which thou must repair, It is the port of Salvation, the Ark wherein Noah lodgeth & his family, that is Christ and his faithful people, It is the barn where the good corn is laid up, till the winowing day, It is the fold of Christ's Sheep, The pillar of truth, The treasure-howse of Christ's Graces, The Shop of spiritual Negotiation, The land of promise, The paradise of the second Adame, The Temple of the second Solomon, The mystical body of Christ, The terrestrial heaven of those that hope to be blessed, The only way to life everlasting. If then thou desire to be free from tempests, and contrary winds of disagreeing heresies, direct thy ship and sail to this quiet haven; if thou wilt not make shipwreck of thy soul, fly to this port of Salvation; If thou wilt not be drowned in the deluge of sin or Infidelity, have recourse unto this Ark, out of which none can escape damnation; If thou wilt be of Christ's chosen corn, repose thyself in this his barn, which is the only place of purging from the chaff of sin; If thou wilt be one of Christ's flock, run to his fold, that thou mayest be fed with his sheep; If thou wilt be sure of the truth, keep thy standing upon the pillar of truth; If thou wilt be enriched with Christ's spiritual treasures, this is the treasure house of all his graces. If thou wilt traffic for heaven, and heavenly merchandise, enter the Shop of Christ, I mean his Church, the only place of merit, and Christian negotiation; If thou wilt be partaker of Christ's promises, devil in the land of all his promises; If thou wilt en●●y felicity, enter into this Paradise of the second A. dame; If thou wilt honour God with true sacrifice and worship, this is the only Temple, out of which neither prayers, nor oblations, nor sacrifices, are pleasing; If thou wilt receive any influence, and motion from Christ the Head, incorporate thyself to the Church his mystical body; and if thou wilt be partaker of his spirit, wth is the soul, and life of this body, dismember not thyself, that thou mayest be a lively member; If thou wilt enjoy the bliss of Angels in the upper heaven, enter first into this lower heaven, out of which is no hope to ascend to the higher; If thou wilt attain to life everlasting, pass by the Church, it is the only way; If thou wilt be one of the Church unchangeable, be first one of the Church militaunte; and if thou wilt have God for thy father, take his Church for thy Mother. Nothing more dangerous then to live out of this Church, and no surer damnation, then to die out of this Church. Be not careless therefore in seeking out this Church, and when thou hast found it, differre not thy entrance. It is thy greatest affair, and a matter of most importance, because thereon dependeth, not a temporal state of thy body, but aeternal salvation, or damnation, both of soul and body. Farewell, and pray for him that wisheth thee well, and prayeth for thee, that thou mayst do well. jul. 18. an Dom. 1603.  
MATTHEW KEL.   

THE FIRST BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SVRuey of the grounds and foundation of this new religion on which it may seem to rely: which either are the authority of their preachers, or the evidence of scriptures which they allege, or their private spirit, or credible and probable testimonies, or some visible judge who determineth of controversies: for want of which it is proved that if we receive this new religion, we open the gap to all heretics and heresies.  

The first chapter examineth the mission of the preachers of this new religion, and proveth that they cannot prove themselves to be sent from Christ, and that consequently we cannot give ear unto them, unless we will hearken also unto all false prophets.  
HARDLY shall we find a subject so disloyal, or private man so imprudent, who will arrogate unto himself the honourable office of an ambassador, to deal betwixt Prince and Prince in denounicinge war or offering peace, of in establishing a new league or renewinge an old, unless he have authority from his Prince in whose name he dealeth, and can by letters of credit or other tokens make an evident remonstrance of his legatine power and commission. For if he go unsent, he abuseth his prince's name, and if he cannot show his commission, he runneth on a sleeveles errand. If this be so (as experience teacheth us that it is so and reason telleth us that it must be so) and thath betwixt man and man: we have no reason to think almighty god to be so devoid of princely prudence, as to send his Apostles and preachers to denounce his will and impart his mind to his people, and not to give them with all letters patents of their commission; or to be so unreasonable as to bind us to give credit or audience to such ambassadors, who can only brag of their embassage but cannot by any probable proofs ascertain us of it: for so we might embrace a false preacher and Apostle when in deed we have a lewd and lying prophet by the hand. This Moses well knowing, 
Exod. ●.  never dreamt of that great embassage in which he was sent from God to Pharaoh to deal for the deliverio of the oppressed Israelites, until God had called him and told him that he intended to send him, knowing that if he should have gone unsent he should have abused his lord and masters name. Aaron also durst not adventure upon preestlie function, 
Exod. ●●. Levit. ●.  before that Moses by God's commandment, had consecrated him whose example saint Paul proposeth unto all pastors as necessary to be followed saying; 
〈…〉  Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem sed qui vocatur à De● tanquam Aaron; Neither doth any man take unto himself honour but he who is called of God as Aaron was. The prophets likewoise presumed not to tell unto the people gods mind and will nor to foretell the things to come, of which god wouldehave his people for warned, with out an express commandment from god as may appear by the proheme and beginning of their prophecies. And those immortal creatures which are by nature spirits are by office called Angels, because they are sent from god as his legates, and imbassadoures, for so much the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imylyeth from which our English word Angel, is derived. Wherefore the Angel that came to Daniel declareth unto him his commission before h●e telleth him his message. Daniel (saith he) stam gradu tuo nunc enim missus sum ad te: 
Dan. 10.  Daniel stand in thy step for now I am sent unto the. And saint Luke describing that great embassage of the Archangel Gabriel unto the blessed virgin Marie, 
Luc. 10  saith that he was, sent from God into a city of Galilee which was called Na●areth unto a virgin despoused unto a man whose name was joseph. In like manner S. Ioh● Baptist the precursour of Christ and more than a prophet of God, whonot only for told the Messias but also pointed him out with his finger, 
Malach. 3. Mat. 11. Ciril. l. ● in Io. c. 17. Beda in c. 1. Mar.  is called an Angel, not because he was an Angel by nature as Origen imagined, but because he was an Angel by office as being sent to make the way and to prepare it for the Messias. Yea Christ himself would not undertake the office and function of a Messias and Mediator before he was sent by his father: 
Io. ●.  For I (saith he) came not of myself but he sent me and therefore he saith his doctrine is not his own but his fathers because although he preached the same, 
〈…〉.  yet because he preached it in his father's name who sent him he calleth it his father's doctrine. And as Christ was sent from his father sowere his Apostles from him, 
Io. 20.  else had not their name agreed to their person, because the word Apostle cometh of the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a messenger or ambassador. And if they had not been sent they could not have preached, because as faith and religion is revealed only by God, 
Matth. 1●.  so none can have authority to preach it but from God according to that of S. Paul: 
Rom. 10.  How shall they preach unless they be sent? And as it is proper to all true Apostles not to presume to preach before they be sent, so is it as common to all false Prophets to run before they be sent, and to preach their own fancy with out mission, or commission; who therefore in divers places of scripture are said to come but never to be sent. All they (saith Christ) who came before me are thieves and nobbers. 
Io. 10.  Where you must note that he saith not all they who were sent, because Moses and the prophets were sent before him, and yet were neither thieves nor robbers, but hesaieth, all they that came before me, are thieves and rohbers, 
Maldonatus in Io. 10.  that is who came of their own heads neither sent nor commanded, by cause they stole authority from God, and arrogated that unto themselves, which he never gave them, using & abusing his name and crying that the lord saith so when he never said so nor meant so. Of which kind of thief our saviour speaking noteth him with the same mark of a false Prophet which is, coming. 
Io. 10.  A●theef (saith he) doth not come but to steal and kill. The like manner of speech useth saint Paul saying; 
2. Cor. 17.  If he that cometh shall preach unto yond any other Christ. To be brief he that cannot he because he is the prime and first verity, and will not lie because he is goodness itself, gives us this mark to know a false Prophet by Beware (saith he) of false Prophets, 
Mat. ●.  but what mark dost thou give us (o lord) to know them by, that we may take heed of them? Who come (saith he) vnt● you in the garments of sheep but in wardlie are ravening wolves. So that if any preachers come only, that is, come unsent they are thee●es that steal authority which was never given them, and they are false Prophets which con on their own heads before they be sent, and preach their own devices, before they have commission. If then our new reformers and Prophets of the lord (as they call them selves) be sent from god (as they say they be) to reform the church not only in manners, but also in faith and religion, let them tell us their mission and show us their commission, and we will reverence them as the messengers, and respect them as the ambassadors and Angels of god. But if they come on their own heads or cannot give us assurawce that they are sent from god they must pardon us if we give not ear unto them: for if they be not sent they have no authority to deal with us, and if they cannot prove their mission we have no warrant to deal with them. Twoe manner of missions which god useth insending preachers unto us I find in holy write, which also have been practised in the church of god, the one an extraordinary the other an ordinary mission. The extraordinary mission is made immediately from god, the ordinary mission god maketh by means of some other whom he hath sent immediately from himself. For as god ordinatilie doth nothing immediately by himself, but by means of second causes, causing light by the son, and heat by the fire, producing fruits by trees, men and beasts by some of their own kind, yet he doth not so tie himself unto his creatures, but that some times extraordinarily he worketh by himself without any concurrence of them as he did when with a word, or touch, he restored health, which ordinarily he doth by physicians and second causes, so likewise ordinarily god sendeth pastors and preachers, and giveth them authority by others, yet sometimes also extraordinarily he sendeth them immediately from him self. As for example: Moses and Aaron in the old law were sent immediately from god to recall his people out of Egypt, and to rule and govern them in matters of religion; but the high priests which succeeded Aaron and were consecrated by him and his successors, were sent by an ordinary mission. In like manner in the new law, saint Peter and the rest of the Apostles were called and sent extraordinarily & immediately from Christ but they which succeeded the Apostles and were ordained by them by imposition of hands and other ceremonies, were sent by an ordinary mission, because our saviour Christ whem he instituted his Apostles did also appoint a continual order, by which others should succeed them in their offices, which was imposition of hands by a Bishop lawfully consecrated and so the Bishops which now are, may truly affirm that they are sent from Christ to rule & govern his church, because they are consecrated & instituted by the order which Christ hath appointed and they succeeded the Apostles whom Christ immediately sent to preach, teach, and minister sacraments. Now betwixt these twoe missions, this amongst others, is one difference; that an extraordinary mission must be proved by miracles or plain prophecies, else every one may brag that he is sent extraordinarily and no man shall control him, but an ordinary mission needeth no such proof, and therefore he who is sent by an ordinary mission if he can show that he was instituted by the ordinary means which Christ hath left in his church, and that he succeedeth them who were counted lawful pastors and preachers, he giveth sufficient testimony of his ordinary mission & commission. If then our new preachers be sent by an ordinary mission le●t them show their succession & tell us the pedigree of their predecessors that we may see who were bishops before them, and who consecrated and instituted them, and who gave them commission and authority to intermeddle in the rule and government of the church: for so Christ ordinarily sendeth preachers & pastors to his church. 
● prescr. c. 38.  Thus Turtullian urged the heretics of his tyme. Let them (saith he) show us the origen of their churches, let them unfold the order of their bishops which by successors, so runneth on from the beginning, that the first bishop have for his author and predecessor some one of the Apostles or apostolical men which lived in the Apostles time, etc. As the church of the Smyrneans doth register Polycarpe placed by ●hon, as the church of the Romans' hath Clement ordained by Peter, etc. To this proof S. Augustine putteth the heretics of his age: 
e●n. partem ●Donati.  number (saith he) the priests even from Peter's seat and look which to which succeeded in the order of those ffathers. And in an other place he saith that this succession of priests is the thing, 
count ep. fundamenti c. 4.  which holdeth him in the catholic church, because he knew, that there is the true Church, where is true religion, there true religion, where true pastors to teach it, and there true pastors, where one succeedeth to another by an ordinary succession. And thus we must urge our new reformers to declare unto us the pedegres of their ancetours, & to show who be the predecessors to whom they be successors, if they will have us to admit them as the ministers of God sent by an ordinary mission. But this they can never do for who I pray yond was the immediate predecessor of Luther and Caluin? or who was he that made the first superintendant in Inglande? I am sure and all the world, yea they themselves will witness, that they are no successors to the catholic bislopes and pastors, because they degenerate from them altoge-ther, and they were feign to contemn & disobey them before they could open their mouths in pulpits. Yea our pastors were so far from ordaining them, or instituting them & giving them authority, that they cried out against them as new startuppes, condemned them for heretics, Antipastours, and new, yea false Apostles. Nether can they derive themselves from any other lawful pastors for before they themselves took upon them the name and office of pastors, there were none at the time of their rising, but our catholic pastors. Yea as in the next book is proved, they cannot de●iue their descente from ancient heretics, because in all points they agree not with any of them; and if they could, yet were not that sufficiet, for they were counted & condemned for arrant heretics, and intruded themselves as these men do into the true pastors offices, & were themselves as these men are, the first of their family, succeeding to no predecessors. Here they find themselves much pressed, & know not I dare say, what to answer, but yet they will play small play rather than sirte out, and will make hard shift rather than no shift, and shape a misshapen answer rather than no answer. And what is that? They say that the Apostles which were the first bishops, & pastors, had for a time ●heir lawful successors, but at the length the Church failed and the pastors with it, & with them the succession decayed; but yet afterwards Luther & Caluin revived this dead Church again, & restored the pastors: And so (say they) we succeed the Apostles and their immediate successors, but by interruption of many hundred years. But this God knows is a poor shift & a stolen shift. For this was the answer of the heretics of Tertullians' time, against whom he useth no other argument than the absurdity which followeth so absurd an answer. 
l. press.  Then (saith he) truth which was imprisoned expected Marcionites her redeemers and in the mean time pastouts preached falsely, and the christians belecued erroniouslie, many thousands were wronglie baptised so many works of faith ministered a miss, so many chrismes evillie wrought, so many preest-hoodes and minister not rightly done, so many martyrdoomes all in vain. The like may be said against Luther, Zuinglins, Caluine, and other new Apostles of this time If the Church failed before your coming, than she expected many hundred years for you in particular, than all ministery in the Church was all this while wrong, preaching & teaching was false, they who boar the name of true pastors were not so, that society which was dispersed throughout the world & was counted the only christian Church and was persecuted for the same by the devil & his ministers, was a synagogue of the devil, established and upholden by the devil; & so one devil psecuted another, all martyrdoms in that Church were in vain, all acts of religion were superstitious, all conncells which were gathered in this Church, all pastors that ruled in it, all doctors that written & tanght in it and for it, deceived, & were deceived. Happy then was the day in which Luther leapt out of his Monastery, disobeyed the Pope & Church, and having gotten a yoke fellow, out of a cloy stir of professed and vowed virgins, devised a new religion to cloak his villainy. And could not Christ all that while find out a man fit to restore his Church from death to life? was there not Ambrose, no Austin, no Hierome, no Gregory fit for such a purpose? and was Luther the only man who for learning & virtue (thonghe he were an apostata) was according to God his heart and liking, whom God wished for, & expected so long? But if I demonstrate that the true Church cannot die nor decay, them is their Church a bastard synagogue which as they say once flourishing in the Apostles time, and after their time also for some small time, and asterwardes died for no little time, but rather for some hundred years: or elf they must of necessity show a succession of their Church and Religion from age to age, & of their pastors from pastor to pastor; and if they cannot they are not sent by an ordinaire mission because they succeed to no predecessors but are the first of their family. 
Chap. 5.  This I have demonstrated in the second book as the reader may see if he please to turn over a few leaves; & so hear I may suppose it, & supposing conclude that they are not sent by an ordinary mission because they succeed to none. But if this answerre will not serve as a blind man may see that i● doth not, than they have another in store: and what is that? they say forsooth that they are true successors to the Apostles and that they have their predecessors who believed as they do, ruled the Church, ministered & received sacraments, but secretly, & invisibly because their Church itself was all that time invisible. And so if you demand of them who were their predecessors, they will answerre that they had predecessors but they were invisible. This is another blind shift of theirs which I shall refute in the next book at large. Hear only I demand whether this invisible Church was invisible to themselves, 
Chap 5.  or to papists only and pagans who were not of their religion. If it were invisible to themselves, how can they tell that there was any religion like to theirs before their time, or that there were any pastors of their kind? for that which was invisible unto them could not be seen of them, and so we are no more to believe them in saying that they had a Church & pastors before Luther's time then a blind man that will determine of colours. If they say it was invisible only to papists & pagamnes & others which were not of their Church; then as it is like, Luther and Caluine who were members of that Church knew well the pastors to whom they succeeded, & of whom they received authority. Let them tell us then who they were else we cannot receive them as ministers of God sent by an ordinary mission, because they can not show us their predecessors to whom they succeeded. Thus I have plainly proved that these men are not sent by an ordinary mission because they succeed to none who were their predecessors. What now can they say why we should not reject them as false prophets, who run before they be sent & preach before they be called to that function? They will say as often times they do, that they were sent immediately from Christ by an extraordinary mission. But then we must put them also to the proof of this their mission. And first of all in saying that they are sent extraordinarily, they bewray themselves to be those Apostles which run unsent, because it is manifest in scripture that Christ appointing Apostles, 
Ephes. 4.  ordained a succession of pastors to the end. For as he instituted a visible Church which is never to fail or fall (as shall be in the next book demonstrated) so did he appoint perpetual governors & pastors to govern & rule this Church in a visible manner as there also shall be proved, 
Chap 5.  else should that visible & goodly mystical body of Christ, have been left headless with out a visible head, and because the same pastors could not always live to govern the Church visibly, it followeth that Christ instituted a succession of them, & consequently that Christ sendeth none to rule it his Church but by succession to some others by whom they were ordained & instituted, & therefore he that enters into the government of the Church and not by this entry, and door of succession, he is a thief that seeketh windows, corners, & byways as themselves do, who because they mean no good, dare not enter into the house as honest men do by the ordinary way. Let not then the reformers brag of their extraordinary mission because Christ having instituted a perpetual succession of ordinary pastors meaneth not to send any extraordinary preachers, rather they may be ashamed of their monstrous nativities for they are like unto those heretics of whom Optatus speaketh qui de se prodigiosè nasci volverunt: 
l 1. cont. Pa●.  Which would be borne of themselves prodigiously without any ffather or mother. They are like to Victor the Donatiste who as Optatus affirmeth was a son without a father, 
l. 2. cont. Par.  & a disciple without a master. They are not unlike the Novatianes' who as saint Cyprian averreth, 
l. 1. ep. ●.  Nemini succedentes à seipsis episcopiordinati sunt, Succeeding to no man, they were ordained bishops of themselves. But let us give them leave to say at least that they were sent extraordinarily, that so we may see better how they can prove their extraordinary mission, and how we can disprove the same. First I demand of them where they read in scripture that after Christ had established a succession of pastors to govern his Church to the end, 
Ephes. ●.  he would send sometimes extraordinary ministers to put them out of office, & to enter into the government of the Church to reform all absurd abuses● for if they can not bring scripture for this they are not to be credited, & that by their own confession. But I know they can not allege any one line of scripture for that purpose, and I am sure, & they are not ignorant, 
Mat. ●●.  that Christ said he builded his Church upon a rock so that it should not need the repairing of these new masons, & established a kingdom and consequently governors which should continue for ever and so should need no innovation, 
Second book  which point hear after shall be more amply proved. 
chap 5.  But suppose that our saviour had foretold the fall & ruin of his Church & ordinary pastors, and had forewarned us of new Apostles & pastors to be sent to make a reformation, 
Hi●r. e. 1●.  yet seeing that God hath also warned us of false prophets who will falsely prophecy in his name whereas he sent them not, & who shall divine & foretell lies & vanities saying that the lord said so, and seeing that the Apostle commandeth us vearie straitly to take heed of false prophets which come in sheeps fleeses yea in coats of true pastors, 
Gal. 2.  bearing the name of pastors & alleging scriptures for a cloak to their heresies, as true pastors do for their true doctrine, yea since that Christ himself biddeth us to beware of false prophets who come in the garments of innocent sheep but in wardlie are ravening wolves, 
Mat. 70  that is (as Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth) who invest themselves in the goodly garments of the prophets & apostles testimonies but in wardlie, 
l cont proph●● nas haresu●● novitates c. 37.  if you unmask them by expounding the testimonies which they allege, yond shall espy ravening wolves under sheeps & sheepcherdes' coats add biting yea devouring heresies covered very coninglie with the sayings of the Prophets & Apostles: seeing that I say we have such warning of false prophets, we have good reason to suspect these reformers for such kind of cattle, and we have no reason to hearken unto them as unto true prophets, unless they can prove their extraordinary mission by extraordinary signs and tokens of prophecies or miracles, & so can give us a note to distinguish them from the false prophets, whose coming is so often & so plainly foretold. Other wise if it be sufficient that they can say they are sent extraordinarily, then do we open the gap to false prophets, who when they come will not let to say yea & to swear as much, and so they can not be excluded if these men be admitted. Yea we make God most unreasonable, to think that he will send extraordinary messengers & yet give them no letters of credit, no extraordinary signs or tokens of their imbassie. For in so doing he should either cause them to run on a sleeules' errand or else he should bind us to give ear unto them who can prove their commission no better then false prophets can, 
Exod 4.  of whom not with standing he commandeth us to beware. This Moses well perceiving would not take upon him that great imbassie until that God had promised him the gift of working miracles by which he might prove his mission. Non credent mihi (saith he) neque audient vocem meam, sed dicent non apparuit tibi dominus: They will not believe me, nor give ear unto my voice, but will say God did not appear unto thee. As if he had said; thou sayest o lord that thou meanest to send me into Egypt unto the Tyrant Pharaoh to deliver thy people from his tyranny, but how shall I make it known either unto him or unto thy people that thou in deed dost send me? my bare word will not be taken because they will say I am a stranger unto them, & for any thing which they know, may come as well in mine own name yea in thedevills' name as god his name. 
Exod. ●.  This seemed to God so reasonable an excuse, that he gave him by & by the gift of working miracles, by which he might prove his extraordinary mission. For he said unto Moses, What is that which thou hast in thy hand Moses answered, a rod; and God said, cast it on the ground. He cast it, and it was turned into a serpent. And this saith God I do that they may believe that I appeared unto thee. wherefore when after his coming into Egypt he had wrought so strange miracles, and admirable works, the Israelites believed that he was sent to deliver them, 
Lue. 1.  & accordingly they followed him, though Pharaoes' heart was so obdured, that all those miracles could neither break, nor mollify it, he by his free will resisting gods graces, & forccible callings. In like manner saint John Baptistes mission was proved not only by the prophecy of Malachi, but also by his miraculous nativity and the testimony of an Angel; although he came not to preach any new doctrine but only to exhort the people to penance, which before by other prophets had been inculcated, and to point out the Messias with his finger, who me all the prophets had fortold so plainly, that when Christ appeared, it was almost evident that he was the man on whom had run so long a bead roll of prophecies and predictions. The Messias also himself christ jesus, because he succeeded to none but came with extaordinarie authority, sent immediately from his ffather, proved his mission by so manifest works & miracles, that see said his works did testify, from whom he was sent, and the people also confessed that he could not have wrought such wonders, if he had not been of God. And altough Christ had sufficiently by miracles and prophecies which ran of him, proved that he was the Messias: Yet he thought not that sufficient for the proof of the mission of his Apostles, but because they were sent immediately from him, and were successors to none (for to Christ they were only vicegerentes) he gave them also power to work miracles by which they might prove their mission and confirm their doctrine with signs that followed. 
Meth. ●●.  Now than if our gospel spillers be sent by an extraordinary mission immediately from God, let them (hew us some miracles for proof of their extraordinary commission, or else were we more than mad to credit them being forewarned that false prophets shall come, from whom these men can not distinguish them selves, unless they can show us some manifest prophecies, or work some wounders amongst us. Let Luther then the first man of this new family, who as he & his say, 
So Cocleus. writes.  is sent by God extraordinarily to reform the christian world & to make us new-noe Christian, let him I say show his miracles if he will have any audience for else we may justly fear lest he be one of those false ꝓphets of whon before hand God hath warned us. In deed I grant that he on a time to show himself a true prophet, avouched veric boldy after twoe years preaching that he would be the death of all Popes, & would banish Cardinals, Monks, Nuns, masses, & bells out of the christian world. But Luther is gone long since and yet Pope's reign, Cardinals flourish, Monks and Nuns possess their old monasteries, saving in Inglande, & some few other corners; masses also are not only said but sung solemnly, and bells do ring still and the world doth ring of bells. He caused also to be engraven upon his tomb this verse in Latin.  
Pestis eram vivens moriens ero mors tuae Papa. 
Suri●u anno domini. 15●●.   
Wilest here I lived I was thy plague and dying (Pope) I'll be thy death.  
But yet Popes live and may tread upon Luther's grave, still Pope's reign, & though they be excluded from Inglande, Germany, scotlan, and some few other places, yet do they exercise their authority still and as much as ever in Italy, Spain, France and other countries, and have by the Benedictins, Dominicanes, jesuits, 
Lopes l. r. c. a. Gen. l. 4. ●ron. ●nno Christi 1492 Gonzal. 2. p hist de la Chine. c. 24. l. 3. hist gen. c. 28. ●. care●. Regem Angl.  Augustine's, and Franciscanes means and industrious labours, extended their jurisdiction to the Indies and other newefounde lands & countries Likewise the same Luther in his railing book against king Henry the eight thus again prophesieth: Dogmata mea stabunt & Papa cadet: viderit Deus uter prímo fessus defecerit, Papa, an Lutherus. My opinions (saith he) shall stand, and the Pope shall fall let God look to it whether the Pope wearied out or Luther shall first fail. And yet we see that Popes live and reign, & Luther is dead & descended to hell, and his doctrine decayeth more and more, and many are now weary of it and see more and more into his absurdities. On a time also this man of God, this great patriarch● and fift evangelist, this second Elias and eight wise man, to get himself a name, 
Stephilus' ●pol. 2. Genebr chrone. 4. ann. Christi 166.  assayed what he could do in dispossessing of a devil, but it would not be, & the reason I think was, because one devil will not or can not cast out an other, yea the devil so scared Luther for attempting so great a matter, that the doors being shut by the devil, the man of God was fain to break the windows least thedevill should tear him in pieces. But peradventure he will brag of his nativity. in deed that was strange for although he was not borne by miracle as saint John baptist was, yet some are of opinion that he is descended either by father or mother from the devil himself who was incubus to his mother, 
Fout in tract. sacr de stat● rel.  or succubus to his ffather. John Caluine also an other patriarch of the new Church made the like attempts but they had the like success. 
Bolsec. ● 13.  He agreed on a time for a piece of money with a man to fayne himself first sick, & after dead, and he conjured his wife to weep and lament the death of her husband that by her tears and lamentations the jest might seem more probable. The sick man was commended at every preach to be prayed for, after ward the man feigned himself to be dead, his wife crieth out, Caluine goeth a walking which a great troop, and passing by the sick man's house demanded as one altogether ignorant of the matter what was the cause of those cries and lamentations, and answerre being made that one was dead, he entereth in, falleth down on his knees, prayeth to God to show his power in raising the dead to life, and their in to glorify his servant Caluine, that the world might know that he was the man whom God had culled out to be the only man who should reform & repair the Church of Christ. And haiunge ended his prayer, he takes the man by the hand & commands him in God his name to a rise. But the man after much calling not a rising, his wife calleth on him also, & rubs him on the side, to signify that now was the time to rise, but he neither could answer nor move, but by God his inste indgment (who neither will nor can work a miracle to maintain a falsehood) was stone-deade and as cold as clay, & so the jest was turned into good earnest and the comedy into a tragedy. which his wife perceiving cried out on Caluine and called him a cooseninge knave, and murderer of her husband; but Caluine departeth with a flea in his ear saying that over much grief had operessed the wife & deprived her of her wits. Wherefore since that the novellers can work no miracles, raise no dead men, dispossess no devils, foretell no future things, heal no diseased, not so much as a lame dog to prove their authority, what reason have we to hearken unto them? And if we give ear unto them; who may not challenge audience at our hands? For suppose some branisicke Browniste, some brother of the ffamilie of love or some other if it may be, more fantastical, should preach the dreams of his drowsic head, & vain conceits of his idle brain, calling them new points of religion, and reformations of the old, might he not allege some scripture for every fancy of his though never so vain, and make a show also of proof if he expound it as he please? might he not discannon books of scripture which seem to stand in his way? & being demanded by what authority he taketh all this upon him, might he not say that he is sent from Christ immediately? And being further requested to show some miracles as extraordinary signs to prove an extraordinary mission, might he not easily answer and that out of scripture also that miracles are for infidels and that Luther & Caluine are accepted of who never could so much as heal a halting dog, and therefore that he & his preaching cannot be refused if they & theirs be admitted? And so we see that if we accept of the reformers of this time as the true Apostles, ministers, & messengers of God, not with standing that they can neither show succession for their ordinary, nor miracles for their extraordinary mission, we open the gap to all false-apostles, and heretics whatsoever: the door is open for them, they may enter in thick & threefold into the ministery and can not be excluded if these new reformers be received, without plain and palpable partiality. And so thou seest gentle reader that in Inglande and other places where this new doctrine hath taken root that they have no probable assurance of their religion by the authority of their preachers, because they can say no more for proof of their authority, then can the false Apostles. Since therefore thou art warranted that the Church and succession of her pastors shall never fall nor fail, and art forewarned also, that false prophets shall come and say they are sent when God never sent them at all, how canst thou hang thy salvation on these new ministers whom thou canst not distinguish from false prophets, because they can show no more probability of their ordinary or extraordinary mission, than they did, and to whon thou canst not give care, but thou must hearken also by the same reason unto all false propheter who can say as much for themselves as thy preachers can do, & therefore can not be rejected if these be received, with out plain partiality.   

The second Chapter showeth how the Reformers grounding their Religion on bare scripture, do set the gate open unto all heretics and heresies.  
THE devil hath always played the ape even from the beginning: for after that he perceived that he could not be God in deed, to which dignity by climbing thoughts he had ambitiously aspired, he endeavoured by all means possible so to bring his intentes to pass, that he might at least go for a God, and be taken for a God; and therefore like an ape he hath ever imitated God so nearly, that he would be honoured and served in the same fashion and manner as he saw the true God was worshipped. 
Tert l. pras. c. 40.  God is served with sacrifice, as with a service dew unto divine Majesty, the devil was ever honoured amongst the pagans with his Hecatombs and Sacrifices even by the Emperors of the world, God hath his priests, the devil his flamens, God hath his sacraments the devil his expiations and ceremonies, God hath his baptism, his eucharist, his nuns, and the devil hath his washings, his oblation of bread, and his vestal virgins, and as God promiseth a heaven to his servants and worshippers so doth the devil promise his Elysian fields and threateneth his stigiane lake. 
Tert. ibid.  And even as the devil by idolaters hath imitated God's sacrifice, Sacraments, and manner of worship, so by heretics he hath always affected to be as like as may be to Christ and his Apostles, in citation and allegation of scripture. Wherefore Vincentius Lyrinensis noteth it to have been the practice of heretics the members of the devil, 
l. count proph. ●. ●7.  to allege scriptures against the true Christians and members of Christ, as once the devil their head, against Christ jesus our head, wrested a place of scripture to prove that he must needs cast himself headlong from the pinnacle of the temple to prove himself the son of God. 
Mat. 4.  Martion (as Witnesseth Tertullian) to prone that the world (which he imagined to be of an cuil nature) was created of an evil God, 
l prase. c 51.  used that place of Saint Matthew: 
Mat. 7.  Non potest arbor bona malos fructus facere, a good tree can not bring forth evil fruits. 
l. de carne Christie. 20.  Valentinus (as the same author relateth) to persuade the world, that Christ's body was framed of the substance of the heavens and consequently was no true flesh nor truly conceived & borne of the Virgin Marie but rather passed through her womb as through a Pipe, taking no substance of her; alleged saint Paul's words who comparing the first Adame from whom we fetch our carnal pedigree, with the second Adame Christ jesus, from whom we are descended spiritually, useth these words: The first man of earth earthly, 
1. Cor. ●●.  the second man from heaven heavenly: Not knowing or not willing to know that Christ is called heavenly, either in respect of his divinity and divine person, or because he was not earthly that is subject to sin which proceedeth from earthly and terrene desires, or because his body by right was from the first moment of his conception, celestial, that is glorious, as are the bodies of the blessed (which therefore saint Paul calleth also spiritual) and afterward was the first body that rose to that glory to which it ever had good right, 
Ibidam.  because a glorious soul such as Christ's was from the first infusion of it into the body, 
Io. 4.  required as dew a glorious body but Christ would have his body to want this dew whilst he lived with us, that he might suffer for us, which he could not have done in a glorified body. The Arrians to prove God the son inferior to his father, and not consubstantial nor coaequal unto him, brought his own words against him: the father is greater than I: omitting many pregnant places which avouch the son to be consubstantial and equal unto him, to which places this also is not contrary, 
August. l. 1. Trin. 6.7.  because it proveth only that Christ as man is inferior to his father. The Nestorians by those places by which we prove two natures in Christ the one humane the other divine proved two persons in Christ. The Eutichianes by the same places of scripture by which Catholics do prove that in Christ was but one person, endeavoured to prove that in Christ was but one nature. And it hath been the property of all heretics to make no bones of scriptures, but prodigally to spend them and to laviss he them out to prove thereby their heresies, were they never so fantastical. 
Supra.  Hic fortasse (sayeth Vincentius Lyrinensis) aliquis interroget, an & haeretici divinae scripturae testimonijs utantur, Vtuntur planè & vehementer quidem, nam videas eos volare per singula quaeque divinae legis volumina: Here perchance some will demand whether that heretics do use the testimonies of holy scripture? they use them assuredly and that vehemeutly, for you shall see them fly through every volume of the heavenly law. Read (sayeth he) the works of Paulus Samosatenus of Priscilianus, iovinianus, or Eunomius, and thou shalt find an infinite heap of examples, almost no page omitted which is not died and coloured with sentences of the old and new Testament Remember (sayeth Hilarius) that there is no her tike which doth not feign that his blasphemies which he preacheth are according unto Scriptures. 
Orat. ●. con●. Const.  And faint Austin is of opinion that heresies proceed from no other fountain than scriptures wrongly expounded and crookedly wrested: Non aliunde natae sunt haereses, 
Tract. 1● in 10.  nisi dum scripturae bonae non intelliguntur benè: From no other place heresies do proceed, but whilst good scriptures, are evilly understood. But yet herein these heretics are liberal of that which is none of their own, and like Aesop's crow they proudly deck themselves with other birds feathers. For what right or title have they to scriptures of which they are so prodigal? or how came they to get the possession of scriptures? truly as thieves take possession of other men's goods. For Catholics have had the scriptures in their keeping time out of mind, as all histories, all writings of the fathers, all councils and ancient tradition will witness for us: and so at least by prescription, Catholics are the true and lawful possessors of scriptures. Yea histories, and the ancient books of the fathers, who from the first age alleged scriptures, are arguments that we are the lawful heirs to the Apostles concerning the inheritance of scripture, 
Second book chap. 1.  because as hereafter shallbe proved we only are the successors to the ancient fathers and Apostles themselves. And seeing that such arguments would cast them in law, if the controversy were but about apiece of ground, I see no reason, but that if the reformers of this time and the Catholic should put this case to any indifferent judge, to wit whether they or Catholics are the lawful possessors of scripture, the judge must needs give sentence for the Catholic party which was the first possessor, & possessor even from the Apostles of holy scripture. Yea the Reformers of this age Luther and Caluin when they began to preach, received not the Bible of any of their praedicessours, because before Luther, there were no Lutherans, neither were there Caluinists before Caluine, but they found the Bible in the Catholic & Roman Church which ever had the custody of this treasure, and out of this Church they took the Bible else had they never come to the knowledge of it, and seeing that they took it with out the lawful owners leave, it must needs follow that they are thieves and no lawful possessors, and consequently have no right to use it especially against the right owner. Wherefore if they will fight with us with no other weapons than scriptures we must first put them to the proof of their title, lest we admit them to scriptures, who have no right unto them, and permit them to use our own weapon, to cut our own throats. And seeing that they can not prove themselves lawful possessors of scripture, neither are we bound to dispute with them by scripture, neither have they any right or reason to allege scripture against us. But yet as I have declared, heretics fingers itch, and are never well but when they are fingering of Scriptures, and their tongues are never so glibbe, as when they are fauced with texts of scripture. And why think you do they so willingly allege scripture, and decide all by the bare letter of scripture? Many reasons there are why they do so. For first their guilty conscience urgeth them thereunto. For as the fowl and beautilesse maid, perceuing her defect and want of natural beauty, is fain to use extrinsical colours, to make a show of beauty where in deed is none, so the heretics either doubting in conscience of the verity of their opinions, or at least not able otherwise to defend them from error, are constrained to use scriptures as colours, to make at least a show of verity where in deed no verity is to be soound. 
Amb in ●. vlt. ad Tit  Fos as S. Ambrose sayeth, impiety seeing authority to be esteemed; covereth herself with the veal of scripture that whereas by herself she is not acceptable byscripture she may seem most commendable. Wherefore Vincentius Lyrinensis sayeth, 
Supra ●. 17.  that heretics herein are like to sluttes who perfume with sweat odours and powders those things which of themselves are stinking, or to those nurses who anoint the cup brims with honey to make heedless children to drink down the bitter potion, or to those Apothecaries who upon the boxes which contain poison, write the names of sovereign restauratives: for so heretics with the sweet odours of scriptures perfume the ordurs of their heresies, & with the sweet honey of God's word which tasted to Davidlik the honey comb, 
Psal. 11●.  deceive the unheedy and make them drink poison in their golden cups, & applying scripture to their poisonful doctrine they make the simple to buy of them deadly poison in steed of wholesome medicines, that is heresies instead of true faith and religion. Let not then our Reformers brag so much of scripture, neither let them think to carry away the bucklers because they allege scripture for every thing, and let not the simple people think themselves secure, because their minister proveth what he preacheth by scripture, because every heretic doth the same & the devil himself hath alleged scripture, 
Mat. ●.  and would have proved that Christ must cast himself headlong from the pinnacle if he might have had that liberty which all heretics do take, 
Li praescrip. c. 19  that is to expound scripture as he pleaseth. Wherefore Tertulian refuseth flatly to dispute with heretics by bare scripture, and counts it but lip labour. And good reason had he, because either they will deny scripture when they can not draw it to their bias, or they will expound it as they list, if it may abide glozing; and so they shape not their doctrine according to scripture but rather scripture according to their doctrine. yea it is so usual a thing amongst them to discanon books of scripture or to dismember and may me them if they stand in their way that there is almost no part of scripture which by one heretic or other hath not been rejected or mangled. 
Cast no 〈◊〉 Scriptura. Si●t●● l ●. ●. Bibl.  Martion was so coning in this point that Tertulian calleth him muss Ponticus the mo●●se of Pontus, 
Li. ●. contra Marcionem.  for gnawing of scriptures. Cerdon denied saint Matthewes Gospel because it sets down the Genealogy of Christ which could not stand with his heresy that avouched that Christ had no true flesh, 
Ters. l praescr. c. ●1.  and that he was not truly borne. 
Iron l. 1. c. 28. Epiph. ser. ●0.  The Ebionits' refused saint Paul's Epistles because they reject the jewish ceremonies which those heretics allowed of. 
Prefat in Evang Cocl. in vitae.  And why did Martin Luther the Archeretike of this age disallow of S. Iames epistle but because it is so opposite to his solafidian justice? otherwise what more certainty hath he of saint Paul's epistles then of that of saint james, especially he having no knowledge neither of the one nor the other but by the Roman and Catholic Church, which esteemeth of both alike: Saint Austin was so far from doubting of the verity of this epistle of Saint lames that he affirmeth it to have been written of purpose against certain heretics who misconstred Saint Paul's epistles, 
V de operibus ●. 14.  
Infra l. ultio c. 3.  as Luther and Caluin do. Why doth Luther discanon job? Why jesteth he at Ecclesiastes? Why contemneth he all the Glospells but saint Ihons', the epistle to the Hebrewes, and that of judas? Why doth not Caluin like of Ecclesiasticus, judith and the Maccabees, but because that these books are opposite to some point or other of their doctrine? What marvel then if we refuse to decide controversies with them by bare scripture, who if we bring a place of scripture, against them, will deny it to be scripture though all the world say contrary? And although they admit some books of scripture, yet those they so admit, that they will have the bare letter, or joined with their voluntary exposition, to be the judge of controversies, that so they may make scriptures to speak as they list, and to give that sentence which pleaseth them. For bare scripture is of a waxy nature, and is as pliable to admit divers expositions as wax is to take divers impressions. Which is the cause why heretics out of scripture so easily can excogitate and devise even contrary heresies. 
Li ●. contrae Brent.  Luther therefore calleth scripture the book of heretics, and Hosius relateth howone compared scripture to Aesop's fables, because you may as diversly interpret scripture as you may moralise those fables. Others call scripture a nose of wax, because it may be wrested and wried every way: which comparisons although they be odious, and little beseeming the majesty of scripture, yet are they true if by scripture you understand the bare letter of scripture, without an assured interpreter, as the Reformers do. For the ba●e letter of scripture is so ambiguous & may have so many senses and meanings that it may be applied to what you will, & may be, & already hath been used for the proof of the most absurd heresies that ever were. But whilst they allege the bare letter of scripture for confirmation of their doctrine, well may they so delude the unlearned, but men of learning and intelligence, are well assured that the bare letter is no more scripture, than the body of a man is a man. For as the soul is the life of the body, & that which maketh a man, so the sense is the life of the word and that which giveth scripture life, essence, & being. 
Com. ad. Gal.  Wherefore saint Hierome sayeth that The ghlospel is not in the word but in the sense, not in the bark but in the sap, not in the leaves of the words but in the root of the meaning. Let not therefore out Reformers vaunt in their pulpits that they try their doctrine by the touchstone of scripture, neither let them insult over Catholics as though they relied only on men's decrees, and Pope's Bulls for if they give us the letter of scripture with the true meaning which is the formal cause and life of the word, we will reverence it as the word of God, and prefer it before all the decrees and writings of Pope and Church, but take the true sense from it, and it is no more scripture than is a man without a soul, because as the same body may be the living body of a man and a dead carcase also, so the same letter with the true meaning is the word of God, with a false meaning, it is the word of the devil. As for example, those words of our Saviour: The father is greater than I, 
Io. 1●.  taken in the right sense, that is according to Christ's human nature, are the true word of God, but taken in the meaning of the Arrians who imagined Christ a creature inferior even in person to his father, they are no word of God but of the devil, unless you will grant heresy to be the word of God. The reason of this is, because words, are words, in that they are signs of the minds meaning, and do explicate her inward conceit, and consequently that is God's word which explicateth his meaning, and divine conceit; but if it explicate the mind of the devil or of his ministers such as all heretics are, then is it not the word of God but rather of the devil. Werfore when the letter of the scripture is joined with the right meaning, then do we grant though men written it, that is is the word of God, because it explicateh his meaning, who spoke unto the holy writers in that meaning, and directed their hearts and hands in the writing of the same. 
Isa. 1.  In so much that God sayeth to isaiah: 
Heb. 1.  Behold I have put my words in thy mouth. And saint Paul saith that God diversly and by divers means spoke in times passed unto our forefathers, in the Prophets, that is in the mouche of the prophets, putting in their mouths that which they were to speak and directing their, hands to write it. For as the vital spirit of man frameth his words in his mouth and giveth them their meaning, so the words of the prophets and other holy writers were framed in their mouths by the spirit of God. Which is the very cause why divines say that God was the principal speaker and writer of scripture, and that the Prophet, Apostle or evangelist, was his instrument, and as it were the pen, mouth, and tongue of God, 
Psal 44. Praefat. in Mat. 1. Li. 7. conf. ●. vlt l ●●. Civit. c. 38. Hom 10. in ●exam.  in that he was guided & directed by him and his holy spirit. Wherefore David who was one of these writers sayeth that his tongue is the pen or quill of him that writeth swiftly; and saint Gregory and saint Austin affirm scripture to be the venerable style of the holy ghost, and saint Basil sayeth that not only the sense of scripture but also every word and tittle is inspired by the holy ghost. Wherein a difference is put betwixt scripture and definitions of the Church, Pope, or Counsels. Because these are assisted by the holy ghost, only that they may define the truth, and so the sense of a councils definition confirmed by the Pope, is of the holy ghost, but it is not necessary that every word or reason in a Council proceed from the holy spirit of God, and therefore divines say that in a Council, that thing only is necessarily to be believed, which the Council of set purpose intended to define. But as for other things which are spoken incidently, and as for reasons which the Council allegeth, they are not of that credit, although without cuident cause they are not to be rejected. And this is the cause why the ancient fathers do way and ponder every word and tittle, which interpreters of the Counsels canons, or definitions, do not. Werfore (as I said) let them not charge us with contempt of scripture, for our opinion and estimation of scripture is most venerable, if it be in deed scripture, yea we avouch that in itself it is of far greater authority than is the Church or her definitions, because though God assist both, yet after a more noble manner he assisteth holy writers in writing of scripture, because he assisteth them infaillibly not only for the sense and verity but also for every word which they write, and every reason and whatsoever is in scripture, whereas he assisteth the Pope and Council infallibly, only for the sense and verity of that which they intend to define, but neither for every word nor for every reason, nor for every thing which is incidently spoken as is already declared. And yet we say also that although scripture of itself be greater than the Church, and independent of her, because not from her but from God it hath authority and verity, yet the Church is better known to us then scripture, and therefore though she make not scripture, yet of her we are to learn which is scripture, and what is the meaning thereof; which is no more disgrace to scripture then that faint John and the Apostles should give testimony of Christ because they were better known than he, though his authority in itself was greater than theirs & not depending of them. yea the reformers every one in particular be he a Cobbler, is according to their doctrine to judge by his private spirit which is scripture and what is the meaning of scripture, which seemeth to have more difficulty then that the Church, and her common spirit, which Christ promised her, 
●●. 1●. 1●.  should challenge unto her such authority. Give us therefore true scripture and we will reverence it as the word of God, but corrupt this scripture by putting a false sense and signification to the letter, as the reformers do, and then we will not acknowledge it for the word of God, because it explicateth not his mind and meaning, but rather we detest it above all other words & writings whatsoever, because in that it beareth the name of the word of God and yet is not, it is the most pernicious word that is. For as the sourest vinegar cometh of the best wine, so the most pernicious word is the letter of scripture corrupted and misinterpreted. If then our adversaries will have scripture to be judge in controversies of religion, let them allege true scripture, that is the letter with the true meaning, of which not every private spirit, but the common spirit of the Church must be judge, as shall hereafter be proved. But if they will make the bare letter to be judge, we deny first that the bare letter is scritpure, and then we avouch that the bare letter is no good rule nor lawful judge of religion, because the letter of scripture, may have divers senses, and may serve every heretic for his purpose, as before is declared, and so can be no rule nor judge, which both must be assured, and certain. To this they answer that scripture is so easy that the meaning is evident to every one that hath eyes to see it, & so he may as easily see the conformity of their religion unto the rule of scripture. For as when the measure is known it is evident how long the cloth is which is measured by it, so scripture as they say being easy, it is most evident when religion is true, because it is evident when it is agreeable, and conformable to the assured, and known measure of scripture, by which all religions are to be squared out and measured. But that scripture is not easy to be understood, it is easily to be proved and so this answer is as easily to be rejected. 
●. Pet. 3.  For first scripture herself confesseth her own obscurity. For saint Peter in his epistle which is a part of scripture, avoucheth that in S. Paul's Epistles, which our reformers will not deny to be another part of scripture, are certain hard things, hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable deprave, as also the rest of the scriptures, 
lib. de fid. & op. c. 14.  to their own perdition. And saint Austin saith plainly that those hard things are his commendations of faith which the ignorant even from the Apostles time did so misconster, as though his meaning had been that only faith without charity and good works doth justify. 
Act. 1●.  The Eunuch could not understand Esaie without an interpreter, 
Psal 1●8.  David crieth for understanding at God's hands before he dareth adventure to search the la, 
Luc 24.  the Apostles could not understand scriptures till Christ opened their sense and eyes of understanding, and yet our reformers are so eagle-eyed that they can see clearly and that at the first sight into the darkest and obscurest place of scripture. The ancient fathers affirm that scriptures are obscure, and amongst them saint Hierome sayeth that the beginning of Genesis and the end of Ezechiel, 
Ep. ad Paul.  in times past was not permitted to be read of any till he were thirty years of age, and why but for the obscurity which might rather deceive, than direct the younger sort? 
l. 2. con. c. 14.  S. Austin that great light of the Church & miraculous wit, who when he was but twenty years of age understood the predicamentes of Aristotle at the first sight, thought neither so highly of himself nor so basely of scriptures, as to think himself able by reach of wit to attain unto the profound sense and meaning of them, but rather though he had studied them more days & nights then our ministers have done days only, 
Ep. 3. ad V●lus.  yea or hours, and had written more for the interpreting of scriptures then ever they read, yet saith he: So great is the profundity of them that I might every day make profit in them if I should with greatest leisure, greatest study, and a better wit, endeavour to come unto the knowledge of them only, and that from my tender youth unto crooked old age. And in his books which he written upon Genesis, in his tracts upon saint John, and divers other parts of scripture he moveth many doubts and difficulties; 
Prafat. assert. ●rt da●.  and yet Luther sayeth that scriptures are more plain and easy than all the father's commentaries. Petrus Lombardus commonly called the master of sentences, 
Li●. ●. d. 12.1. p. q 65.  saint Thomas & other divines armed with philosophy, and furnished with the school literature, apply not withstanding all their wits to the explicating of the first chapter of Genesis and the creation of the world in the first six days, 
〈◊〉 Hexam●●.  as also saint Basil, saint Ambrose & others do. And yet Luther boldly affirmeth that no part of scripture is to be called our counted obscure. 
l. de seru● ar. bit.  Saint Gregory Nazianzeen and saint Basil studied scriptures for thirteen years together, and yet durst not swerver a jot from the interpretation of the ancient fathers. 
Ruff. l. 11. c. 4  Saint Hierom not withstanding that he was so well seen in the Greek and Hebrew tongue, 
ep. tot. ●●.  and other both profane and sacred literature, yet went he as far as Alexandria to confer with Didimus. Who also running after a cursory manner over all the books of scripture findeth such difficulty in every one, as though he understood this only in scripture that he understandeth not scripture, or as though this only in scripture were easy to be understood, that Scripture is not easy, & ending with the Apocalypse thus he concludeth: Apocalypsis joannis tot habet sacramenta quot verba, parum dixt pro merito voluminis, laus omnis inferior est, in verbis singulis multiplices latent intelligentiae: The Apocalypse of John hath as many sacraments as words, I have said little for the merit of the volume, all praise is inferior, in every word there lie hidden many senses and meanings. And yet Luther and Caluin and commonly Puritans and Protestants avouch scripture to be facile and perspicuous, that by the own light you may see it, and see into it, and need no more help of an interpreter than of a candle to see the son when it shineth in the midde-daye. But if this doctrine be true why is there such contention amongst the Reformers for the true explication of divers places of Scripture? Why did the fathers, and why do the Reformers make so large commentaries upon scripture? Why retain they a divinity lesson in Oxford and other Universities, especially now that they have turned the Bible into the vulgar tongue, which being done, by the private spirit of the minister at the first sight it is easily understood? If this be true then certainly had the ancient fathers very dull pates, who with all their study, industry, prayer, fasting, solitude, tongues, philosophy, and sanctity of life, could not attain to that knowledge of scripture in a long life's time, which a minister by and by getteth at the first opening of the Bible. But tell me in good sadness: are you in jest or earnest when you say that scripture is easy? When you read the first chap. of Gen. the prophecies especially of Daniel, the Psalms of David, jobes' witty sayings, salomon's proverbs and Canticles, saint Paul's epistles, S. Ihons' Apocalypse, do you find no difficulty? I can not think it, because even experience teacheth that nothing is more evident than that scripture is not evident. For first the very letter and phrase of scripture is obscure and ambiguous. Secondly many speeches in scripture are prophetical, many parabolical, many metaphorical, which commonly are full of obscurity. Thirdly it is proper to scripture to have many senses under one letter, as the literal sense which the holy writer first intended, and this sense some times is signified by proper words, some times metaphorical, yea sometimes also this literal sense under one letter, is divers. Sometimes the sense is spiritual which is that which the things under the letter do signify as for example those words of saint Paul Abrahame had twoe 'zounds one of the handmaid another of the free woman, 
Gal. ●.  literally do signify Abrahames two sons, because that the letter importeth and that first is intended, but these twoe sons were figures of the old and new Testament or the twoe peoples which lived under those Testaments, and so this is the spiritual signification of those words which they not immediately but by means of those twoe sons do signify. And this sense is either moral or tropological when it tendeth to manners, or allegorical which tendeth to faith or the Church, or anagogical which tendeth to heaven or life everlasting. Wherefore this word Jerusalem literally signifieth the city so called, morally, the soul of man which God inhabiteth by good life or the devil by bad, allegorically, the Church militant, and anagogically, heaven and the Church triumphant. Now who is he that dareth promise to tell us infaillibly when a place of scripture is to be understood literally or spiritually and in what literal or spiritual meaning? 
in c 16. Ezec.  Saint Hierome affirmeth that Apollinaris, Tertulian, and Lactantius, and other millenarians, imagined after the resurrection, a reedification of the Temple and terrestrial Jerusalem, and that Christ in it should reign for a thousand years and we that time should live in all corporal pleasures, because they undetstood certain places of scripture literally and properly, which should have been understood spiritually & metaphorically. And contrariwise the same father ascribeth Origens' errors in the exposition of the beginning of Genesis to no other cause, 
ep. ad Paul.  then that he imagined that the said chapter ought to be understood metaphorically and spiritually, which should have been interpreted historically, properly, and literally. And what man in his wit can think it so easy to hit always of the right sense, where the senses are so diverse and in which so many learned men have banguered. Truly when I consider with myself how evident a thing it is that scriptures are hard and obscure, I marvel how our Reformers can persuade themselves that scriptures are easy. and some times I am induced to think that when they say so they speak not as they think? but yet when I call to mind another opinion of theirs, which is that the true meaning of scripture is that which every ones private spirit imagineth, I see it to be as easy to interpret scripture, as to imagine, which is most easy, because the imagination is free and can as well imagine chimeras as true objects. As for example if that were the true meaning of Aristotle which every one would imagine, than were it an easy matter for every cobbler to understand Aristotle were he in Greek or Latin, because he can imagine what it pleaseth him with great facility. And this if I be not deceived is the cause why now every sister of the lord whom saint Paul commandeth to be silent in the Church, will needs be a bibliste and an interpreter of Scripture. For if that be the true sense of scripture which the private spirit imagineth, if she have the spirit (as why should she not as well as the minister especially it being a received doctrine amongst them that every one by his private spirit can judge of scripture) why may not she comment upon the scripture, and mount also into the pulpit, there to preach the doctrine of her spirit. But o fancies, o Luciferiam pride, to which heresy leadeth even the frail and imperfect Sex which nature seemeth to have debarred from pulpits. 
Lib. praesc.  This pride Tertulian espied in the heretical women of his tyme. Ipsae mulieres hereticae quam sunt procaces quae docere audent, contendere exorcismis agere, curationes repromittere, forsitan & tingere: Even the heretical women how malapert are they, which dare be so bold as to preach, and to take upon them to exorcize, and to promise miraculous cures, yea perhaps to baptise. And whereas Apprehentices are bound seven years to an occupation, to learn only a mechanical trade, the art and science of expounding scripture which is the highest science that is, seemeth to these subtle wits so easy, 
Ep. ad Paul.  that as saint Hierome observed in some of his time, every cobbler, every old trot, and doting fool can with out a Doctor find out the secret meaning of scripture, and teach before they be taught. But let them say and believe if they can or will, that scripture is easy, the experience & reason which I have alleged will prove the contrary. And truly if honey be hidden in the comb, marrow in the bone, and precious stones in the sea, if gold be gotten with labour out of the bowels & secret veins of the earth, and roses be hedged in with pricking thorns, if nature hath hidden all perfection and natural sciences & vealed them with such obscurity that without great industry they can not be discovered, good reason was there that the mystical meanings and sacred senses of scripture should be vealed with an obscure letter and covered with many enigmatical speeches. For first by reason of this difficulty the study of scripture asketh a man's whole life, and so keeping him occupied, distracteth him from profane, idle, and evil occupations. Secondly the difficulty of scripture makes a man to have a better esteem and higher conceit of the same, because things easily learned are easily contained, 
Li. 2. doct. Christ. c. 6.  & knowledge hardly gotten is highly priced. And therefore as S. Austin noteth, the holy ghost in scripture hath provided easy things to satisfy our hunger, & obscure places also to take away loathsomeness. Because our understanding with easy things only, would be soon cloyed, & with obscurity only would easily be deterred. Thirdly this difficulcy imprinteth in our memory the word of God more deeply. For as the iron is more hard to receive impression then wax or water, yet keepeth it more firmly, so that which we learn hardly, we forget not easily. Fourthly it controleth our high-clyming and deep searching wits & makes us to acknowledge the weakness of our intellectual eyesight, which if it be so dim ne, that it can no more sustain the blazing splendour of natural verities, them can the night-crow's eyes the beams of the son, much less● can it behold (unless it be by a glimpse and glimmering) the splendent rays of supernatural verities, revealed through the dark veal of holy scripture. Fiftly this difficulty increaseth merit and desert, when so constantly we believe those verities which in scripture are rather vealed them revealed. Sixthly this difficulty preserveth scripture from profanation, and is the cause why every one can not babble of scripture as they do of easy things, and as the heretics of this time do, because they imagine scripture to be easy. seven it hides our sacred mysteries from ꝓphane infidels who are no more worthy of this divine knowledge then are the beastly swine of precious pearls. 
Orig. li. 1. in Le●it.  Eightly as Cirill or rather Origen very well observeth, these obscure phrases and figures wherein the divine verity is clad, are as it were a seemly habit which graceth the word of God and makes it seem the better unto our weakish eyes. For more are we delighted to see the verity of the sacred Eucharist under the figure of Manna, and of the Sacrament of Baptism, in that shadow of the red sea, then if we saw the same set forth to ourvewe in bare words though never so plain. But now let us see what our ghospellers can say to this experience and reason by which I have proved scriptures to be hard and difficile? It is true sayeth Luther, scriptures are in many places hard, but where they treat of things necessary to salvation, there are they plain and perspicuous. Is it true (Luther) that so me parts of scripture are hard? 
Supra.  then must thou eat that word of thine in which thou sayedst. Ego de tota scriptura dico, nullam eius partem obscuram dici volo. I say of all scripture, I will have no part of it called obscure. And wilt thou stand to it, that where scripture treateth of things necessary to salvation, there it is plain and easy? I ask then of thee, whether the doctrine of Baptism be not necessary to salvation? And if thou say yea, then is some part of scripture which treateth of things necessary, hard and difficile, for otherwise Caluine would never have cavilled so much about those words of Christ. 
Io. ●.  Unless a man be borne again of water and the holy ghost. Is not the doctrine of the blessed Sacrament necessary to be believed? And yet who seethe not, how many diverse expositions the ghospellers have devised upon those few words. 
Mat. 26. Luc. 22.  This is my body? Is not the doctrine of justification necessary? And yet it is so obscurely set down in scripture, that Osiander a voucheth, 
Ex Bol to 3. l. 3. l. 2. de justif. initio  that amongst the confessionistes there are twenty different opinions about the formal cause of justification, and every one is deduced out of scripture. At least they will grant me that the doctrine and faith of the blessed Trinity and of Christ's divinity, and humanity is of necessity to be believed; & yet the Ebionites, Arrianes, Nestorians, Eutychians, Valentinians, Monothelites, and Appollinaristes, who held diverse heresies concerning the Trinity and Incarnation, proved them all to their thinking out of scripture. Which is a sign that scripture is not easy, for where all is plain, all men commonly agree, and if scripture where it speaketh of those mysteries were perspicuous they would never have banguered so grossly in expounding them. But rather than my adversary will stand out, he will be content to play small play. If sayeth he thou be a good Grammarian, all will seem easy unto thee. And was not I pray thee S. Austin who read Rhetoric in Milan, was not S. Hieronwhoe was excellent in all the three tongues, a Grammarian? They were, They were, and yet they confessed as I have declared, that scriptures were full of difficulty. Yea in England our ministers have the Bible in English, and so have no need of any help of Grammar, and yet can they not agree about the scriptures meaning. Yea in all sciences, it is one thing to be a grammarian another thing to attain to the knowledge of the science, for many a school master in England can constrew Aristotle which yet can not understand him, and if grammar were sufficient, then after grammar, we should need no study neither in divinity nor philosophy, nor any other science: And to use no other argument then experiens, let our Grammarians in Ingland after they have constrewed the psalms, tell me wether they do yet understand the psalms? But my adversary will show that he is not tongue tied and therefore will not be put to silence. If (sayeth he) you confer one place with another, one will explicate another. This is another starting hole which he hath found out. But this also is but a poor shift. For although one place conferred with another many times giveth a great light to both, yet doth it not so always fall out. For diverse have conferred the same places and yet have gathered diverse meanings, yea sometimes conference of places augmenteth the difficulty, and maketh a show of contradiction which before appeared not. Now gentle reader thou wouldst think that this man were satisfied or else that his mouth were stopped, but yet he desireth one answer more, and if that will not serve, he will either yield or hold his peace. If you pray to God (sayeth he) to illuminate you, he will reveal the meaning of scripture unto you, or if you have the spirit & be not carnal but spiritual, or if you be praedestinate, you shall find all as plain in scripture, as the kings high way. This answer is so poor, that it well argueth that our adversary is put to an hard shift and to a last reply: because in this answer he declareth ignotum per ignotius, an unknown thing by that which is more unknown. As for example, I would have him to assure us whether that we expound scripture rightly or wrongly & he telleth us that if we pray as we ought to do, or if we be of the elect, or if we be spiritual men, we shall easiilie find out the meaning of holy scripture. And seeing that nothing is more uncertain than whether we pray as we ought to do, whether we be elect or Noah, or whether we be true spiritual men or no: by this rule we shall never, be assured of the true sense of scripture. And were not I pray you saint Austin, saint Hierom, and other ffathers before mentioned, the elect Saints of God? was it not like that if any prayed a right, that they did so? were not they liker to be spiritual men, than our fleshly ghospellers, whom their wives can not content? Or can the reformers assure us that they themselves are elect, that thy pray just as thy ought to do, that they are spriritual men who have the right spirit of interpreting scripture? It followeth therefore which I intended to prove that if we believe these reformers, because they allege scriptures according to their own exposition, we must of necessity give ear unto all false prophets, who can, and have already & hereafter will allege scripture for what soever they shall preach; and so if these Reformers be admitted no heretics nor heresies can be excluded or rejected. Which conclusion although it necessarily ꝓpceedeth from the premises, which before are laid down, yet to help the readers memoire, I will lay them down again briefly, that out of them he may gather the intended conclusion more easily. Thou must therefore (gentle reader) call to mind which before is proved; to wite that it hath always been the manner of heretics to allege scripture, and with such cloaks to conceal their heresies; That they had no authority to use scripture against our wills who are the only lawful possessors; that all though they perforce have ever used them, yet in very deed they gained nought thereby, because that word which they used was no scripture, and is so hard, obscure, and ambiguous that unless the meaning be first agreed upon, it may serve for a proof of all heresies, as hither to it hath done; and seeing that our reformers use no other proof for their doctrine, but the letter of scripture interpreted at their pleasure, we can give no credit unto their doctrine, unless we will allow of all ancient heresies, neither can we admit their people for lawful preachers unless we will admit also all false apostles, who have always alleged scriptures for their heresies, and so can not without plain partiality be rejected, if our new pretended reformers, be received.   

The third Chapter treateth of the pri●at Spirit which the pretended Reformers have made supreme judge in earth in the interpretation of scripture, whereby, as it is proved, the gap is opened to all heretics, and none can be excluded, if these new Reformers be admitted to determine of religion by the private spirit.  
Self-love (sayeth one) is as good as guilding, which maketh that to seem goodly, wherein ourselves be parties. For as guidling maketh all to seem gold, be it but stone or wood underneath; So self-love maketh to ourselves, even our selves, and all our actions to seem comely & seemly, be they never so absurd & unseemly. Suum cuique pulchrum (sayeth the) latin adage, to which is answerable our English proverb, Every man as he likes quoth the good man to his cow. To Pan, his own pipe and piping sounded more melodiousely than A pollo his harp & harping. Every maid thinks herself of all to be the fairest, or if she acknowledge any one defect in beauty, she thinks that to be counteruayld in many other perfections. Every mother deems her own children the most well favoured, to every hen her own chicken is most pleasing, yea every owl and crow thinks her own youngone fairer & better feathered then the white dove, hawk, or Eagle. Artisans praise most their own workmanship, Poet's price their own poems at the highest rate, & every scholar thinks his own wit most pregnant, and every doctor prefers his own books & writings before all other. Yea all men by nature not ruled by reason, nor corrected by grace, fall most willing lie in love with their own conceits, and the broods and youngones of their own devising wits. The reason hereof is, own self, to which, as every one is more near, then to another, so is he most addicted and affected. For to ourselves we are one, to others we are only united, and so first we like ourselves & our own doings, next of all, those and their actions, who arnearest and most united unto us. Wherefore although, in that God is the chiefest good and goodness itself, he should by all reason be first and best beloved, yet because he is not so near unto us, as we are to ourselves, we give the may denhead and prime of our affection unto ourselves. 
l. de diligende Deo.  This saint Bernarde in his book which he made of the love of God observed long since. Imprimis (sayeth he) diligit hemo seipsum propter se, caro quip est & nihil sapere valet praeter se, cumque se videt persenon posse subsistere, Deum sibi quasi necessari●m incipit diligere, at verò cum Deum coeperit occasione, propriae necessitatis colere & diligere, Deus illi dulcessit, & sie gustando quam suavis est Dominus, transit ad tertium gradum & diligit Deum propterse: First of all man loveth himself for himself, because he is flesh, and can like of nothing but himself, and when he seethe that of him self he can not stand, he begins to love God as a thing necessary unto him, but when he beginneth to love God upon occasion of his own necessity, than God beginneth to wax sweet unto him, and so by tasting how sweet God is he passeth to the third degree and loveth God for himself. And as we love ourselves and our own things best, so doth this self love blind us and hide from our own eyes our own defects. Werfore Demosthenes was want to say that it is a most easy thing to deceive ourselves, for while we desire especially to have our own actions liked, we easily persuade ourselves that they are to be liked. 
l 9 de leg. ●. p.  And therefore Plato counseleth every man to fly this vice of self love which the Grecians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not to be ashamed to learn of others especially when they are our betters. Now if ever any were sick of this disease, it is the heretic especially of our time, who preferreth his own opinion before the common consent of fathers, and his own private and particular spirit before the common spirit of the Church: who though a general council, in which all the gravity, sanctity, wisdom, and learning of the Church is assembled together, define the contrary, will never change his opinion, but will prefer his own particular opinion and private spirit before all councils, fathers, ages, & Churches, and he but one, will stand against all, and he but one, will be judge of all in interpretation of scripture, and will be judged of none. 
l. ●. count haer. ●. 2.  This intolerable pride & self love of their own opinions Saint Ireneus avoucheth to be a common disease amongst heretics. unusquisque (sayeth he) fictionem quam à semetipso adinaenit, illam esse sapientiam dicit, seque indubitate & incontaminate & sincere absconditum scire mysterium. Every one sayeth that his own fiction which he hath devised is wisdom, and that he undoubtedly, incontaminatly, and sincerely doth know the hidden mystery. A rius that famous or rather infamous heretic, not for spoiling Diana's temple but for robbing Christ of his divinity, was so wise in his own conceit, 
Nic l. 8. c. 7. l. 4 c. 12.  that he thought none of the ancient father's worthy to be compared with him. Aetius another soldier of Lucifer's band was wont to say that he knew God as well as he knew himself. 
Theodoreth. l 4. her. fab..  Manicheus bragged that he was not only an Apostle of Christ, 
Aug. count ep. fund.  but also a Paraclete. Nestorius' eloquent indeed, though not so sweet in uttering, 
Socr l. 2.3.22.  as forward to come to the utterance, took such pleasure therein, that he had no mind to read the ancient fathers. But to leave the old and to come to our new-born heretics, you shall see that in this self love and liking of their own opinions, they degenerate not a jot from their ancetours. Luther seeing himself oftentimes to be pressed with the old father's authority, preferreth his own private opinion before their common sentence, and decree, and blusheth not a whit at the matter. 
Li, cons. ●●gem Angl.  Nihilcuro (sayeth he) si mill Augustini, mill Cipriam, mill Ecclesiae contra me sentiant; I care not if a thousand Augustine's, a thousand Ciprianes, a thousand Churches think otherwise then I do. 
Pro l. lib constatut● E●clesiae.  And in another place: Doctrinam meam (sayeth he) nolo judicari à quoquam necab Episcopis, nec ab Angelis ommbus, volo per eam & Angelorum judex esse: I will not have my doctrine judged of any neither of Bishops nor of all the Angels, I will by my doctrine be judge even of the Angels. And again in another book of his: 
L do s●r●●● arbier●●.  Ego (sayeth he) in hoc libro non contuli sed asserui, & assero, net penes ullum, judicium esse volo, sed omnibus suadeo ut praestent obsequium. I have not conferred in this book but I have affirmed, and I affirm, neither will I that any man iudgè hereof, but I counsel all to obey mine opinion, But especially he triun phe●li●n another place of the afore said book which he written against Henry the eight. I oppose (sayeth he) the gospel (but expounded as he pleaseth) against the sayings of fathers and Angeles (as though Angeles were in opinion contrary to the gospel.) Here I stand, here I remain, here I glory, here I triumph, here I insulteagainst the Papists, Thomists, Henricistes, Sophistes, and all the sayings of men though never so holy. See how this man pleaseth himself in his own opinion, and how he preferreth it before all men and Angeles. For all though he will seem to prefer only the ghospelle before them, yet seeing that the controversy is not betwixt scriptures, & fathers (because the father's reverenced scriptures more than ever Luther did) but whether Luther or they expounded scripture most righthy, he in deed preferreth himself before all the fathers that ever were, and in conceit, triumpheth over them all, but before the victory. Caluin also in this self pleasing opinion showeth himself as bragging and Thrasonical as Luther for his heart, and contendeth with him who shall stout it most. 
l. 4. Inst. ●. 9.  Nulla Conciliorum (sayeth he) Pastorum, Fpiscoporum, nomina, nos impedire debent, quo minus omnes omnium spiritus, ad divini verbi regulam exigamus: No names of councils Pastors, Bishops, aught to hinder us from examining the spirits of all men by the divine word. And in another chapter of the same book, 
c 〈…〉.  explicating those words of scripture This is my body in a contrary sense to the Lutherans he sayeth that he having by diligent meditation examined those words doth embrace that sense which the spirit telleth him, 
Mat. 26.  and leaning to this (sayeth he) I despise thewisaon of all men which can be opposed against me. See, see, the pride of an heretic, may not Luther and every false prophet say that he hath used diligence and that the spirit tells him the contrary? Were not the fathers as diligent as Caluin, as Wise, as learned, and as virtuous, who expounded those words in their proper sense? No, no, one Caluin in his own conceit surpasseth them all, and his opinion and private spirit must take the place and upper hand of all the Austin's, Ambroses', Gregory's, Hieromes, of all the councils, yea and Churches also, all though they were thousands in number. 
Virg. Aeneid. 9 ovid. meo. 1.  Of these men's private spirits may be said that of the Poet Sua cuique Deus fit dira cupido: Every once cruel lust is his God. Sibi quisque profecto est Deus: Every one truly is to himself a God. For these men especially, who prefer their private opinions before Fathers, councils, Churches, yea and Angels also, What do they but adore the idols of their own imaginations, as their God? Truly these men which are not sicut caeteri homines, like other men at either gods or beasts, and that by the sentence of Aristotle the prince of Philosophers. For if by this philophers' verdict, solitary men or rather haters of society, whom the Grecians use to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be other gods or savage beasts, what are these men who flying always the company and common consent of Christians, v●ill go alone in all their opinions, and symbolise or sort themselves with no men. But this it is to leave the Catholic Church, which when the heretic forsaketh, he bids adieu to all fathers, councils, antiquity, and common consent, which only are to be found, in this Charch; and must of necessary stand post-alone, and stick to his private spirit & opinion against all the Christian world. I would saint Bernard had been to deal with these singular spirits, but because he is rid of these troublesome companions, we will at least allege his words which he once used against one Petrus Abailardus possessed with the same evil spirit, who said that man was not delivered by Christ from captivity of the devil: and although (sayeth he) the doctors of the Church think the contrary, yet other wise it seemeth unto me. What (sayeth saint Bernard) shall I deem more intolerable in these words? 
Epist. 100LS.  blasphemy, or arrogancy? What more damnable? rashness or impiety? Were it not more meet that such a mouth should be bobbed and beaten with stones then refuted by reasons? doth he not justly provoke all men's hands against him, whose hands are against all? All (sayeth he) shink thus, but I think otherwise. But what dost thou think? what bringest thou better? What more subtility dost thou find; What greater secret dost thou boast to have been revealed unto thee, which hath not been known to so many saints, which hath escaped so many wisemen? yet tell us, what that is which seemeth true unto thee & unto no man else? And so forth. If to these words of Saint Bernard gentle reader thou add Luther or Caluin in steed of Petrus Abailardus, and putting out his singular opinion put one of theirs in the place, thou wilt easily peroeive that these words may as well be used against them as him, for they are no less singular than he as appeareth by their proud assertions which I have alleged, 
Luth. art 27.28. Ca u l. 2. Inst.  and may appear more by their opinions of the private spirit which in other places they make the judge of the meaning of scriptures & of all other controversies of religion. Do not they say still in effect that which saint Bernard calleth intolerable and damnable: I say so, let all the world say the contrary? Do not they prefer their own exposition of scripture before fathers, counsels, Churches, yea Angels also? Do not their mouths out of which have proceeded such arrogant speeches deserve rather to be beaten with stones then to be refuted by reasons? Behold England my dear & foully deceived country, to what pride these Lucifers have induced the. Why didst thou forsake the Roman Church which was ever taken even of infidels for the only Christian society? Whom didst thou follow when thou didst leave that Church, but only a singular spirit? And whereon now dost thou rely, whereon dost thou ground thy religion? Not upon fathers, nor councils, nor antiquity, nor Church, nor common consent, for all these, thy newapostles whom thou hast followed have rejected. dost thou then rely upon Luther or Caluin or the new-found ministers? Thou seest by the first chapter how they can not prove their mission nor distinguish themselves from fall prophets, which are assuredly to come and are all ready come. And what reason hadst thou to forsake thy grave & learned for fathers for these skipiacks, and the common spirit of the Church for their fingular spirits which are so private that thou shalt hardly find twoe of them conspiring in one opinion. Dost thou ground thyself on scripture? Bare scripture as I have proved in the second Chapter is no sure ground without the true sense, and how dost thou know that thou hast the right meaning of scripture? I know thy answer: My spirit (sayest thou) telleth me so. This then is thy stay, this is thy ground in religion, this is thy last refuge to which thou must needs stick unto as I have declared, when thou leavest the Catholic Church. But is not this intolerable pride to make thy private spirit to be judge of scripture and sense of scripture? Is not this intolerable arrogancy to make thy own private spirit judge of counsels, fathers, Church and all, and to prefer thine own private opinion, before their common consent, as though thou being but one, couldst see further into scripture and that at the first reading, than they all could do by great study and labour? But what assured stay thou hast in this thy spirit we shall see anon. now I will put a difference herein betwixt these spiritual men, and that absurd heretic Suenkfeldius, lest I seem to do, injury to my adversary, and not to be able to overcome him, unless I belly him. Suenkfeldius therefore denieth all Sacraments and scripture, and is so spiritual, that he will live only of the spirit, and neither of the word, nor Sacraments. But Luther and Caluin admit both Sacraments, and the word of scripture, mary yet they will have the spirit to give sentence of scripture and the meaning of scripture. For if you ask them how they know that faith only justifieth? they will answer by scripture. But ask them how they know that which they allege for that opinion to be scripture, or that to be the true meaning of scripture in which they take the scriptures by them alleged? They will not say that by the fathers, councils, or Church, they at assured, but by their own private spirit. So that although Caluin writeth against the Libertines for relying only on the spirit, yet at last he falleth into the same labyrinth himself, for whilst he will be judged by scripture, yet so that his spirit must give sentence which is scripture, and what is the meaning thereof, he pronounceth the last sentence, from which is no appeal, by his private spirit. Against this spirit of theirs I could bring many arguments, but of itself it is so fantastical, that these few shall suffice to refute it. First I say, that although God might have governed his Church by internal revelation of a private spirit, which should propose unto every one in particular, which is scripture, & what is the meaning thereof, which is true faith, what is the will of God, which is the way to salvation, and what are the commandments, never theless this were a government rather for angels then for men. for men are visible and have a visible conversation, and therefore are to be directed by visible pastors, visible laws, and rules, and nor by an invisible spirit? For this cause almighty god who could sanctify us as he doth the angels without any visible means, yet because we are men, he hath always bestowed his graces upon us by sensible signs and sacraments and by a visible dispensation of men. Secondly suppose God should govern every one by his inward spirit, yet this were not sufficient for others amongst whom we converse for how shall they know my spirit to be of God, and not of the devil? Wherefore this spirit is not sufficient to govern and direct men in a peaceable conversation: because whilst every man would brag of his spirit, and none could prove the same unto othersno more than our spirits in Ingland can, they would fall together by the ears about their spirits and never should be able to part the fray or to end the controversy. Thirdly neither is this spirit unless it be joined with a plain revelation (as our spiritual heretics see by experience that it is not) sufficient for a man's own self to rely on for the assurance & quietness of his conscience. For I ask of him that thiks himself most assured, how he knows that his spirit is of God & not of the devil? If he answer, that the spirit brings, with it a certain firm persuasion which makes a man to his thinking aslured; I say that this is not sufficient, because every heretic yea every Turk hath this inward persuasion, and Suenkefeldius who denied all Sacraments and scriptures, and would be guided only by the spirit, was fully thus persuaded by his spirit, which he also did verily think to be of God. If these men thought verily that they had the spirit of God, and yet were deceived; why may not Caluin, why may not every brother, begin to doubt of his spirit? Yea why should we believe him on his bare word, to have the true spirit unless he can prove it by miracles or the authority of the Church to whom Christ promised this spirit, which he can never do. For as for miracles henever could raise a dead louse from death to life, and to prove his spirit by the authority of the Church, were to prove it conformable to the common spirit of the Christian Church, which he neither can nor will do, because be will be singular. If he prove his spirit by the scripture he winds himself in a circle out of which he can never get himself out with honour or honesty. For even now he proved scripture and the meaning thereof by his spirit, and now he proveth his spirit by the scripture, and if you ask again how he knows this to be scripture, he will answer, by his spirit, and so will never get out of this circle but will still prove scripture by his spirit, & his spirit, by scripture, for which kind of argument the Logicians, will deride him and hiss him out of the school. For to prove scripture by the spirit, and the spirit by scripture, which scripture according to Caluin is not known but by the spirit, is to prove the spirit by the spirit, and idem, per idem. But behold I pray you to what the devil can persuade man when he hath blinded his eyes by depriving him of the light of faith. There is nothing so secret unto man as is this spirit; because the heart of man is a bottomless pit, whose depth a man's own self can not sound, it is a labyrinth into which when you enter you can hardly find the wayto get out, spirits also are diverse, & want not in man's ●arte, places to shroud & means to transforms themselves: They will often times make a show of the spirit of God, when indeed they are the spirit of the devil, who long since promised that he would be a lying spirit in the mouths of all false prophets, and yet every brother of the new religion waranted neither by miracle, nor evident reuclation, nor Church, nor council, will needs be persuaded yea and assured also, that his spirit is of God. Fourthly God had been unreasonable if he had given us no other judge to interpret his laws, than this secret spirit. For he hath bound us to a religion which is above reason and often times against sense and sensuality, and this he hath delivered unto us in a book very obscure and hard to understand, and with all he hath obliged us to the belief, and obseruarion of this la and religion, under pain of aeternal damnation. Now if he hath given us no other interpreter of this law but our own private spirit which is to secret and subject to error, he should seem to have intended and desired our damnation, and to have given us a law not for a rule to direct us but for a snare to catch us, and a pitfall to ruinated us, by cause we can not keep this law unless we understand it, and not keeping it we shallbe damned. Truly better had princes provided for their subjects then God for his, because princes make plain laws and yet lest the subjects shousld plead ignorance or complain that they are punished for not keeping a law which they understand not, they have provided interpreters whose glosses are plain; and yet Christ our lawegiver according unto Caluins' opinion, hath given us an obscure law, and a more obscure interpreter to wit the secret and uncertain spirit, and with all exacteth hell pains of us if we observe not his law in the right sense & meaning. Fiftly if this private spirit be admitted for an umpire in matters of religion all Hierarchy and order in the Church, falleth, for then all are heads none are feet, all are eyes to direct none are inferior members to be directed, all are pastors no sheep, all are masters no scholars. Away then with Bishops yea and superintendents also; avaunt preachers we are not tied to any men's spirit in particular, no not to the Church's spirit in general, bieause every man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught of God immediately by his private spirit. It is not true which S. Paul sayeth that Christ gave us some pastors some doctors, 
Ephes ●●  because all are pastors; It is not true which the scripture affirmeth in many places which shall hereafter be alleged that the government of the Church is monarchical, no nor Aristocratical, but rather democratical and populare, because every one of the people by his private spirit is supreme judge and a supreme head in matters of religion, every cobbler or tinker if he be a faithful believer, judgeth all & acknowledgeth no superior; because whilst his spirit judgeth which is scripture & what is the meaning of scripture, to which all are subject, he sumoneth all to stand to his judgement, and he will be adjudged by none: & so whilst all are superiors, none are inferiors yea none are superiors because a superior can not be with out an inferior, and where is no superior nor inferior there is no subordination, where is no subordination, there is no order, where no order, there is confusion, and so where the spirit ruleth, there can not be the Church, because it is compared to a city, yea unto a kingdom also, in both which is a seemly order. Lastly this spirit openeth the gap unto all heretics and heresies which according to my promise I shall prove evidently and lay open manifestly. For if that be true sense of scripture which the private spirit suggesteth, if the reformed new religion be the sincer religion because it is squared and ruled by scripture, or rather by scripture interpreted by the private spirit, then certainly by the same way that this pretended religion is entered in to the world for currant; by the same way, may all heretics and heresies, all false prophets and false apostles, claim free passage also, and by no equity can be excluded if Luther, Caluin and their brotherhood be admitted. For every lying prophet can allege scripture as well as they, he can brag of his spirit as well as they, he can say and swear that he hath the right spirit which assureth him also that he expoundeth scripture rightly, and preacheth truly; and seeing that the reformers of this age can say no more (for they have neither miracles nor other authority to prove their spirit as all ready is proved) it followeth evidently, that if they be admitted and received, no false prophet, though never so fantastical, can be rejected.   

The fourth Chapter demonstrateth that in rejecting fathers and counsels, which consisted of fathers, the pretended reformers open the gap, and gate, to all heretics and heresies.  
PArricide, and murder of parents, in old time was deemed so heinous an offence, & so unworthy a fact (as being not only contrary to reason but also repugnant unto nature) that Solon the famous lawmaker decreed no law against it, not for that he thought it not worthy punishment, but because ●ee counted it more barbarous, and inhuman, then could be by man committed. And in deed man's nature so much abhorred this un natural fact, that until six hundred years after Rome was built, no man ever is read of so unkind as who could find in his heart to embrew his hands in his parent's blood. 
Cic. pro Roscio  Lucius Ostius, as some do think, was the first who laying aside all humanity, against nature's propension and natural affection, laid violent hands upon his father, & deprived him of being, of whom he had received being. Which fact was no sooner committed but nature abhorred it & the Romans' then the most civil people, to represent the enormity of the offence, devised a punishment which should not only be a just pain but also an emblem of the fault. 
Cic supra. Iwen Satyr. ●. Plut. in vi ●a Ostij.  They decreed first of all that the murderer should be sewed up in a leather sack. Secondly that sacked, he should be cast into the water. thirdly with him were included a cock, a viper, an ape, and a dog, to acompanie him at his death, whose natures he had imitated in his life. he was enclosed in a sack and so cast into the river, that so at one time he should lose the light of the son, which he could not see, of the fire, which he could not feel, of the air, in which he was not permitted to breath, of the water in which he swimming was not refreshed, of the earth which he touched not; and so he was deprived at one time of the benefit of the son, and the four elements of which all were produced, because he had been unkind and unnatural to him, of whom he was begotten. His companions at his death were a Cock, because as this bird fighteth with his fire, and treadeth the hen which hatched him, so he hath been injurious to him that begot him; A viper, because as this beast eateth himself out of his damns belly, so he ruineth him who gave him being, an ape, because as he imitateth man in his actions and some what resembles him in form of body, yet is in deed no man, but a beast, so this unnatural murderer, carrieth the shape of a man, but in conditions is no man, because he hath cast of all humanity; And lastly a dog, that this creatures faithful service to his master who only feeds him, may confound this monster and condemn his treachery who hath been so false to his parent who hath not only fed him but begotten him. This kind of death in mine opinion were a punishment not unfitly to be laid on heretics especially the most malicious (for with them who err not of malice I wish more gentle dealing) who are so unnatural children to Christ their father as shall appear in the third book, who so revile & miscall the ancient fathers of whom they received faith and religion, and are so unkind unto the Catholic Church their mother, which by the Sacrament of Baptism regenerated them, and gave them their spiritual being. For they deserve to be deprived at one time of the heavens and elements of which all things are in some sort produced, who contemn the Church, the councils, the fathers, and chief pastors, of whom and by whom they received their supernatural being by which they are Christianes'. They deserve a cock at their death, because as the cock fighteth often times with his sire, and abuseth the hen that hatched him, so they contend with ancient fathers and as much as in them lieth deflower their mother the Church which bore them spiritually; a viper also aught to die with them, because like vipers by schisms and heresies they ear them selves out of the womb of the Church; an ape must also suffer with them, because as he resembleth man but is in deed a beast so they like apes imitate true Christians bearing the name of Christ as they do, admitting certain scriptures and Sacraments as they do, devising superintendentes for the bishops of the Church, ministers for priests, tables for altars, & a profane Cene and supper, for the sacred Eucharist, and yet in deed are no true Christian but monstrous infidels and worse than jew and Pagans; 
Th. ●. 2. q. 〈◊〉. ar. 6.  a dog also to make up the number they worthily deserve, to put them in mind that dogs may teach them fidelity for dogs though they receive some times blows, and never any greater benefit than crusts and bones, yet are so faithful to their masters, that they will not leave them todeath, whereas the heretic is so ungrateful and unfaithful to Christ and his spouse the Church, that for no other cause then an itching humour of pride and self love, he will run after every sectmaster that can only drop a few texts of scripture interpreted by his own spirit, leaving the Church & ancient fathers, and consequently Christ himself because they ever went together, and who heareth one, heareth the other. But lest I condemn them to the punishment of parricides for contempt of ancient fathers, before I prove them to be guilty of the fault, I will set down word by voord, their own sayings and assertions, by which shall appear, what respect they bear, and what kindness they show, towards their ancient forefathers. 
Ex Epiph. her.  Basilides an infamous heretic vaunted that he and his only knew the truth, and that all his forefathers were sues & canes, hogs and dogs, not worthy of the margarites of his doctrine. 
Lib. s.c. ●0.  The Valentinians (sayeth Ireneus) if you urge them with scriptures which they can not answer, will deny them, if you provoke them to be tried by tradition delivered unto us by a succession of priests and fathers, adversantur traditioni dicentes se non solum presbyteris, sed etiam apostolis existentes sapientiores, sinceram invenisse veritatem: they oppose against tradition saying that they being wiser then the priests and apostles, 
〈◊〉 3.  have found out the sincere verity. Arius as before I have rehearsed thought none of the father's comparable unto him: Nestorius disdained to read their works; and our reformers of this age, show by their unreverent, and railing speeches against the fathers, that they are descended of the same race of parricides and revilers of their ancient fathers. To begin therefore with the first patriarch of this new religion, Martin Luther that man of God (although by his own confession he was so familiar with the devil that he hath eaten a bushel of salt with him) in his book against the king of England having called him blokhead, 
l. ● count Reg. Axgl. fol. 348  beetlehead, grossehead, dull pate and such like names, for pressing him with the authority of fathers thus he decideth the matter Hencricus dicta patrum inducit pro sacrificio missario etc. Henry for his massing sacrifice brings in the sayings of fathers. Here say I, that by this means, my sentence is confirmed: for this is it which I said, that the Thomisticall asses, have nothing which they can allege but a multitude of men, and the ancient use. But I against the sayings of fathers, men, angels, and devils, put down the gospel which is the word of the aeternal majesty: here I insult over the sayings of men though never so holy, so that I care not though a thousand Austin's, and Ciprianes, should stand against me. Thus one Martin Luther braveth them all & thus this good child reverenceth, and respecteth his ancient fathers: for as I said in the last chapter, although he seemeth only to prefer the scripture, yet seeing that they admitted, and alleged scripture also, the question is, who hath better skill in expounding scripture, and if we believe this man all the fathers might have gone to school to him. 
in expos. a. 6●▪ fol. 167.  Zuinglius will not be behind Luther in this matter. They affirm (sayeth he) and we deny that the mass is a sacrifice. Who shallbe judge of this controversy? The sole (say I) and the only word of God. But by and by thou beginnest to cry, The fathers, the fathers have thus delivered unto us. But I bring to thee not fathers, nor mothers, but ● require the word of God. Caluine desireth to be counted modest, but herein also he could not contain himself. 
l. ●. Inst. ca 8. ●. 10.  When the adversaries object to me (sayeth he) that this was the cusstome, I answerre that the old fathers in this matter wanted both la and example, & were carried away into an error, whilst they attributed to much to the name of penance, and the common people's opinions. 
 And again, I am little moved with those things which occur cuery where in the writings of father's concerning satisfaction. I see truly many of them yea (I will speak simply as it is) all almost of them whose books are extant, were in this matter dece●ued, and spoke hardly. And in another book of his he calls the fathers of the council of Trent hogs & asses. 
in Antid. can ●.  Peter martyr calleth papists, Patrologos, not Theologos, 
〈◊〉 votis.  for alleging fathers. Doctor Humphrey in the life of lewell, perceiving that lewell had offered to much when in the heat of his sermon he was content to be tried by fathers; sayeth that he might have used a better defence for him sel●e, than the authority of fathers, who (sayeth he) if they teach contrary it little skilleth, for what have we to do with fathers, with flesh, & blood, or what pertaineth it to us what the false Synods of bishops do decree. 
Vide ●undem in praefat in Orig.  Beza calleth Athanasius Satanasius, and the fathers of the Nicen Council, blind sophists, ministers of the beast, and staves of Antichrist. 
●●ont. Papatum  And although Luther affirmeth that saint Gregory the great, was the last good Pope, yet Bibliander calleth him in derision the Patriarch of ceremonies. Melancthon condemneth him for allowing of the sacrifice of the mass, for the dead. 
praef. ep Zui●● gl. & Mel.  Paulus Vergerius written a book of the toys and fables of Gregory. Horn in his book against Abbot Fecnam, calleth this saint (to whom we English men own no less than our conversion from paganism to christianity) a blind buzzard. 
Cent 1. pag. 66 72 Cent. ● par. 678.  Bile the chronicler sayeth that this saint, sent Austin the monk to plant in England his Romish religion, but yet (sayeth he) Lat●mer is much more worthy to be counted England's apostle, because Austin brought nothing but man's traditions, mass, crosses, litanies, whereas Latimer with the hook of truth cut of these superstitions. Whitaker in his book called reprehension, 
Pag. 8●.  sayeth that the fathers for the most part were of opinion that Antichrist is but one particular man, but in that as in many other things the● erred. The like respect they bear to general councils in which the wisest and gravest fathers of the Church were always assembled. Luther in his book of Counsels calleth them Sycophants, and flatterers of the Pope, and sayeth that the canons of the Council of Nice, which Constantine reverenced and honoured with his presence, are hay, straw, sticks, and stubble. 
Ibidem.  Yea in this council he findeth a plain contradiction, because the council forbids all eunuchs to be promoted to preesthood, and yet commandeth priests to live chastened As though only they who are gelded could live chaste, and as though there were no mean betwixt wiving, and gelding. Yea sayeth Luther, 
l. ●●nt. Regem Angliae.  if all the decrees of councils were powered into thee with a pipe, yet would they not make thee a christian. 
l. 4. Inst c. 9 sect. 8.  Caluin will examine all councils by the word, before he will give any credit unto them, and seeing that the fathers in councils examined their decrees by scripture also, Caluin will make an examination upon their examination, and so will be judge of them all. But lest I weary the reader with to long a catalogue of reviling speeches of these contumelious chammes and parricides, I report me unto the indifferent reader, whether they deserve not the punishment of parricides, who so scoff, taunt, contemn, and revile their forefathers? But my meaning was not to condemn them upon whom God his sentence must pass, my drift is hereby to show how much in reviling fathers they crack the credit of their religion, and how withal in rejecting this authority, they open the gap to all heretics and heresies. And as concerning the first point, it is well known, that antiquity was always reverenced: old age was ever respected, old coins priced, ancient statues admired, old writings esteemed, and in all arts, the most ancient professors of the same, bear the bell a way. In painting Appelles hath the credit above all painters, in statuary works Lycippus; in comedies Plautus and Terence; in Tragedies Seneca; in histories Livy, Sallust, justine; in Poetry, Homer, Virgil, Ovid; in Rhetoric Demosthenes, and Cicero; in Philosophy, Plato, and Aristotle; in Divinity, Peter Lombard, saint Thomas of Aquin, Scotus, and such other subtle schoolmen; And shall not the ancient fathers and doctors of the Church, who by their art professed exposition of scripture, be reverenced, and credited in their art before our unlearned and upstart ministers? shall antiquity give credit to Poets and painters, and not to Doctors & interpreters of scripture? What is this but to prefer ꝓphane literature before religion, Philosophy before faith & divinity, paganism before Christianity, yea poets & painters before Doctors & fathers of the Church? If any one now should say, that Plato, and Aristotle were but dolts and Asses, that Appelles was but a blurting painter, that Cicero was but a railing Rhetorician, that Virgil & Ovid, were but rhyming Poets, Whose ears could abide, such contumelies? Think then (indifferent reader) how fowl mouthed the heretics of this age are, who thus miscall the ancient fathers, renowned for their skill in interpretation of scripture, and other learning, as appeareth by their learned commentaries, homilies, and other works? Think how arrogant these men are, who prefer themselves before all ancient fathers, even in that learning, which was their profession, and for which they have been for many hundred years, as famous, as ever Cicero was for eloquence, Aristotle for Philosophy, or Virgil & Ovid, for Poetry. But whilst they contemn the authority of ancient fathers, what greater authority do they bring but upstarte and unlearned ministers? Whilst they reject the fathers as men who mighterre, are they gods or angels? are not they men as the fathers were, and not worthy to be their men & servants to carry their books after them? But now according to my promise, I will declare the first point by me proposed, to wit how in rejecting fathers, they crack their own credit. For these fathers were learned, grave, wise, glorious in working miracles, and great in bearing of authority in the Church of God. Their profession was preaching, teaching, and interpreting of scripture, in which art they are ancient, and famous for many hundred years: Some of them were scholars to the Apostles, others succeeded immediately the Apostles scholars. The new Apostles are new and young, who began but the other day to study, and to interpret scriptures, and peradventure many of them would never have been able to make a sermon, had they not the help of the father's commentaries & homilies. Let then the indifferent reader be judge, whether the religion which the fathers taught and professed or that which these new Apostles have devised, be likest to be true, and whether it be not more probable, that they preached & teached according unto scripture, rather than our new and later Bible-clerkes. Truly to say that a Luther, Caluin, Zuinglins, Beza, is herein to be preferred before Austin's, Ambroses', Hieromes, Gregory's, were as absurdly spoken, as if one should prefer the painters of these days, before Appelles, or the Physicians of this age before Galen. More over where these fathers went, there always went religion, where they were Doctors, that was the Church of Christ, where they were pastors, there was always the fold of Christ, of them consisted all the general councils, by them were the ancient Canons decreed, and old heresies condemned, all the bishoprics, seas, and Churches, by them were governed, and by their means erected. They were the men who in all ages opposed themselves against heretics, as true pastors against the ravening wolves who had only the coat of shepherds, against them & their people, were raised all the persecutions as against the only Christianes', their actions, their offices, in God his Church, their books, their miracles, their lives, their deaths, do fill Ecclesiastical histories, the writers whereof intending to write the beginning & progress of the Christian Church, write only of the Roman and Catholic Church, the pastors and Doctors whereof, were the ancient fathers. So that whilst our reformers refuse the authority & doctrine of the fathers, they cut themselves from the Church of Christ, because that, & the fathers (as all histories & monuments declare) went ever together, and they join in part with all old heretics, forasmuch the fathers by doctrine, and censure, ever condemned, because in one heresy, or other, they aggree with them all, as shallbe in the next book demonstrated, and they let not to confess, with Toby Matthew, that no man can read fathers and believe them, & embrace this new religion. Read Genebrard (gentle reader) and thou shalt see how in the end of every age he setteth down a catalogue of all the ancient fathers who were counted the only true pastors, as also a list of all the heretics. them the Catholics which now live profess to follow as the heretics of this age will confess, those infamous heretics, the reformers adore & embrace their doctrine, as I shall prove hereafter in the second book. judge thou then whether the Church and Christian religion be with these reformers and revilers of fathers, or with the Catholics uhom they have. Nicknamed Papists. This argument of the father's authority, put Luther many times to his trumps, and sometimes afflicted him, with no little scrouples; but because he had a large conscience, he swallowed them up, 
Praefat l. de abrog. miss● privata.  & in time digested them all. How often (sayeth he) did my trembling heart beat with in me, and reprehending me, object against me that most strong argument? Art thou only wise? Do so many worlds err? Were so many ages ignorant? What if thou errest and drawest so many into error to be damned with thee eternally? And in an other place. 
To. 5. ann●●. breniss.  Dost thou, a sole man, and of no account, take upon thee so great matters? What if thou being but one man offendest? If God permit such, so many, and all to err, why may he not permit the to err? Hither to appertain those arguments. The Church, the Church, the fathers, the fathers, the councils, the custom, the multitudes, & greatness of wise men. Whom do not these hills of arguments, 
To. ●. in Gal.  these clouds, yea these seas of examples ouer-whelme? And yet again this scrouple assaulte●h him. Some (sayeth he) will say unto me: The Church so many ages hath so thought and taught, So have thought, & taught, all the primitive Churches, and Doctoures most holymen, much more great and more learned than thou. Who art thou that darest dissent from all these, and obtrude unto us a diverse doctrine? Thus God moved Luther's heart, which might have been a sufficient call, to have recalled, and reclaimed him; but he being obstinate; thus put this motion by: When satan thus urgeth, and conspireth with flesh, and reason, the conscience is terrified and despaireth, unless constantly thou return to thyself, and say, whether Cyprian, Ambrose Austin, or Peter, Paul, and John, yea an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet this I know for certain that I counsel not men to human but divine things. Art thou sure Luther, when thou hast so many, 
See Reinolds in his refut. c. ●.  and so learned fathers against thee? Darest thou prefer thy own particular judgement, before their common consent? Yea (layeth M. Whitakar) Luther in some case may prefer himself before all the fathers, & a thousand Churches. For when his doctrine is according to scripture then is it to give place to no fathers. But this is as much to the purpose as the patch beside the hole, because the comparison is not betwixt fathers and scriptures, which are to be preferred: because the fathers allowed and alleged scripture even for those points of doctrine for which Luther doth, and all the Luther's in the world can not prove that all the fathers held any one opinion against scripture; but the question must be, whether Luther or all the fathers did best understand the scripture; and therefore if Luther hold against the fathers in exposition of scripture, he preferreth himself before them all. As for example, Luther allegeth scripture to disprove free will, all the fathers allege scripture to prove it, and Luther expounds scripture one way, they another, else they could not both allege scripture for contrary doctrine. Wherefore if Luther sayeth that he expoundeth scripture truly, and therefore cares not for all the fathers, he preferreth his own judgement before them all, and so can not answer that argument grounded in the father's authority, nor comfort, himself with this, that he forsooth hath the word of God which is above them all. And so Luther must give us leave to come upon him with his own argument, which he shall never answer. The Church from the beginning hath taught, and expounded scripture other wise than thou dost, so many Austin's, Ambroses', Ciprianes, councils, and ages, have preached other wise. Are they all deceived hast thou only found out the truth? What if thou rather art deluded? Thou art but one, they are many, thou art of late, they of ancient standing, thou a sinner, they saints, thou some scholar, but they were learned doctors, thou hast a wit, but all their wits were of a greater reach, thou seest some thing, but so many eyes must needs have a greater insight; Thou hast studied scripture but they more, thou hast watched at thy book, but they in night-studie have spent more oil than thou, though thou peradventure more wine than they, & thou allegest scripture for thy doctrine, they for the contrary. And so their judgement must be preferred before thine, & consequently theirs shallbe the true doctrine, they the true Pastors, theirs the true Church; & so ours now is the true Christian religion, we the right Christianes', who aggree with those fathers, and the Church of which they were pastors and preachers: and Luther and the reformers, who will have no part with the fathers, are no members of the true Church, because the ancient fathers and the true Church were never yet separated, but always went together. The first point being proved we will come to the second, in which I shall prove that in rejecting fathers they open the gap to all heretics who may say what they will (as the reformers do) if that authority be contemned. But first it shall not be amiss to declare what authority the fathers have, & whether they have infaillible assistance of God to expound scriptures righthly; for if they have not: neither are Catholics assured of their faith by their authority, neither do the heretics open the gap to heresies by rejecting their authority, which if it be not infallible, may itself also authorize and countenance heresy. 
Ephes. ●.  Saint Paul sayeth that God hath provided us of some Apostles, some Prophets, others Evangelists, others Doctors & Pastors to the consummation of saints to the work of the ministery unto the edifying of the body of Christ, that if for the instruction of his Church. Where the first place is giu●n to Prophets, Apostles and evangelists who written the scripture, in the second place follow doctors and pastors because their office is not to write scripture but to interpret it; And the reason is yielded why these doctors are given unto us, lest that we should waver like childrem and be carried about with every wound of the doctrine of men. 
Ibidem.  Now if all the pastors and doctors which we call fathers should of could err, than were they not appointed to keep their sheep from wandering, rather should they be the cause of their error, for the sheep must here the voice of their pastors, and so if the pastors err, the sheep must err with them, if they wander the sheep who know nothing but by their pastors, can not keep the right way. And if thou say that in case of error the people must leave the pastors, I demand of thee how they shall know when the pastors err, who know nothing but by the voice of their pastors? And suppose they should leave their pastors. then is the frame of the body of Christ's Church dissolved, and the members are separated from the head, and the Church is a headless body: then do they leave the salt, by which they should be salted and preserved from corruption in religion: 
Mat. 5.  Then do they leave the ligt, by which they should be illuminated. 
Mat. 2●.  And how then is that true; upon Moses' cheer sit the Scribes and pharisees do those things which they say? are the pastors of the Church of less authority than the pastors of the synagogue? If they can err, then is it not true which Christ said who heareth you heareth me, unless you will say that Christ also may err in them and with them. But our heretics will say that all the fathers are men. I grant it but they are men directed by the holy ghost, and Christ was a man, and yet not only as God, but as man also, he could not err; and the writers of scripture as Moses, and Solomon, and the prophets of the old law, and the Apostles and Evangelists in the new law, were men, and yet they erred not, nor could not err, unless we will call scripture in question. But where (say they) read you, that the fathers have the infallible affistaunce in exposition of scripture? Where I read that they are light, that they are salt, that they are pastors to whom when we hearken we hearken to Christ; 
Mat. ●●. Io. 21.  Where I read that we must do what they say, where I read that the Church can not err which must follow her pastors, where I read that the Church which learneth all of her pastors, is a pillar of truth. 
2. Tim. ●.  But some fathers have erred. I grant it, but never all agreed in one error together: never all the fathers of all ages, yea not all of one age (for to these also we must hearken) have conspired in an untrutrh. And I demand of our reformers. Whether they be not men also? And I think they will not deny it. If they be men, I ask whether they can not err in expounding scripture? If they can then have neither they nor others by them any assurance. If they can not err because every one of them hath the spirit: Then say I, that more probable it is that so many spirits of the father's conspiring in one can not err, then that no particular and private spirit can err, especially seeing that these private spirits are diverse and contrary, and we have no more assurance of one than another. judge now (gentle reader) whether that the Catholics religion which is conformable unto the fathers and pastors of the Church be the sincere christian religion, or rather the religion of the heretics, which is aggreeable to no common but only to a private spirit; especially seeing that we have such warrant for the common consent of fathers but none at all for the private spirit of every private man. Now let us see in a word how by rejecting this infallible authority of fathers, they leave no certain rule for exposition of scripture, and so open the gap to all heretics and heresies. For lay away fathers which were in all ages counted the only pastors of the Church, the authority of councils is nothing worth, for they consisted of fathers, the authority of the Church is of as little esteem, because she all ways believed as her pastors did, yea she could not tell what to believe but by their instruction: scripture therefore is only left and the private spirit, & seeing those twoe bare authorities, as before is proved, open the gap to all heresies, the denial of the father's authority must needs do the same. For suppose a new heretic, yea a devil from hell in the likeness of a man, should preach a new heresy contrary to all the heresies that ever where, might he not allege scripture for it, expounding it as he pleaseth? And if you demand of him how he knoweth that he expoundeth it aright, might he not say that his spirit tells him so? And if you allege that all that ever taught before him were of another opinion, and gave another exposition of scripture; might he not say as easily as Luther and Caluin do, that they were men & erred all the pack of them▪ And so if authority of fathers be rejected he or any other might say what he would and no man could control him. Wherefore to conclude if we give ear unto the ghospellers of this time who have rejected, the authority of fathers & will consequently judge all by scripture sensed by the private spirit, we must hearken to all heretics, and open the gap yea the door to all false apostles, who can not without manifest partiality be excluded and repelled, if these men be admitted.   

The fift Chapter showeth that they have no probable means to induce a reasonable man unto their religion, and that therefore if we give credit unto them, we must give credit to all heretics preach they never so absurd & fantastical paradoxes.  
IT is a common opinion amongst the ancient fathers and divines, that our fay the being supernatural, can not be demonstrated by reason, as opinions of Philosophers may be, because it aimeth at things a 'bove reason Philosophy, soars no higher than reason gives her leave, and so in Christian religion we ought more to rely on faith and authority, than reason, and we can not show ourselves more reasonable, then to leave of reasoning in things above reason. But all though it be so that we can not prove our religion by reason, yet we may set it forth with such testimony of miracles, antiquity, common consent, and such like motives, as shall convince a man of reason, that this religion involueth no evident absurdity against reason, but rather is very probable, and most credibly to be belceved. 
2.2 〈…〉 ar. 〈◊〉  For although as saint Thomas sayeth our religion be not evidentely true, yet is it euídenter credibilis, evidently credible, because though in itself it be obscure, yet hath it been so credibly delivered unto us by credible signs and tokens, that no man can with reason think it otherwise then very credible, if he well consider what testimonies may be alleged for it, which as David said are credibilia nimis, 
Psal. 〈◊〉.  ●o to credible, that is so credible as we can not with reason desire greater testimony for things above reason. In the beginning God cathechised man in this religion by Angels whom he sent, and by patriarchs & Prophets whom he inspired, by whom he taught the people what sacraments to use, what sacrifices to offer, and other points of religion, such as then men were capable of. In the la written he delivered his will and meaning concerning la, and religion, and the ceremonies, and sacraments belonging there unto by his servant Moses, 
●u●d. 〈◊〉.  to whom he appeared by an angel in thundering, and other such signs, and by whom he wrougth in Egypt, and in the desert so many miracles, for proof and confirmation of this religion. After wards in the la of grace and fullness of time, and time of spiritual plenty and riches, as in more ample manner, so with greater testimonies and signs, this faith was delivered unto us. For first our Saviour proved his mission by all the ancient prophets, who had foretold his coming, and the manner, of his coming, his office, the place and circumstances of his nativity, life, and death, which all aggreing to him concluded him to be the Messias. Secondly by infinite miracles he proved his authority & doctrine in so much that he said, 
〈◊〉. 10. ●.  that the works which he did, gave testimony of him, yea the jews confessed that he could not have done so strange things if he had not been of God. And seeing that he wrought these miracles to prove himself to be the Messias, & his doctrine to be of God, it could not be otherwise, because as God can not deceive being prima verita●, the first verity, nor be deceived being wisdom itself, so can he not give testimony of an untruth by miracles, for so should he be both a liar & a deceiver. 
Act. 2.  The apostles in like manner, after that in Pentecost they had received the holy ghost in a visible form and manner, received power also to give this holy spirit visibly to others, and to work miracles also to prove their mission, and doctrine; 
Mar. vi●.  in so much that saint Mark sayeth that they preached, and God confirmed, their doctrine by miracles, and signs that followed. Wherefore although the doctrine which they preached was out of reasons kenning, yet it was made evident by testimony, and so was evidently credible, because if God can not give testimony to an untruth, then in that he gave testimony by miracle of their doctrine, it must needs follow that it was of God. Secondly the strange conquest which the Apostles made of Idolatry in despite of all the Philosophers and Tyrants of the world, and the miraculous planting of the Christian faith, is an argument to prove our religion to be of God most pregnant, & a motive to persuade any reasonable man, most forcible. For as once the Israelites by making a procession about the walls of Hierico, 
Iosus ●.  and sounding of their trompetes (an unlikely stratagem to surprise such a city) dismantled the town & leveled the walls with the ground, so Christ jesus by the circuit of a few Apostles and disciples about the world, and by the blasts of their mouths, which were the golden trompetes which promulgated the new law, ransacked the city of idolatry, which then was as great all most as the world, made the Roman Empire subject to Christ's Church, and caused the Sceptre to yield to Christ's cross, and made Philosophy as an handmaid, to serve and attend ●ppon the faith of Christ. A strange conquest certes, whether you consider the warryers', or the manner of fight, or the force of the enemy, against whon they waged battle. And as concerning the soldiers, good lord how unlikely men, to atcheve such a victory? warriors should be men of force and strength to make the assault, and to give the onsett, to defend or offend: These were feeble fisher men. 
1. Cor. 1.  Infirma mundi elegit Deus: God chose the weaklings of the world. Warryers' especially the king or general should have riches and treasures good store; because armies can neither be relieved, nor levied without money, which therefore is called, neruus belli, the sinew or strength of war: These men were poor fishers who had no other treasure then ragged nets, & their General Christ jesus, was as poor as they, living on alms, & not having sometimes that which wolves and wild beasts have, a chamber to lodge in. 
Lus ●.  Warriors especially if they be the leaders, must be of noble birth, and parentage, for souldious are hardly led by them who are base, and not easily commanded by them, who are as mean in quality and condition as themselves: These men were fisher men the basest kind of People, if we believe plutarch, that are to be found: who therefore by their trade are banished human society, and converse more with fishes than men, and live more on the water then on the land: ignobilia & contemptibilia huius mundi elegit Deus: 
1. Cor. ●●  God hath chosen the ignoble and contemptible of this world. warriors should be wise and ingenious to lay plots, to devise stratagems, and to use force of wit, where force of arms will not serve: These were simple Fishermen, never trained up in schools, and more coning with a hook, then with a book: Stulta huius mundi elegit Deus: 
●. Cor. ●.  God chose the foolish of this world. Soldiers should be many in number lest the gross troops of the adversary terrify them with the sight of the multitude: These were a small army, and a silly flock, 
Luc. 1●.  only twelve Captains, the twelve Apostles, and 72. private soldiers I mean seventy two disciples. And yet these weaklings, were to wrestle with the might of the Roman Empire, These poor beggars were to deal with them that had the wealth of the world, These base fishers were to contend with the nobility of the world, These simple souls were to encounter with the Wisest Philosophers; and these few waged battle against all nationes upon earth, yea all the devils in hell, who also opposed against them all their hellish forces. And as touching the manner of the fight, that made the victory more incredible. For the enemies came with the flourish of eloquence, these with half barbarous simplicity, they came armed with power, these with infirmity in which virtue is perfected, 
〈◊〉. Cor. 1●.  they with pride, these with humility, they shot maledictions, these benedictions, They laid on blows, these boar them patiently, they cried, kill, kill, these cried, suffer, suffer. A strange manner of fight, where the soldiers overcame, by putting up injuries, not by revenging, by bearing not by giving blows, by laying the body open to the enemies weapon, not by close warding or defending. But if these few soldiers so ill armed, might have kept together, they had been more strong, because force united is greater than the same dispersed; but these few soldiers divided forces, and one man single went against a whole country, yea somety mes many Countries. Saint Peter sets upon Pontus, Bithynia, Galatia, and Rome itself, saint Paul goeth against Illiricus, Cappadocia, Cyprus; saint james the elder encounters with all Spain: saint james the younger with jury; saint Thomas with India, saint Matthew with Aethiopia; others with other countries, and in fine, thus they conquered the greatest part of the world. Now if we consider in what consisted the victory it will yet appear more admirable. This victory consisted not in surprising of a city, in undermining a castle, in burning of villages, in gaining of ravelings, in maiming, and kill bodies, but in extinguishing of idolatry, in extirpating vice, in subduing men's understanding, in overcoming their wills, in curbing & bridling their affections, in planting a new religion never hard of before, which commandeth men to believe firmly things above reason, and to observe laws contrary to sensuality, vice, and pleasure, which by long custom were become all most natural unto men. And to this they persuaded not a few, but all the world, nor fools but philosophers, such as Dionysius Areopagita, justinus martyr, and others were; not poor men but Kings, yea and Emperors, such as Philip, and Constantine were, and that in despite of all the tyrants in earth and maugre all the devils in hell. Yea so firmly they persuaded m● unto this new religion and new life, that thousands by and by were ready to suffer all torments, rather than to deny the least article of this new belief. Let not any therefore object unto us that our religion is obscure, and that it teacheth things above reason, for all though we can not by reason see the truth, nor prove the truth of this religion, yet it can not but be true and of God; because such men as the apostles were, to such as all theworld but they were (that is nuzzled and persuaded in a contrary religion) and after so strange a manner, could never have planted so hard a religion, and that in despite of the tyrants in earth and devils in hell, unless God had seconded and assisted them. Let not then the A theiste of this godless time, call in question the miracles of Christ and his saints wrought by them in confirmation of this religion▪ and related in the scripture, and ecclesiastical histories, as though they were but old wives tales which they tell amongst their maids spinning by the candle; Let them not say that never miracle was wrought for this religion, by this they shall gain nothing, I will come upon them with that of saint Austin; that such a religion by such, and in such a manner should be planted in the world without miracles, is the greatest miracle of all, and so in denying miracles, will they, nill they, they grant a miracle. Deny if thou wilt our miracles (for which not with standing we have as good, & better histories, than thou hast for the Roman Emperors, Captains, legions, wars, and victories) thou canst not deny, but that a few fishermen, obscure, base, unlearned, have turned all the world upside down, for this thou seest: Thou canst not deny but that the world is dissuaded from idolatry unto Christian religion, from sensuality to chastity, from gluttony to fasting, from riches to voluntary provertie, from usual vice to unacquainted virtue, from the broad and easy way which leadeth to perdition, unto the straight and narrow way which tendeth to salvation. Thou canst not deny, but that men unlearned, and impotent, have done this, whom thou canst suspect neither to have used deceit, nor compulsion. Thou canst not deny, but that many Emperors have resisted these men, and yet they have gotten the victory. Let then this religion be never so repugnant to sense never so high above reason, I believe it is of God, I believe it is true, else by such men and after such a manner, it could never have been persuaded. 
Hugo de 8. Vi●t.  Yea I will boldly say with a certain learned man: Si error est (domine) à te decepti sumus: if this which we believe be an error, thou (o lord) hast deceived us: But thou canst neither deceive nor be deceived, therefore we are assured of our religion. God therefore who hath always delivered faith unto us so credibly, and induced us unto it so sweetly by probable means, yea by evident signs and testimonies; if he hath permitted this faith to decay or to lie hidden for many hundred years, or if corruption and error in religion, hath for long time been taken for sincere religion, than no doubt by them by whom he restoreth this religion again, and delivereth it in the former perfection, by whom he reformeth these errors which have gone for truths, he will give us probable & credible means, by which like reasonable men, we may be induced unto this reformation. For if we have many hundred years by our for fathers been taught that there are seven Sacraments, that the sacrament of the Alt●r is a sacrifice, and containeth Christ's body and blood really, that there is purgatory, that we have free will, that good works are necessary, that our evil works, are no works of God, that prayer to saints and reverence done to them and their images is not superstition; them no doubt if God will have us to leave of these old opinions, and to embrace new, he will in so importaunt a matter as this is, which toucheth salvation and damnation, use probable and credible means to dissuade us from our old errors, lest that seeing no reason why we should leave them, we persist still in them, or least that we expose ourselves to danger of embracing new heresies, for old religion, as easily we may, if without any reason at all, we will forsake that faith in which we and our great grand fathers were baptized. For although faith be a Theological virtue and therefore as divines say consists not in a mean betwixt two extremes in respect of God, who is the object (because he is prima veritas, whom we can not credit to soon nor to much) yet in respect of us, and the means by which we come to know God his authority, we may exceed in believing, and we may be wanting in belief. They are deficient and to slow in believing, who when God his mind and will is proposed by sufficient motives, & tokens, yet will not give credit. This was the fault of the jew who were so slow and hard of belief, that though Christ by miracles and prophecies had proved himself to be the Messias and his doctrine to be of God, yet they would not believe him. This also was the fault of the Apostles though not in so high a degree, whose eyes were so blinded with Christ's passion, that all though the stone of his sepulchre, 
Luc. 14.  was removed, and that the angel had affirmed that he was risen, yet they would not believe it, who therefore were called tardi cord ad credendum slow of heart to believe .. They are rash and to hasty in believing who believe with out sufficient reason or testimony. Such were the Galathians who were to easily carried away from that which was preached unto them. 
Gal. 1.  Wherefore the wise man sayeth, 
Eccl. 19  that he is light of heart who believeth to quickly. And in deed if God would have us give our assent where we see no reason nor testimony sufficient, he should first do us great injury, because it is the nature of our understanding to be moved at least by probability, or credibility. Secondly he should expose us to danger of error, for he that will believe when no probability moveth him, may easily fall into an error. Wherefore it may well be supposed for certain, that God will not have us to believe any religion, though it be preached in his name, unless we have some credibility or probability to persuade us there unto. If then our reformers would have us to believe that in these and these points we and our forefathers have erred, and that henceforth thus and thus we are to believe; they must at least show us probability that we have been deceived, and that they are sent to put us into the way. For other wise we being for warned of false prophets and commanded also to hatken unto our pastors, we have no reason to forsake our ancient religion and to embrace new opinions, nor to leave our ancient pastors, and to run after strangers, unless they can bring some probability, yea and that greater than the old fathers can bring for that which they have taught us. Twoe means only I find which a doctor or preacher can use to persuade his auditors. The first is evident reason which convinceth the understanding of the hearer or scholar. And by this means our religion can not be proved, because reason can not reach unto mysteries of faith which are above reason. And so the reformers can not convince us by reason that they are sent from God to reform us and that their doctrine is the verity, because they teach many things above reason as well as we do, to wit the Trinity, Incarnation, Resurrection, faith, justification, and such like: yea as I shall prove hereafter many things also against common sense and reason. not the first, because they are above reason, not the second, because they are against reason. The second means to persuade is the authority of him who teacheth. This means Pythagoras is said to have used in his school, 
A●l. Gel. l. 1. ●. 9.  who commanded his scholars to silence for the space of two years, all which time, they might only hearken, but not ask any questions: and for that time they wear called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hearers. After wards they might ask questions of their Master, but when he had answerred they might ask no reason, but must content themselves with his authority, and count it sufficient that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said so. Now, authority is won either by wit and learning, or by virtue, or antiquity, or number, or office and dignity. And the reason hereof is, because wise and learned men are likest to see farthest into matters, and so the more willingly we believe them; virtuous men are dearest unto God, and so we are more easily persuaded to think that God imparts his mind unto them most amply; Truth also is the daughter of time, which in time brings the truth to light, and therefore we are most prone to believe old men, to whom long time brings great experience, and we well imagine that to be true which for a long time hath been holden for true; And because many men see more they one alone, we count the voice of many men, the voice of God, and we reverence that for a verity, which most men have averred; 
Rom. 1●.  and lastly because all authority is of God, and men in office are appointed by him to govern, we are ready to think that God especially directeth them, who have charge not only of them selves but of others also, which is the very cause why we use to reverence superiors decrees, unless we see a manifest absurdity in them. If then the reformers will have us to forsake old pastors, and to hearken unto new, if they will have us abjure old religion and embrace a new; let them show us greater authority then that of the ancient fathers, else we have no reason to prefer them and their doctrine, before old doctors, and old religion. But this they can never do, and so they can never bind us in reason to accept of their religion. For if we compare them with the old and ancient fathers in all the means alleged, by which credit and authority is gotten, we shall find them to come short by many furlongs in every one of them. And first for wit and learning I think neither Luther nor Caluine nor any of them all, unless their faces be brazen, have the face to compare with the ancient fathers. For they were Gregory's, Augustine's, Ambroses', Basilles, Hieromes, Cirilles, and such like, who written more than ever they read, and studied more than ever they loitered, and were in all literature so learned, that the reformers were scarce worthy to carry their books after them. And although Luther and Caluin wanted not altogether learning, yet they came short of these men; And as for their followers which were never trained up in our schools, well may they prattle in Greek, and flourish in a few vain latin phrases, yet solid learning either in divinity or philosophy, they have not. Let the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, of Basill and other places, let the confraternity of Geneva, show us a Bellarmine, Baronius, Molin, Suares, Vasques, Bannes, Gregory of Valence, an Allene, Hatding, Bristol, Gregory Martin, Stapleton, if they can? What works have they set out comparable to the books of these Catholic writers? Let an in different reader peruse the learnedest book of these reformers, 
jewel. Plessis.  & he shall see in them false allegations of fathers, corruptions of scriptures, fathers and councils, lies, impostures, affirmations without proofs words without matter, & praeterea nihil, and nothing else. As for virtue, if they have any modesty remaining, they will not (being guilty of so vicious lives) make any comparison with the former fathers who by the common report of all were saints; and their writings, miracles almsdeeds, fastings, austere penance, prayer, chastity, mortification, contempt of the world, and such like, will testify no less. And although they may object that many amongst us also have lived viciously, yet we can give them herein a ma nifest difference. For first, the first founders of our religion were men of great perfection, as the Apostles & their successors in the primitive Church, yea as the planters of religion in every country were. 
l. 1. c. 23. & 26.  Read saint Bede and you shall see that the benedictines whom S. Gregory sent into our country to recall us from idolatry, were Saints, & moved m●●e the king by their holy conversation, them by their preaching and miracles? And yet even the first of these new families, the first preachers of this reformation, even Luther and Caluin then selves, were notorious, and infamous for evil life. Luther was an Apostata, he married a Nun, he lived beastlike, & died accordingly. for after a merry and a moist supper, he was found dead the next morning in his bed, with his tongue hanging out. Caluin lived like an epicure served his belly for his God, he was a man given to revenge & puffed up with pride, and ambition. True it is, he carried marks on his back but not such as saint Paul carried, but such as the minister of justice noted him with all for his abominable lethery, 
●●lsec. in vita qius. & Gen. l. 4. an. Christi ●●66.  and as he lived so he died, an Herodes death: because lise were his executioners. Secondly although many be bad amongst us, yet I think, more amongst them. Thirdly evil life amongst us, is a fault of our own perverse will and nature, but amongst them it is the fruit of their doctrine, which (as by many arguments I shall prove hereafter) leadeth and induceth unto all dishonesty. 
In the seventh book.  Lastly they which amongst us lead a vicious life, are never amended by coming unto you: which experience hath taught, & proved in some lose Catholics, who partly for fear, partly for liberty, have repaired unto you. For they were so far from being reform by you, that so long as they conversed with you, they fell daily from one vice to another, and never stayed, till they came to the depth of iniquity. And yet we have seen many wild Gallauntes lose in life, and rioutouse in conversation, who after that they be admitted into our Church ad society, and instructed in our faith and religion, do cast of all evil customs, become modest in behaviour, temperate, sober, and who before feared neither sin, nor God, nor the devil, wax scrpulous, and fearful of conscience, and who before could not spare one half hour in a day for prayer, think now whole days to short a tyme. Yea, you seem to give good life unto us. For you will trust our word more than an obligation of one of your own sect, and if you see a man mild, modest, chaste, temperate, given to prayer, fasting, almesdeeds upright in all his actions, and exemplair in conversation, you suspect him for a papist. Yea when our priests would the better escape your Pursivauntes, they must fayne then selves in out ward show and habit to be roistours ruffions and dissolute companions, as though vice were the badge of your religion. As for number we exceed them by many countries and ages in which they never lived, and for one new minister we have hundred● of ancient pastors and learned fathers, For antiquity, although they fayne an invisible Church before Martin Luther, yet as I have proved in the first chapter and shall again hereafter, their preacher are up starts, their doctrine is as young and whereas we can show a succession of our religion and pastors for the space of sixteen hundred years even from the Apostles, they can derive their pedigree no higher, then from Martin Luther Lastly our doctors were pastors, and boar great offices in the Church of God and the first of them in our country and in every country proved their authority by miracles, 
●. 31.  and their successors proved the same by succession; but as yet the new preachers could never prove their authority and mission to be either extraordinary, by miracles, or ordinary, by succession, as is already demonstrated in the first chapter. So that for learning, virtue, antiquity, number, dignity, by which authority is gotten, we and our religion, do carry the bell away. What reason then have men to forsake Catholics and their pastors, and preachers, to hearken unto these new prophets, who neither in learning, nor virtue, nor antiquity, not number, nor dignity, can make any just comparison with them? Suppose some one should be wavering, and doubtful 〈◊〉 religion, and deliberating with him ●olfe whether to follow the old father's 〈◊〉 new preachers, should make this discourse with himself. I have been baptiaed, and brought up in the Catholic religion, and so were my fore fathers tyme out of mind, but of late years some have been so bold as to avouch that they were all deceived and damned also unless igno●unce excuse them, wherefore seeing that without true faith no man can be sa●●ed, it is good that I look into both the old and new religion, to see which by all reason I ought to embrace. But before I give ear unto these Reformers which say that they come to correct old errors, let me see what probability they bring for their pure and reformed religion. First I see they aggree not, and yet every one sayeth that he teacheth the true faith and reformed religion, and seeing that one bringeth no more authority than another, that is, scripture interpreted by his own spirit, I see no reason why I should give credit more to one then to another, and therefore because I can not give credit to all, I see no reason why I should credit any of them all. 
Hier. ●●.  Secondly I am forewarned that false prophets shall come unsent and yet avouch also that they are sent from God, and therefore unless these men can say more for themselves then they can, I see no reason which can bind me to give ear unto them. They say they are sent from God. So will false prophets say. And I examining what is their mission, find therein a great defect: for either it is an ordinary mission; and then they must show a succession of pastors whose rooms they supply, which I see they can not do, because no history makes mention either of their pastors or their service, or practise of their religion; or it is an extraordinary by which they are sent immediately from Christ, and then they must prove it by miracles, else I must by the same reason hearken unto every false prophet. Nether doth it suffice to say that they preach no other doctrine than the Apostles did, and therefore need no other miracles than those which were wrought by them; for so every archeretique may say, and you can not control him, unless you put him to his miracles. But they allege scripture for their doctrine; so have all heretics done as is showed in the second chapter. But heretics expounded scriptures amiss, these men have hitten upon the right meaning. How shall I know that? they say they have the true spirit in interpreting of scripture. And how shall I, or how can they ●ell that, seeing that nothing is so secret as is this spirit, as is proved in the third chapter? And did not Arius say that he interpreted scriptures by the true spirit, when he alleged them to prove that the son was a creature, & netherequall, nor coequal, nor consubstantial, to his father? Yea do not all heretics say so, do not all the Reformers say so, even when they hold contrary opinions? I see no reason therefore not so much as probable why I should hearken unto these reformers, unless I will hearken also unto all the heretics that ever were or shall be. Much less can I see any reason why to forsake my ancient pastors, who made me and my for father's Christians, and to prefer these pretended reformers before them. For as for learning they surpassed these reformers, and for virtue they excelled, and so were more likely men to see into the sense of scripture, and verity of religion, and were fit instruments for God to use, and vessels more capable of God his spirit and revelations. In antiquity they are before them by many hundred years, in number they are an hundred at least for one; for authority they were honourable Prelates, and Bishops of the Church, who proved their mission, commission, and authority by succession, yea and by miracles also; neither of which proofs the reformers can alleag for their mission, and authority. Shall I then leave such learned men for such young clat kes, so virtuous men for so vicious, so ancient Pastors for so new & so late upstartes, so many for so few, and men of such pastoral dignity, for them that can not prove their commission, no more than a false prophet can do? Surely I see no reason why I should, and seeing that God will not bind me to give credit to them that can bring no probability, for their own or their Doctors authority, I see not how with any show of justice God can at the latter day condemn me, for not hearkening unto them; for I might answer with reason that I saw no reason why I should hearken to them, rather than to every false prophet, much less why I should forsake mine ancient religion for a new, and mine old & grave fathers for a few young ministers who were borne but yesterday. By this gentle reader thou mayest see how little reason men of understanding have to give credit unto the new religion. But lest I may seem to partial or thou (gentle reader) mayst be to timorous in pronouncing the sentence, let the matter be brought before an indifferent judge, who is net her of the old, nor the new Religion. 
l. 1●. A●●.  In Josephus his history I find an example in the like case of controversy. The jews (sayeth he) and the Samaritans contended once about the place, where God should be worshipped; The jews said Jerusalem was the place; 
Deus. 19.4 Reg. 17.10.4.  The Samaritans would have it to be the mount Garizim. The matter was brought before a Pagan king, yet a discreet and indifferent judge: Prolocutours were appointed on bother sides to plead the cause, Sabeus, and Theodosius for the Samaritans, Andronicus for the jew. Andronicus had leave granted to speak first; who recounteth a succession of the high precstes from Aaron unto his time, all which time the jew were counted the true worshippers of God; he declareth the Antiquity of the Temple of Jerusalem, and of the sacrifices there offered; he telleth how that place was ever taken for the true place of worship, and that therefore it was adorned and enriched not only by the gifts of their own kings, but of strangers also, & hamely by the kings of Asia, and that there was never doubt of this, till the Samaritans made a schism. After that Andronicus had told this tale, the prolocutours of the Samaritans began to speak; but being demanded to show the like antiquity and succession they could not, but rather were enforced to bewray their infancy, and the revolt which long after that God had been worshipped in Jerusalem, they made from the jew. Wherefore the king pronounceth sentence for the jew, and declareth them to be the right worshippers & the Temple to be the right place where the jewish religion was to be exercised. If in like manner before the like judge, I for the ancient Catholic religion, and some one of the ministery for the new religion were appointed prolocutours, for whom, thinkest thou (gentle reader) would the sentence be pronounced? If I should begin to show a succession of our pastors and religion, by all histories and monuments even from the Apostles▪ 
Iren. l. ●. c. 3.  If I should show a catalogue out of Ireneus of all the Popes from saint Peter to Eleutherius, 
l. ● count Donatist. Epist. 16●.  out of Optatus unto Damasus, out of saint Austin unto Anastasius, out of Eusebius, Genebrard and others, even unto these days, and that in this succession by no Historiographer was ever noted any change, or fall in Church, or religion? If I should prove out of the same histories that this ancient catholic Church was that which was persecuted by the evil Emperors, and afterwards enriched by Constantine and other good Kings and princes; that for this Church, Churches and monasteries were builded, that in this Church all the general councils were holden; that by this Church all heretics were condemned; that this Church was even by pagans counted the only christian Church, that all ancient fathers, doctors Martyrs, & Saints, were members of this Church; should I not incline the judge to my part? If when I had done, some one of the Ministry should rise up and begin to tell his tale and say that all the ancient Christians were deceived and lived in error and ignorance until that Luther, or Zuinglius, or Caluin, like so many sons appeared in our horizont, that the religion of these men, is the reformed religion though it was never hard of before. And if being by me demanded how their preachers proved their mission, he could allege no proof at all; or being asked how they proved their religion he should answer, by scripture sensed by his private spirit, which always hath been the proof of all heresies; and being commanded by the judge to show (if their Church be Christian) a succession of their bishops preachers, and practise of religion; he should fly unto an invisible Church, or say that the Church Christian decayed quite after the Apostles time, and yet could neither tell the time, nor the occasion of so notorious a fall, nor allege one historiographer that writeth of so great a mutation in the world; If I should tell the first tale, and he the second (for I see not what better answer he can make) for himself; thinks not thou (gentle reader) that the judge would answer, that although he believed not at all in Christ or his religion, yet that it seemed most probable that Catholics are the true Christianes', and that their Church is the place of the practice of this religion, as the Temple of Jerusalem was of the jewishe service and worship of God. If then there be no probable reason by which these Reformers can persuade us to their reformation, there is no reason why we should forsake our ancient pastors to follow them, unless we will byndeour selves also to hearken unto all false prophets, preach they never so absurd & improbable doctrine, and so open the gap, unto all heretics and heresies.   

The sixth Chapter proveth that they have no judge in matters of religion, and so do open the gap to all heretics who may preach what they list, if there be no judge to contrelle them.  
AS yet there was never seen any society well ordered, were it great or little, but some governor or moderator ruled and managed the same. for many men as they have many heads, so have they divers opinions and as they are of different complexions and constitutions, so are they of diverse conceits and inclinations, and therefore will never agree in one, unless they be directed and commanded by one, or at least by diverse which aggree in one. Wherefore we see that every kingdom hath his king, every dukedom a duke, every common wealth a magistrate, every City a major or Baily, every army a General, yea every village almost hath a constable, every family a good man of the house, every school a schoolmaster. And shall not the Church of god, the society of his faithful and chosen servants, have a visible head to direct it, and a judge to rule it by laws, and govern it by authority? Or shall we think that he hath left that society which he calleth his spouse, & which he loved so dearly that he died for it, as a kingdom with out a king, a City with out a major, an army with out a General, a ship with out a Pilot, a fold with out a pastor or a body with out a head? No no, I warrant you, he that descended from heaven to earth to establish this spiritual kingdom, and shed his blood to enrich it, hath well provided for the government of the same, and so well, that thereby you shall perceive the skill and wisdom of the Governor. And truly if by the effect we may take a scantling of the cause, the good  order, the firm peace, and long continuance of the Church, will bear witness of a most prudent prince's governement For as diverse stones in a building could never have kept that order as to make a goodly palace, had not some intelligent workman disposed them, so this goodly order & Hierarchy in the Church could never have been established, had not some prince and governor put every subject in his room and place. And as many strings or voices can never make one musical harmony, unless some coning musician tune the strings, and give unto every voice his tone, so shall many people of diverse, dispositions, nations, sex's conditions, (such as are in the Church) never live in peace, free from jars & discords unless there be a Superior to tune these diverse natures, & a head to direct these diverse membres of the body of the Church. And as the Sheep which want a Shep heard can not long keep together, but are like to wander and to come in danger of the wolf; as an army can not long withstand the enemy, unless some General appoint, and commannud every soldier to his standing; and as the Ship, is never any long time free from sands or rocks, when the mariner is absent: so could never the Church of Christ, especially against so many violent persecutions, for so long a time, have endured, unless some potent and prudent governor, by his laws, wisdom, and authority, had upholden, guided, and directed it. And the reason is, because in a society and especially that of the Church, are diverse men, yea diverse nations, and diverse men have diverse natures, and diverses natures, have diverse dispositions, and diverse dispositions cause diverse opinions, and diverse opinions move contradictions, and contradictions end in factions, and factions make an end of all societies, unless there be a moderator to prevent them by his wisdom, or appease them by his authority. A head than is necessary in all societies, and not only necessary, but also principal. For although the obedient & complying nature of the subject doth help much to the maintenance of peace and order, yet the head and Superior most of all prevaileth. For as the head is the principal part, so doth it bear most sway in the government of the body; which is the cause why the body is affected according to the head, and why the subject followeth the prince's humour. Yea even as when the head in man's body is intoxicated the whole body reeleth, and if the head want eyes the body tumbleth into ditches, and falleth into danger; so if the head of a society be inconstaunte, the whole society wavereth, if the superior want eyes of circumspection, the subjects are in danger. Wherefore Philip King of Macedo and father to Alexander the great, was wont to say, that he had rather have an army of fearful hearts governed by a Lion, then of lions ruled and commanded by a heart: insinuating there by, that as the head in a society is the principal member, so is it the most necessary. If then the Church of Christ be a peaceable, and well ordered body, it hath a head to guide and rule it. And if we look into the government of the same even from the beginning, we shall find that this goodly common wealth never wanted a Prince and governor. In the law of nature first of all Adam our first parent, as he was our common father according unto flesh, so was he a priest and pastor of the souls of all those who lived in his time, and a governor of his family which was descended of him, not only in domestical, civil, or temporal, but also in spiritual matters concerning faith and religion. For this cause he was endued with all knowledge and science, that as the first doctor he might instruct and direct his posterity; and although by his fall, he lost all infused knowledge, yet did he still so long as he lived, remain pastor and supreme head of the Church. Wherefore Theophilus Bishop of Antioch sayeth, 
l. 2. ad. Autol.  that God for no other cause framed Eve out of Adam's side but to demonstrate unto us a mystery and figure of the monarchy of his Church: that as Adam was head of the same in his time, so ever after there was one pastor the chief of all. 
Ho 34.1. Cor.  And saint Chrisostom sayeth plainly that Adam was one head given unto all; and his reason is because (sayeth he) God Known, that emulation could not be avoided amongst aequals, wherefore he would have no popular government but a kingdom. After Adam's death, Seth and others succeeded him in the like pastoral authority even unto Noe. No dying, Sem his eldest son undertook the same charge; and even unto Aaron the first high priest of the Levitical law, all the heirs males of every family (if we believe saint Hierom) were priests, 
q. heb. q. 7.  who ministered sacraments and offered sacrifices every one in his family. And amongst all the priests of divers families, one was the supreme pastor and judge of the rest to whom belonged the final sentence in matters of religion; and this supreme authority as it seemeth belonged always unto the most ancient, to whom all the rest as they were in age inferior so were they subject in authority. As for example Abrahame and Sem, were priests at one time, because Abraham was the eldest son of There, Sem of Noah, yet because Sem was the most ancient, he was the higher priest, 
Gen. 11.  and therefore to him (for the Hebrewes as saint Hierom witnesseth, affirm that Sem and Melchisedech were all one) Abraham offered tithes and was blessed of him as of his superior. Yea it seemeth probable that Melchisedech in his time was the high priest and supreme head of the Church. Wherefore Theophilus speakig of Melchisedech, 
Supra.  uttereth these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This man was a priest the first of all the priests of God the highest. Where he can not mean that Melchisedech was the first in time & years, because Adam, Abel and Noah were before him, and therefore his meaning must be that Melchisedech was the first priest in dignity, & the highest of all the priests of his tyme. So that even in the la of nature, that is from Adam to Moses, there was always an high priest to rule the Church, and to compose controversies, that might arise in matters of religion. After that, in the law written the high priest ruled all in ecclesiastical affairs as is plain in the books of Exodus and Leviticus. In Exodus we read how Moses like a spiritual judge giveth sentence in causes ecclesiastical and answereth all doubts and questions which arose concerning the observation and interpretation of the la, 
Exod. 1●.  and although to ease himself he was persuaded to lay part of his charge & burden upon others shoulders, yet still he reserveth to himself the judgement of all martyrs concerning the la and ceremonies. 
c. 17.  And in Deuteronomie we find that the people were commanded in all difficulties of religion to have recourse unto the priest of the Levitical la who ruled at that time, and God threateneth that if any be so proud and stubborn as to refuse to obey his sentence, he shall suffer death by the decree of the judge. Where a blind man may see that the synagogue had her judge to decide all controversies in religion. And shall we imagine that the Church and spouse of Christ, wanteth a head to direct her, and a judge to give her satisfaction in all doubts of religion? No, no, in the law of grace, as God hath bestowed more grace on his Church then on his Synagogue, so hath he provided her of a judge and governor, whom for his Church's sake he assisteth more particularly. And first of all Christ himself whilst he lived governed this Church himself, and in all points played the part of a supreme head, high priest, and pastor. For he instituted a new la, a new sacrifice, & new sacraments, he ordained priests and ministers and gave them authority to preach, & to minister, and to govern in the Church, under him. And after that he had withdrawn his visible presence from us, he left us not with out an under-pastour, but presently after his resurrection, he appointed saint Peter his vicegerent in earth, that still the Church might have a visible judge to whom she might repayer in all her difficulties. 
Io. 21.  For after his resurrection he appeareth to his Apostles and singling out saint Peter from the rest, he demandeth of him three times not only whether he loved him, but also whether more than the rest; and finding in deed that he did so, and that consequently he was the fittest (for the chiefest thing in a pastor is love) he maketh choice of him before the rest, and comitetth unto him the charge of his sheep, in so ample manner, that he excepteth none, but giveth him authority over all both lambs and sheep, that is lesser and greater Christianes', even Apostles & Bishops, who all must acknowledge Peter for their pastor, if they will be the sheep of Christ. For as saint Bernard noteth, 
l. de consid.  where there is no distinction, there is no exception. And seeing that after saint Peter's death the Church hath no less need of a visible pastor, then before it had, as Christ left him for his vicegerent, so in him did he appoint a continual succession of his successors, that the Church might always be provided of a visible pastor. And therefore as bishops are the successors of the other Apostles, so some one must succeed saint Peter and must have that superiority over other Bishops, which saint Peter had over the Apostles. And truly to omit other proofs, no man more likely to be this man then the Bishop of Rome. For in the Sea of Rome saint Peter did last of all reside, there he died, and there, before his death he appointed Clemens, who refusing, Linus succeeded, and after him Cletus, after him Anacletus, after him Clemens, and so forth even unto Clement the eight who now in Rome residing, ruleth the Church not only of Rome but of all the christian world. Werfore the Bishops of this Sea were ever called the vicar's of Christ and successors of saint Peter, they have ever called general councils and confirmed the same, they made general laws to which all bishopsyea all Christians acknowledged themselves bound and obliged; they have excommunicated Bishops and Emperors wheresoever they lived, thinking none that are Christianes' to be out of their jurisdiction, they have taken appellations from all parts, and showed themselves in all these actions supreme pastors not of Rome only, but of all the world, and yet were never counted usurpers; and therefore sithence that saint Peter must have a successor, and that needs there must be one visible judge under Christ, to whom in all doubts we must repair, the Pope of Rome is likest to be he, or else if any one be more like, then let the adversary name him. And if they name any other but him, I will avouch that the Church hath been without an head these 1600. years, for all this while never any executed that office but he. S. Hierom I am sure took the Bishop of Rome to be the man, for he in a doubt and controversy of the high mystery of the Trinity flieth unto Damasus Bishop of Rome, 
Epistol● ad Dam.  not that he was learneder than saint Hierom, but because he Known that for saint Peter & consequently for his successors Christ prayed that he might not err, 
Luc. 22.  but rather confirm his bretheru. A pastore (sayeth he) praesidium ovis flagito: Of my pastor I demand the help dew to a sheep. Now then let our new Christianes', if they be the Church of Christ, which ever had a visible head, tell us who is their supreme judge, and pastor? They will say peradue●tur that Christ himself is their judge and pastor, and that they need no other, because as he planted his Church, so still he ruleth the same. But this shift will not serve the turn; for Christ now converseth not visibly amongst us, and so beside him, the visible Church must have a visible head, as hither to she hath everhad. And altoughe Christ still remaineth our high priest, 
Io. 10.  doctor, and pastor, yet he offerreth not sacrifices immediately but only by his underpreestes, neither doth he teach us by his own voice, 
Ephes 4.  or revelations, but by doctors whom Saint Paul sayeth he hath appointed; neither doth he feed us by his own hand but by the hand of inferior pastors, who minister his Sacraments unto us, and deliver his word in the true meaning, by which the soul liveth. 
Mat. 4.  Wherefore besides him the Church being a visible body, must have a visible head, else we may say of it, as once Epaminondas said of a great army which wanted a General, Video pulcherimam bestiam, sed sine capite: I see a very fair beast but without a head. And the reason hereof is because a head and judge in the Church is necessary to decide controversies in religion which arise all most every age, yea ●ome times often times, in the same age. sith than we can not now have access to Christ, beside him we must have a visible judge. which Christ himself well knowing, presently after he had left us, appointed S. Peter as his vicegerent, as is all ready proved. I demand then of all the professors of this new religion, especially of them in Ingland, who is their judge in controverlies of religion? They can not say that Scripture is this judge, because scripture is but a written la which can not speak, nor interpret herself, and therefore if the controversy be which is scripture or what is the meaning of it, scripture can give no sentence; yea I have demonstrated in the second Chapter that bare scripture is no sufficient judge in any matter of religion. 
Supr●.  They can not allege the spirit to be this judge, as is evidently proved in the third Chapter: neither will they confess that the Pope, fathers, or counsels are this judge, and if they would, all they would condemn them, as is declared in the fourth Chapter. Peradventure they will be judged by their founders, Luther, Caluin, and such others. But first these agreed not, neither one with another, neither with themselves: for what one affirmeth another denieth, and what one of them taught one year, he corrected the next. but and if they had agreed yet were they no sufficient judges because they can not prove their mission, as is proved in the first Chapter and so are not to be admitted for lawful judges, unless we will admit also all false prophets. Who them is this judge to whom in controversies they repair, and by whose judgement they square out their religion? They will say perchance that the Prince is this judge. But this is as unlikely, and as flat against scripture and practice of the Church as any thing can be. And although her Majesty of late memory and her Father before her, did challenge as due unto them authority in cause Ecclesiastical, of which I dispute not at this time, yet I am sure they would not intermeddle in matters of religion to give sentence what is the meaning of scripture, which books are canonical, and what opinions are heretical and contrary unto god his word, no more than they would intermeddle in ministering of Sacraments or preaching of God's word. For they knew full well what josaphat that good king said, 
● par. 19  to wit, that Amarias' the high priest was to rule in matters of religion, and Captain Zabadias' to menage matters belonging to the King's office. And ozias may be a sufficient example unto all princes, 
● par. 26.  who was stricken with a lepry for usurping the priests office in incensing. We read in deed that Christ commanded Saint Peter to feed his sheep and to govern his Church, 
Io. 21. Act. 2●. Ephes 4.  priests also and pastors have the same charge committed unto them: yea the prophet isaiah sayeth that Princes are Nurses, furtherers, and favourers and defenders of the Church, 
Is. 49.38.60.  but he never calls them rulers of the Church, nor judges in religion. Wherefore saint Ambrose Bishop of Milan writing to his sister sayeth that he told Valentinian the Emperor what belonged to his office in these wordless: 
Ep. 13.  Trouble not they self, O Emperor, as to think that thou hast any Imperial right to meddle in divine matters. Extol not thy self, but if thou wilt reign long, be thou subject to god. It is written give to god which is belonging to god, and to Caesar which belongeth to Caesar. Unto the Emperor palaces appertain, unto the priest Churches. The charge of the public walls is committed to thee, but not of sacred and holy things. A sentence worthy to be set in a tablet of gold, and to hang about a Prince's neck. And truly if Princes were judges of religion we must change religion at their pleasures, and so we should have almost as many religions as Princes. Much less can the parliament be judge in religion for that consists of temporal men, and although in England the lords spiritual are joined with the temporal, yet are they all ruled by the prince. And where I pray you doth scripture warrant us that the parliament is our judge in matters of religion? yea we see that parliaments vary in religion, and so they can give no certain sentence for religion. In France the Parliament is Catholic and is content to be subject to the Pope, and in no wise will meddle with matters of religion. In King Henry's time the eight of that name, the parliament enacted six Catholic articles. In King Edward's time the parliament allowed of another religion, in Queen Mary's time of another, and in Queen Elizabethes' time of another. If then the same man had lived in all these prince's time (as many have done) then if the Parliament be judge he must in conscience though religion be but one have changed four times his religion, else had he been four times an heretic and as often: traitor. Yea I think if the parliament were demanded to define which books of scripture are canonical, and which is the true meaning, they would answer that such matters belong not unto them. But they will answer that the parliament is judge when it is conformable to scripture, as it is at this present, but was not in Queen Maries tyme. Thus they may answer but with how little reason, it will easily appear. For either the parliament precisely, or the parliament aggreeing with scripture is this judge? If they grant me the first, then must we in conscience change religion as often as the parliament changeth decrees; If they grant only the second, then is the parliament no infallible judge, yea no judge at all; for yet we must have a judge to judge the parliament and to determine when the parliament followeth the word of God, else shall we never be satisfied. And who I pray you is this judge? Now I see not whom they can name, unless it be my lord of Canterbury, or the ministery of England, or of all countries where their religion flourisheth. But then I demand of them, first where they read in Scripture that their Clergy is an infallible judge in matters of religion? They will say that the scripture commands us to give credit to our pastors. True, but if I deny that they are true pastors, they can not prove themselves to be so, because they can not prove their mission, as in the first chapter is proved most evidently. Secondly the Clergy of England since King Henry the eight, hath changed religion divers times, and this new Clergy was never yet constant in faith for one whole year together, yea they aggree not amongst themselves, and so can be no assured and infallible judge. Thirdly either the Clergy of England is judge in matters of religion, because it is the Clergy of England, or because it is the Clergy of a whole country, or because it conspireth with the universal Clergy of their religion. If they grant me the first, then doth it folwith we must have a judge to judge the parliament and to determine when the parliament followeth the word of God, else shall we never be satisfied. And who I pray you is this judge? Now I see not whom they can name, unless it be my lord of Canterbury, or the ministery of England, or of all countries where their religion flourisheth. But then I demand of them, first where they read in Scripture that their Clergy is an infallible judge in matters of religion? They will say that the scripture commands us to give credit to our pastors. True, but if I deny that they are true pastors, they can not prove themselves to be so, because they can not prove their mission, as in the first chapter is proved most evidently. Secondly the Clergy of England since King Henry the eight, hath changed religion divers times, and this new Clergy was never yet constant in faith for one whole year together, yea they aggree not amongst themselves, and so can be no assured and infallible judge. Thirdly either the Clergy of. England is judge in matters of religion, because it is the Clergy of England, or because it is the Clergy of a whole country, or because it conspireth with the universal Clergy of their religion. If they grant me the first, then doth it follow that only the Clergy of England is this judge, and so all other countries must be subject to the English Clergy, to which they will never agree. If they grant the second, than every Clergy of a whole country is judge, and so we shall have as many religions all most as countries: and although the new Clergies of Ingland, Germany, Scotland, Holland, Geneve, are contrary the one to the other, yet the people of every country must acknowledge them as judges in religion, and so must embrace contrary opinions. If they grant the third, I must desire them to agree all amongst themselves, before we stand to their judgement; for if this new Clergy be divided into many sects, as all the world seethe that it is, then seeing that we have no more assurance of one Sect, than another, we may refuse to be judged by any of them, especially they them selves refusing to be judged by one another. Yea not all this new Clergy, nor any sect of the same can prove their mission, and therefore are not to be admitted for true pastors and judges in religion unless we will receive all false prophets also & false Apostles. Is there no judge then neither in Ingland nor in all the new Church of the ghospellers? If there be, let them name him, if they can; if there be none, as it seemeth that there is not (for I have named and teiected by good reason all whom I think they can name) then is not their Church the Church of Christ, in which, as is before proved, is always resident a visible judge to compose controversies: yea than the Church (which as I shall prove in the next book is a peaceable kingdom) shall be a common wealth the worst provided for that ever was; it shall be a body without a head, a kingdom without a king or Prince to command, a conventicle of wranglers, the worst ordered and the most dissentious society that ever was; to be brief, the Church militant in earth, shall more resemble that mutinous rout of the damned in hell then the peaceable society of the Church triumphant in heaven: yea then shall that follow which I intented to prove, to wit, that in the new Church of the ghospellers, there are no means to compose & determine controversies, because where there is no visible judge, there every man may believe and preach what he lift, and no man can control him, and if divers preach contrary doctrine, they may go together by the ears and no man shall be to part the fray, because there is no judge to take up the matter betwixt them; and so the gap is open to all false prophets whose doctrine must go for currant be it never so absurd, because there is no judge to give sentence of the truth or falsehood of the same. And to make the matter more plain, suppose that now in Ingland some new preacher should preach a new heresy, yea that many at once should preach contrary opinions, and so fall together by the ears: there would be no means to compose these controversies because there is no judge to take up the matter, neither is there any way to prevent them, because where there is no judge to define, every man may teach what he list, and where every one may teach what he will, there arise jars, and discords, and where no means are to appease them, the society is ruined: 
〈◊〉. 11.  Because every kingdom divided with in itself, shall be made desolate. But in this case peradventure they would call a Provincial or general Council, and so compose matters by common consent. Be it so that they could call such a council, and could also, all, or the most part agree, yet I see not how we are warranted to assure ourselves that they all can not err, and that therefore we may rely upon their sentence; for if they say that we are waranted because they are the true pastors, I can tell them that this is not so sure, because they can not prove their mission, & I demand of them whether the Catholic Clergy, which is far greater and which for fifteen hundred years before Luther was hard of, was counted the only Clergy, may not have their voice, and if they may, certainly their voice will be negative and opposite to their affirmative. But this is spoken upon supposition, that they could call a council and aggree also in the same, for I have good cause to doubt that they neither can call a council nor aggree in a council. For if there be no visible supreme judge nor Pastor in their Church, as I have proved that there is not who should call this council & summon all the Clergy to appear? 
Lut l cont. ●● Calu. ●i ●. Inst. 6.7.  Luther and Caluin say that this belongeth to the Emperor: but seeing that this is an Ecclesiastical office concerning religion, it can not appertain unto a temporal Prince, and now that the Emperor is a Catholic and a Papist as they term him, I think they would not obey him if he should summon them to appear, especially because he would call Catholic bishops & would give the pre-eminence to them. But I have proved all ready that the Emperor though in the name of the Pope as an assistaunte, he may by the Church's permission call a council, yet of himself he can not meddle in spiritual matters. 
Act. ●●.  Wherefore the Council which the Apostles called was, called without the emperors authority, where then there is no Suprem Pastor (as I have proved that amongst them is none) whosoever should take upon him to call a council, should usurp, and the others might refuse to obey his call. Peradventure they would choose one by common consent, and so would all stand to his arbitrement. But in this also is difficulty, for where there is none to command, who shall call them together to agree in the election of this one man? Yet let us suppose that they should meet by chance, as crows do in the Pease-feeld; when they are met, it is not so easy to agree upon one, & when they have agreed, it is not so easy to agree unto his sentence. For if he pronounce sentence for the Protestaunte, the Puritan will repine, and may say that he hath no warrant of his sentence who is but a man, constituted by men, and can show no scripture to proveth at he can not err. But truly I can not think that in this matter, they would ever proceed so far. For as yet they never called a Council together out of all parts of their Church, and those that were called together, for want of a judge to determine, could never agree in any one point of religion. 
Anno 1554.  Surius relateth how on a time twelve Catholic Doctors and twelve Ministers met at Wormatia to make some atonement betwixt the Confessionistes, 
Gen. Cron.  but after a little disputation five of the twelve ministers were excommunicated by the rest, 
Stapl l 4. de prim fed. c. 13.  and cast out for wranglers; and so nothing was concluded. diverse other assemblies and meetings they have attempted, but all ended in thundering excommunications, bitter taunts, and infamous libels, and as yet they never could agree in any council upon any controversy in religion, and all for want of a visible judge, and pastor, to whom all the rest are subject. And this they have gotten by leaving the ancient Catholic Church which acknowledgethe the bishope of Rome as Saint Peter's successor, and Christ's Vicaire, and relieth upon his sentence as infallible, 
Luc. 22.  because Christ in fainct Peter prayed for him that his faith might not fail; and because he hath suprem authority (which all Catholic Bishops have ever acknowledged) he hath called many councils and determined many controversies, and whilst the Church ever standeth to his judgement which never yet was contrary to it is self, she enuoyethe great peace, and unity in faith and religion: where as the ghospellers because they have no visible head, could never call councils, never aggree upon any one point of religion which was before in controversy, and never shall hereafter; because matters of religion are hard, and therefore where ther-are many heads, there are many opinions, & where are many opinions, there are many contradictions, & so no peace, nor unity, because no one supreme visible judge to determine. And as for want of a visible judge they can not appease dissensions after they are arisen, so can they not prevent them. For if there be no visible judge every Cock-brain may preach his own fancies for true faith, and religion, and no man shall control him, nor condemn his doctrine, nor forbidden his preaching: because if there be no visible judge, no man hath the authority, & so the gap is open to all false prophets, who may enter into the new Church thick and three fold, because no man therein is, of authority to forbid them: whence it followeth that if we accept of the new religion and incorporate ourselves to the new Church, we expose ourselves to all false prophets who may preach what they please because no man hath authority to control them.    

THE SECOND BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SVRuey of the Marks of heretics which are proved to agree so fitly unto the professors of the new religion that if ever there were any heretics, they are heretics.  

The first chapter handleth the first mark, of an heretic which is his breach which he maketh out of that Church which is commonly counted the true Christian Church.  
THEY say commonly, that although the devil disguise himself never so much, yet by one mark or other he bewrayeth himself. For although sometimes he investe himself in the habit of a young galant, or of a mortified religious man: yea although in out ward show he transform himself into an angel of light, yet so it happeneth (and I think because God will have it so) that by one mark or other, he is discovered. For either his staring eyes, or stinking savour, or horned head, or forked feet or base voice, discryeth this gallant creature, to be not as he seemeth, but as he is indeed, a fowl and deformed member of the devil, who though he shroud himself under the goodly name of a christian, and wrapp & lap himself from top to toe, in the innocent habit of a pastor, 
Vincent. Lytin ●. contra proph heres. novit. c 36.  which is scripture, and the word of God, yet by one mark or other, yea not by one only but by many, he describeth himself to be as he is an heretic. And the reason is because the counterfeit never attaineth unto the perfection of the currant, and art though she may imitate nature, yet shall she always be wanting in one thing or other. The counterfeit gold of the Alchimistes hath a great resemblance with the true gold, but either the sound, or wait, or operation will prove the old proverb to be true: that all is not gold that glisters. Appelles' painted grapes on a boy's head so lively that the birds pecked at them, but yet art came short of nature, for if the boy had been painted as well as nature frameth her works, the birds would not have been so emboldened, yea the grapes wanted some thing, for at least by pecking the birds perceived, that all is not grapes that seemeth so. Lysippus could in marble stone make so goodly a portrait of a man, that he would show every bone, vain, and wrinkle with all proportion, but the want of life and motion well declared where in art was enforced to yield to nature. Wherefore let the heretic counterfeit never so coningly, let him use all the arte possible to show himself a sincere and true Christian, yet the counterfeit must come short of the currant, and art must yield to nature, and he in one point or other will bewray himself to be no true christian which he professeth himself to be, but a faythless heretic which he would not seem to be. And the first mark by which he is bewrayed, is his breach which he maketh out of the Church and Christian society. For as the wandering sheep was once of the fold, and the rebel was once a subject, and the bow cut of, once lived and flourished in the tree; so heretics especially arch-heretics, were at least for the most part, once sheep of Christ's fold subjects of his kingdom, and members of his body the Church. Wherefore saint John gives us this mark to know an heretic by: Ex nobis prodierunt, 
l. Io. 8.  sed non erant ex nobis: They went out from us, but they were not of us. That is, they lived amongst us (for else they could not have gone out) yet so that they were not worthy our company and therefore as rotten bows are soon broken of, so they were soon shaken of and took occasion to go from us who before for their evil life in desert were none of us. Or else, to follow another exposition, 
Aug tract. 3. in cp 10.  they were amongst us in out ward show because they frequented sacraments with us, but they were heretics in mind and so none of us, and therefore they went out from us. They were in the Church but as evil humours in man's body, and therefore were to be expelled because they were hurtful to the body, and no part of the substance. For commonly heretics live some time secret before they open and disguise themselves, and so before they went out from us openly, they were none of us secretly. Or else according to another interpretation: they were once amongst us and like true Christianes' lived with us, 
Aug tract. ●. 〈◊〉 10.  but even then when they were by present faith and justice members of our Church, God foresaw by his divine foresigt, that they would not continue amongst us, and therefore they went out from us, because even then when they were amongst us, they were none of us finally, to persever with us: not that God his prescience was the cause, but because he foresaw which was to be, that is, that they which were as yet of our society, were of their own free will to leave us and so in God his foresight were finally none of our company. So that one evident mark of an heretic is, that he makes a breach out of the body of the Church, of which he either was, or seemed to be a member. The same mark saint Paul giveth us also to know an heretic when he sayeth that Some shall departed from the faith, 
1. Tim. 〈◊〉 Heb. 10.  and that some are accoustumed to forsake the assembly, and that some going out from us, 
Act. 1●.  do trouble others with words. 
●o. 6.  So the first Sacramentaries I mean the Capharnaites who would not believe that Christ could give his body to be eaten, left Christ and his Apostles and would walk no more with them. So that going out, or breaking forth of the Church, is a note and mark of an heretic. Wherefore Tertulian sayeth, 
l. praesc. c. 8.  that we must not marvel nor think the worse of our Church when some do leave us, because (sayeth he) this showeth us to be of the true Christian company, according. unto that: they went out from us, 
Ibid. ●. 10.  but they were not of us? Yea he sayeth that all heretics were once Romans' in religion, and therefore now are heretics because they separate themselves as Martion, and Valentinus did, of whom (sayeth he) it is certain that they believed once in the Roman Church, until under Pope Eleutherius they were cast out of the same. And this note is so certain that if you run over the catalogue of all the ancient heretics you shall find that they all were once members of that society, which was commonly called and counted Christian, and when they left the same, they were by & by noted for rebels run gates, and Apostatates. & as the scripture noteth the time and occasion, 
3. Reg. 18.  when the Samaritans left the Temple of Jerusalem and would wvorship God no more in that place as the jews ever had done; so have Ecclesiastical histories noted the time, & occasion of the breach of every arch-heretic from the Church: and as yet we well remember (it is not so long) the time and occasion of Luther's revolt from the Catholic, and Roman Church. Yea himself confesseth that once he was a Papist and that in the highest degree, for these words he once uttered in his commentaries upon the first Epistle to the Galarhians: 
●n t. cp. Gal.  Si quisquam alius, certè ego ante lucem ●uangelij pie sensi & Zelavi pro Papisticis legibus, & patrum traditionibus, easque magno serto ut sanctus, & earum obseruationem tanquam necessariam ad salutem v●si & defendi: If ever any, truly I, befoee the light of the gospel (be means his own gospel) thought holily and was Zealons. For the Papistical laws and the father's traditions, and I urged and defended them, 
Ibidem.  and their observation as necessary to salvation. Yea he confesseth how he watched fasted prayed, and tamed his body when he was a friar, yea sayeth he: Tanta erat authoritas Papae apud me, ut vel in minimo dissentire ab ipso, putarem crimen aeterna damnatione dignum: So great was the Pope's authority with me, that I thought it a crime worthy eternal damnation to dissent from him in the least point. 
Ibid.  Yea once sayeth he. I was so zealous for the Pope that I thought John hus a wicked heretic and would have burnt him with mine own hands. And as Luther was, so were all the pack of their first fathers, children of our mother the Catholic Church; and sithence they are gone out, they wear the badge and cognisance of an heretic. They will answer peradventure that we were not the true Church, but werelonge before metamorphized and changed into the synagogue of the devil, & that therefore it was time for them to leave us. But if we were degenerated I demand of them when? under what Pope, or Emperor? and in what age? and from what Church did we degenerate? out of what Church did we make a breach? for as nothing degenerateth but from that which it was before. And if they can not tell us when we begun to degenerate, nor non what Church then can they not put this mark upon us. Yea I shall in this book prove that our Church which now is, aggregeth with the Church which in all ages even from the Apostles was counted the only Christian Church. Nether is it sufficient to say that we were not the true Church, for so Arrius, Nestorius, Eutiches, and every heretic was accustomed to say, who notwithstanding because they went forth of that Church which was commonly called and counted the Christian Church, were counted heretics. Scythe therefore Luther, Caluin, and the rest have departed from our Church, which was and still is called the Christian Church, either they are heretics, or else Arrius, Nestorius, yea Simon Magus, Cerinthus, and Ebion, were no heretics. Nether can they brag that many have left them also and severed themselves from their company; for that was always the manner of heretics, not long to continue in one religion, but to divide themselves into many sects. And if they count those heretics who go from them & make new sects, then are they all even the first of them heretics, because the first of them went out from us. Wherefore in few words to con prize all, and to conclude which I intended, They can not name the Church from which we departed, nor the time, nor the occasion; we can tell when they departed, and from what Church, that is the Roman Church, which was and is still commonly counted, the true Christian Church; wherefore it followeth evidently, that we are still in the right Church because there was never any other out of which we could break forth, they are run out, we wear the badge of true Christianes' which is never to go out, never to forsake that which once we have professed, they are noted with the mark of heretics, which is to go out, and to forsake the common received Church; and so if ever there were any heretics so called, and counted, for breaking forth, and going out, then are they heretics, and never shall be able to hide this mark go they never so disguisedly.   

The second Chapter discovereth the second mark of an heretic which is later standing & novelty, which also is proved to agree as fitly to the ghospellers of this time as to any heretics of former times.  
GOod goeth before bad, truth before falsehood, the currant before the counterfeit, and art before nature: because, evil is but a privation of the good, and falsehood is that which swerveth from the truth, and the counterfeit is but a resemblance of the currant, and art is but an imitation of nature; and so these come after, those of necessity must go before. No marvel then if religion take the precedence of superstition, and Christian faith, of heresy, which is but a privation of that good; a falsity swerving from that truth, a counterfeit resemblance of that currant, and an artificial imitation, of Christian sincerity. Religion was planted before superstition took root, for tue was rooted before vice was sowed, 
Mat. 18.  and the seed of true faith was sowed before the enemy scattered the evil cockle of heresy, and as the true Apostles lived and preached before Simon Magus and other false-prophetes his successors, so true fay the was sowed rooted, & come to some height and ripeness before ever the false Apostles scattered the nettleseed, and hempseed of their heresies. Yea not only by the Apostles generally in the world, but also by their successors particularly in every particular country, faith the grew and flourished before heresy was sowed, 
●i. ●.  for as Bozius in his fourth book of the signs of the Church learnedly proveth, the first conversion of every country from paganism unto Christianity, was not to heresy but to the true faith & Roman religion, and when that was received then heresy being but a corruption of true faith as vinegar is of wine, began to take place then the cockle sprung up after the good corn. And therefore Saint Paul gives us this mark to know an heretic, and for heresy, that they arise after the true religion. 
Act. 80  I know (saith he) that ravening wolves that is heretics after my departure shall enter amongst you not sparing the flock. So that after saint Paul had preached and persuaded true faith, the false prophets entered, to ruin the spiritual building which he had framed. In like manner the ancient fathers have ever noted heretics & their heresies of later standing and novelty. 
l. praesc. c 2●  In all things (sayeth Tertulian) the verity goeth before the image, and last of all cometh the similitude. Yea sayeth he it is a folly to think, that heresy in doctrine is the first, especially seeing that the true religion fortelleth heresies. And in another place, 
ll. 4. adversus Marcionens.  thus he concludeth; Insumma si constatid verius quod prius, id prius quod est ab initio, ab initio quod ab Apostolis, pariter utique constabit idesse ab Apostolis traditum quod apud Ecclesias Apostolicas fuerit sacrosanctum. In brief if it be manifest that that is truest which is first, that first which is from the beginning, that from the beginning which is from the Apostles, it shall likewise be manifest, that that is delivered by the Apostles which hath been inviolably held in the apostolical Churches. And in his book against Praxeas he sayeth that it is adjudged against all heresies, that that is true which is first, that is counterfeit which is later. And this he showeth by a similitude, for (sayeth he) as the wild olive springeth out often times out of the sweet olive nut, 
l. praesc. c 36.  and the wild figtree out of the good fig, so heresies have grown out of our ground which yet are not ours, degenerating from the true grain of faith. Ireneus also subscribeth to Tertulians' opinion in these words: 
l 5. circa medium.  Omnes illi valde posteriores sunt quam Episcopi, quibus Apostoli tradiderunt Ecclesias. All they (he meaneth heretics) are of much later standing than the Bishops, to whom the Apostles delivered and committed the Churches. And as heretics are noted of later standing so is their doctrine, counted to savour of novelty. Wherefore Zozomenus sayeth, 
l. 1. c. 1●.  that Arrius was not afraid to affirm that which never any durst avouch, to wit that God the son was created of nothing. And Vincentius Lyrinensis writing a book against heresies entitleth it: against profane novelties, and wisely observeth that the Catholic Church Keepeth the old, and deviseth no new doctrine, to which sense he explicateth those words of saint Paul: O Timothee depositum custodi, 
c. 2.  o Timothee keep that which was deposed with thee and committed to thy custody: Depositum custodi (sayeth he) non quod à te inventum sed quod tibi creditum est, quod accepisti, non quod excogitasti, rem non ingenij, sed doctrinae, non usurpationis privatae, sed pi●blicae traditionis, in qua non author esse debes, sed custos, non institutor sed sectator, aurum accepisti, aurum red, nolo mihi pro alijs alia subijcias. Keep that which is deposed; not which is invented by thee, but which is committed to thee, which thou hast received not which tho hast devised, a thing not of wit, but of doctrine, not of private usurpation, but of public tradition, in which thou oughtest not to be an author, but a keeper, not an institut our but a follower, thou receivedst gold, restore gold, I will not have thee put in one thing for another. Wherein he putteth a plain difference bettwixt Catholics and heretics; that they stick to the old, these are ever devising new doctrine. For although the Church by new councils and definitions addeth greater explication of her religion, and although by the labours and endeavours of the Doctors of the Church, which in no age are wanting many points of our faith are more illustrated and dilated, yet in substance, our faith is still one and the same. And therefore divines say that faith never from the beginning hath increased in substance but only in explication, and that the Church since the time of the Apostles never had new revelations in the articles of belief, and that in general councils she defineth no new things, but rather those things which before were extaunte in scriptures, fathers, or tradition, she by her definition, declareth more certainly, and proposeth more plainly to the view of the world. So that as Vincentius Lyrinensis sayeth, 
〈◊〉. 29.30.  even as man's body increaseth by nutrition and augmentation, yet gaineth no new limbs and members, but only getteth more quantity and strength in the former, so christian faith by no increase did ever yet gain new articles, but only hath gotten greater and clearer explication of the former. Wherefore the same doctor counseleth every preacher and teacher so to explicate things after a new manner, that he preach not new doctrine: Eadem quae accepisti (sayeth he) ita doce, 
c. 〈◊〉.  ut cùm dicas nouè non dicas nova: The same things which thou hast received, so do thou teach, that when thou speakest after a new manner thou speak no new things. And the reason why faith admitteth no novelty is this: because God speaketh once and never recalls or amends his word; 
job 33. Psal. 6●.  and in him that proverb takes no place: Secunda consilia meliora; second counsels are the best. For God is as wise and circumspect at the first as at the last, & therefore he having once revealed and planted faith, that must stand for good, and he that seeks to change, declares himself a corrupter not a corrector, and in that he cometh after with his divising wit to add, ordetract from the old received faith he bewrays himself to be of later standing & so an heretic, and his doctrine to savour of novelty, & so an heresy. Wherefore to conclude sith that it is certain that Catholics whom they call papists, are of noelate standing, nor no upstarts, (for I demand when they began, and after whom they arose?) they can be no heretics, & seeing that it is no less certain, that the reformers of this time be all novellaunts, and novellers, upstarts, and of later standing, arising many hundred years after the Roman Church which was ever counted the only true Church (for Luther the first of all this new fry and his religion is not yet an hundred years old) it is as certain, that they are heretics and their religion heresy, as that Arius, Nestorius, Pelagius, were heretics, and the same fathers and scriptures before alleged, which have condemned them for heretics because of their late standing, can not without plain partiality, free our reformers from the same sentence, who wear the same badge, & are noted with the same mark of an heretic which is later standing.   

The third Chapter noteth the Reformers with another mark of an heretic which is a particular name which they take from their sectmaster.  
THe heart of man is a secret closet, 
Psal 7. Sap. 1. Hier. 11. Th. 〈◊〉 p q. 57 art. 4.  of which God only Keepeth the Key, it is a bottomless pit which he only who searcheth the heart and reins can sound to the bottom, in so much that unless God reveal, or this heart of man vouchsafe to open itself, neither devil nor angel can discover the hearts cogitations, much less can one man tell what another thinketh. Wherefore that men might impart their thoughts one to another God hath given them a tongue as an Interpreter of the mind and a messenger of the thoughts, and a mouth also as a trumpet wherein the tongue soundeth forth by voice what the heart thinketh. And because the things which we would speak of can not by themselves immediately be brought into discourse, the tongue frameth words and giveth names which go for the things, that so when we hear the sound of the word & name, we may understand the thing which is spoke of. Wherefore the new Christians of this time must not marvel, that by their name, as by an infallible mark I sack to discover them: for names are Symbols and signs of things by which we know the natures of things together with their proprieties. But what will you say is this name, by which they are convinced to be heretics? it is the Surname which they take from their Sect master, by which they were always more famous then by their proper names. At the first when all Christianes' were of one heart and lip, believing and professing the same, 
Act. 4.  they were called all by the same names, as Christianes' of Christ, brethren for their mutual charity, faithful, in respect of one faith; but when certain inconstaunte and devising heads would vary from the rest of the faithful in certain points of religion, their names changed as they themselves were altered, & because they now began to leave the common received faith which Christ by himself and his Apostles, and their successors had delivered, they were no more called by the common name of Christian, but by the name by which their author was called who devised their religion: and so as in faith, they were separated from other Christians, so in names also which explicate the natures of things, they were of necessity severed. Simonians were named of Simon Magus, the Ebionites of Ebion, Marcionites of Martion, the manichees of Manicheus, the Arrians of Arrius, Nestorians of Nestorius, Eutichianes of Eutiches, Pelagians of Pelagius, Donatists of Donatus, who not with standing before they varied in religion and followed new Masters, were called only by the common names of Christians, wherefore the ancient fathers ever condemned them as heretics who were marked with these particular names. Saint Hierome pronounceth boldly this sentence: 
li. contra Lucifer. in fine.  Sicubi audíeris eos qui dicuntur Christiani, non à Domino jesu Christo sed à quopiam alio nuncupari, v●pote Marcionitas, Valentinianos', Montenses, etc. scito non Ecclesiam Christi, sed Anti-christi esse Synagogam: If anywhere thou here of them who are called Christians, yet take their name not of jesus Christ. but of some other, as for example, of they be called Marcionits, Valentinians, Montanists, etc. Know thou, that there is not the Church of Christ but the Synagogue of Antichrist. justinus Martyr discrieth heretics by the same badge and mark: 
Dial. cum Triphone.  There are (sayeth he) and ever were many, which come in the name of jesus, yet are called by divers Surnames as Marcionits, Valentinians, Basilidians, Saturninians every one Biorrowing a name of the first inventor of their doctrine. Of such kind of men this is saint Ciprianes opinion: They which were once Christians, 
Ep. ad Novatum.  now Novatians, are now no more Christians, because (sayeth he) primam fidem vestram perfidia posteriori per nominis appellationem mutastis; you have changed your former faith by a later infidelity by the appellation of your name. And the reason why these fathers accounted always such nicknamed persons as heretics is easily seen, 
Mat. 18.  because such as leave the Church and will not here her voice, were always esteemed as heretics, as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth which signifieth election and separation; 
Li. 2. contr● Faust c. 3. Cipr. l. 1. cp. 6.  and therefore S. Austin and saint Cyprian put this difference betwixt an heretic and a schismatic, that although both do separate themselves from the Church, yet a schismatic only is divided in will, contumacy, and breach of charity, an heretic also in faith and opinion, and therefore seeing that these diverse names taken from diverse authors; argueth such a leparation (for if they had still remained in that Church which commonly was called Christian and had not followed newmasters, there had needed no distinction of names from other Christians) it must needs follow that all such as are distinguished thus in name from other Christians, are divided also from them in faith and religion, and so are no true Christians but perfidious heretics. I demand now of our Lutherans, Zuinglianes, calvinists, Osiandrians, Bezists, Brownists, Martinists, and such like new named Christians of this age, whether they dare stand to the sentence of justinus Martyr, S. Cyprian, and saint Hierom in this point? Truly I think they dare not: and I think also that they have good cause; for if that they be heretics which are surnamed of particular authors (as they plainly affirm) if our new Christianes' be so surnamed as all the world will be witness that they are, then must needs follow this conclusion, that they also are heretics. But to conclude more plainly that which was intended; This mark of an heretic can in no wise aggree unto Catholics, but rather to them aggregeth the sign of the true Christians. For as in the time of the Arians they were counted true Christians which were called by general names, Christians, and Catholics, and they were esteemed of as heretics, which had particular names derived from the author of their sect, as Arians, Aetians, Eudoxians, and such like; so now we that are called by the same names of Catholics and Christians, but by no name taken from any author, must needs be taken for true Christians, who as they never changed name, so never changed religion, and the reformers who are called Lutherans, calvinists, Zwinglians and such like of some particular sectmaster or other, must needs be condemned for heretics. And as before that the ancient heretics forsook the common received faith they went by the common names of Christians and Catholics and never took unto them particular names before they followed particular masters and embraced particular doctrines; so before Luther and Caluin revolted from the Church, they went by the common name of Christians, and never changed their names, till they changed their religion, neither were any Christians called Lutherans, calvinists, or such like, before they relied upon new and particular masters. And as the Arians because they could impose no name of any author to the Catholic Christians, were fain to call them Homo●usians of their doctrine, as before them they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is carnal for defending 2. marriages against Tertulian and the montanists; so at this time our reformers are fain to call Catholics Papists, for holding the supremacy of the Pope, who is no new author of any new religion, but an ancient succesfour of saint Peter, and Vicar of Christ. As for the names of Thomists, and Scotists, they are no names of authors of new religion, because all held the same faith, but of authors of some other new opinions or manners of teaching in Philosophy and school points; like wise the names of Benedictins, Dominicanes, jesuits, are names derived from authors of new states of life but not of new faith or religion. So that in us whom they call Papists, is no name which argueth us to be heretics, in the reformers are particular names of particular authors of new points of religion, & so they wear the character of the beast, and are infamous heretics, if Montanus, Martion, Arius, were worthily called heretics.   

The fourth chapter discovereth another mark of an heretic, which is a renovation almost of all old heresies, which argueth the reformers to be heretics if ever any heretofore were justly counted so.  
MAny there are in the world, who finding many absurdities in the new religion, and yet some difficulties also in the old, will neither hold altogether with the one nor the other; but comfort themselves with a flattering opinion, that a Christian may be saved in all religions so that he retain the principal articles of Christian belief. For (say they) if he be firmly grounded in a right faith of the Incarnation, & Trinity, persuading himself that God is one in essence and three in people, and that Christ is one in person yet subsisting in twoe natures, that he suffered for mankind, & is the Messias and Saviour of the world; he is a Christian good enough, & may be saved well enough, whatsoever his opinion be in lesser matters, as justification, merit, Sacraments, and such like, which to them be but petty matters & not of such importance, as that a man's salvation should depend thereon. But this opinion of theirs would they never so fain that it were true, is most untrue, and as false as flattering. And the reason is, because one only opinion in a matter of faith obstinately defended against the Church's authority, 
Th. ●. ●. q. s. a. & s p. q. ●. 〈…〉.  is sufficient to dismember a Christian from the mystical body of Christ his holy Church, in that it depriveth him of infused faith which is the glue, yea the s● new which uniteth the members of this body together. And in deed as yet we never heard of an heretic but he professed some principal parts of Christian faith, as that Christ was God and man, or the Redeemer of mankind, or the author of the la of grace, or some such like: for if he altogether denied Christ, he was rather an Apostata than an heretic. For he is an heretic who professeth Christ in some sort, and himself also a Christian, yet obstinately denieth some part of Christian religion; and he is an Apostata, who quite renounceth Christ and his religion. Wherefore unless we will grant that all heretics may be saved, we must needs confess that one heresy is sufficient to damn a man perpetually. But in this matter lest my censur seem to rigorous & my sentence to severe, I will allege scriptures which can not deceive us, if they be rightly understood. Our Saviour Christ denounceth him to be like an ethnic an publican, which will not hear the Church, 
Mat. 1●.  and he sayeth not, who will not give credit unto her in principal matters, but absolutely he sayeth, if he will not hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an ethnic and publican, that is shun his company as the jew did all familiarity with pagans and publicans. And again Christ threateneth that he, 
Mar. 1●.  who believeth not sh●lbe damned. To which aggregeth saint Paul saying that without faith, 
Heb. 11.  it is impossible to please God: meaning no doubt a whole and entire faith, devoid of all errors. For else all heretics may be saved who believe aright some parts of Christian belief. 
Gal. ●●.  Wherefore saint Paul amongst the works of the flesh, that is of a man which followeth not the spirit of God, but his own sensuality and liking, reckoneth not only fornication, drunkenness, murder, and idolatry, but also dissensions, sects, and heresies, and against all these works he pronounceth the sentence of damnation: I fortel you as I have for told you, that they which do such things shall not obtain the Kingdom of heaven: which sentence as he would have pronounced against one fornication, or murder, so would he against one heresy. To this aggregeth Athanasius in his creed saying that unless a Christian Keep entirely and inviolately the Catholic faith, 
Symb. Ath●.  he can not be saved. Which to me seemeth a sufficient argument, that one only heresy, is a sufficient matter of condemnation. And truly if we will look back to ancient times, and take a view of ecclesiastical histories & councils, we shall find, that for some fewerrours, yea sometimes for one only, and that not in the principal points of our belief, many have been accursed and condemned for heretics. Pelagius believed that there were three divine persons, equal, coaequal, and consubstantial; he professed that Christ was God and man, and the Saviour of the world, and that by his grace we might more easily come to heaven: yet because that he averred that without this grace we might Keep the commandments, and with all, that little infants were neither conceived nor born in originalle sin, hewas by the common voice of the Church and Christian world, 
Posiid. in vi●● Aug.  condemned fora damnable heretic. Vigilantius believed also the Trinity and incarnation, and yet for that he condemned and contemned relics, vigilles, lighting of candles in the Church, prayer to saints, and with all aequalized matrimony with virginity, saint Hierom condemns him even unto hell. 
l. 〈◊〉 Vigil.  jovinian also for making all sins and good works equal in demerit and merit, 
lib. count jevin.  and for putting no difference betwixt the state of Virgins and the Married, was by the same Doctor condemned for an heretic: to which his sentence all the christian world subscribed. And no marvel. For if one heresy depriveth us of faith, as it doth, 
Th. 2.2. q. ●. a. ●.  because he that believeth not God, and his Church in one article believeth them in none, if faith be the link which uniteth us as members to the mystical body of Christ's Church, than one heresy is sufficient to separate us from the Church, as the very name in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth, and consequently one heresy is enough to damn us, because out of the Church is no salvation. For as the arm cut of dieth, & the bow riven from the tree withereth, so whether by one or many heresies we be separated from Christ's mystical body which he vivisicateth by his spirit, we die and whither, and remain devoid of life, sap, and salvation, because the spirit if God which is as is were the soul and spirit of this body, imparts itself to none but those who by true faith are members of this body, and bows of this tree, 
Psal. 79.  which extendeth itself by reaching bows, from sea to sea. 
l. de vni●. Ecel.  Wherefore saint Cyprian sayeth that whosoever is separated from the Church hath no part in Christ's promises; he is an alien (sayeth he) an enemy, a profane person, and one that can not have God for his father, who hath not the Church for his mother. Yea (sayeth he) such an one may die for Christ, he may burn, he may be cast to the wild beasts, but that death shall be no crown of faith, but a pain of infidelity: such a one may be Killed, but he can not be crowned. If then it be so that one error in faith obstinately defended, is sufficient to cut a man from the Church, and to make him an heretic; then certes the ghospellers of this time must needs be heretics and that in the highest degree, who have renewed almost all the old heresies, and even those which by the Christian world, were always condemned for damnable errors. For if Simon Magus & his successors were ever heretics for such and such opinions, if these men will defend the same opinions, they must needs be condemned for heretics also, unless we will accept persons and use plain and palpable partiality. 
Vine. Lirin.  Simon Magus said that God was the author of sin, 
Aug. her. 65.  whom Cerdon and Martion, Manicheus, Photinus, and Blastus followed, 
Eus. l. ●. c ●●.  and were for this doctrine by the common voice of the Christian world adjudged heretics, & shall not the same sentence pass upon our reformers who say not only (as Simon Mag●s did) that God by a certain consequence is the author of sin, in that he hath given man a nature necessarily inclining to sin, 
Bel. l. 2. ●●. ●. c. ●.  but affirm also that he directly moveth to sin, yea provoketh us and eggeth us forward? Shall Manicheus and the others above named be heretics who said only that the evil God was author of sin (for they imagined two Gods) and shall our reformers be counted good Christians who, say that the good and the only God is the cause & promoter of all lies and wickedness? 
●i de fide & operibus c. 14.  Certain old heretics even in the Apost les time, 
● Pet 3. 〈◊〉 li t. c.2 ● Aug her 54.  grounding themselves upon saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans', which as saint Peter witnesseth they did wrongly interpret, affirmed only faith to be sufficient to salvation (which fantasy Simon Magus, and Eunomius also embraced & for this they were accursed for heretics) & shall Luther & Caluine: 
Lut. in c. ●. Ga● Calu. in. Antid says. 6. can. it.  and their adherentes go for sincere Christians, who teach the self same doctrine. Leo the third Emperor, Constantine the fifth, and Leo the fourth with their adherentes called Iconomachis, and Iconoclastae, 
Zonar. vitae Leo●. Paulus Diaco abide.  Were condemned as heretics for denying honour to Images, and for breaking and defacing them, & how can our ghospellers show their faces amongst Christianes', who exceed those Image-breakers by many degrees. With the Simonians, 
Iren. li. ●. c. 24 Ignat. ep. ad Smyrn. Th. Wald. l. 2. de Sacram. c. z. ●3. Damasc. l. de heres. Ter. l. de bap.  Menandrians, and others in saint Ignatius time, yea with Berengarians and Wiclephistes, they deny that in the Eucharist Christ's body is really present: with the Messalians and Caians, they deny that the Sacraments give grace, with. John Wicleph they deny that Baptism, Confirmation, and Order, imprint characters in our souls, with the Pelagians they say that Baptism is not necessary, 
Wald. to. 2. ●. 96.  and that without it children may be saved by predestination or the faith of their parents: with the Novatians they deny the Sacrament of Penance: 
Infrae. Soc l. 4. c. 24. Iren. l. 1. c. 30.  with the Gnostics, manichees and Encratites, they say Matrimony is no Sacrament, no more (sayeth Caluin) than tillage of the ground yea spinning and carding. 
Higher Proce. mio l. cont. Lucif.  With the manichees they deny free-will, with Aerius the Sacrifice, with helvidius & jovinian, they make marriage equal with virginity. 
Hier. l cont. illos.  They mary priests, & despise Relics with the same Vigilantius, & with Rhetorius they praise all heresies, 
Sand l. 7. vi s●b. mon pag. ●7●.  and renew them all; and shall they for one heresy be accursed heretics, and these men who have raked hell to rake them altogether, be esteemed of as pure, sincere, and reform Christians? Shall several heresies make them heretics, and shall not all heresies almost, assembled together, be sufficient to make these men heretics? Truly unless Apostasy excuse them from beresie (who have denied all most all points of religion, only Christ remaining to whose deny all notwithstanding as the next book shall prove, they have made a great step) I can not see why the ancient heretics for several heresies should be counted heretics, & these for so many which they have raked together, go for good Christians, especially seeing that any one heresy is sufficient to make an heretic, because every one severeth, and separateth from the Church, and her faith and doctrine. Certes if these men be no heretics, the old heretics were none, if these be no heretics, never as yet were any, If these have not the mark of an heretic, Simon Magus, Martion, Cerdon, Pelagius, Wicleph, had none, if these be good Christianes' all heretics were so, or if they were noted with the character of an heretic, these are so marked that they shall never be able to hide or wipe away this mark, until they abjure, and renounce every one of the old heresies which they have renewed, and embrace wholly and entirely the Catholic faith the which they have forsaken.   

The fifth Chapter handleth another mark of an heretic which is want of succession.  
Our adversaries neither can, nor will deny, but that our Saviour Christ and his Apostles, once planted true religion and established a true Church in the world, 
Ephes. 4.  in which Pastors and Doctors were appointed to minister Sacraments, to preach the word of God, and to govern and rule in the Church. The Acts of the Apostles witness no less, 
Act. Apost.  which set before our eyes the beginning and progress of the primitive Church, the beginning in Jerusalem, the progress amongst the Gentiles. For when Christ died the principal foundation and corner stone was laid, when the Apostles were created, the building went on, and when they by preaching & miracles augmented the number of the first Christianes', than was the building of this Church perfected, and brought to that splendour and perfection, that the Scribes and pharisees emulated and envied the glory thereof, and sought the means to ruin this work of God, 
Act. ●.  but in vain: for as Gamaliel told them, the work of God no power can dissolve. 
Act 7. ●.  Against this Church the devil raised a tempest which began with a storm of stones amongst the jew, but by the Emperors and heretics hath continued unto this day. In this Church was called a Council in jerusalem where saint Peter as the head pronounceth the sentence, 
Act. 15.  and saint same's subscribeth. The first pastors of this Church were the Apostles; saint james was Bishop of jerusalem, saint John of Ephesus, saint Mark of Alexandria, 
Eus. l. 2. ●. 1●  saint Peter first of Antioch, then of Rome, which were his particulars seats, for he was supreme Bishop also of all the Christian world. 
Io. 21.  And in Antioch Euodius succeeded to saint Peter, 
ep. ad Anti●.  & after him Ignatius. In Rome after that he had exercised the function of a supreme pastor for the space of twenty and five years (departing not withstanding some times as business or persecution enforced him) before his death he appointed Clemens for his successor; but he refusing, 
Act. 1●. Gal. 2.  Linus and Cletus saint Peter's coadiutours, 
Epiph. har. 27.  succeeded him, and after them saint Clemens accepted of the charge. 
Sand. pag. 256.  The other Apostles in other places left their scholars to succeed them, yea and placed others in other places where themselves could not reside: as saint John appointed Policarp at Smyrna. 
Tert. l. praes. ●. 3●.  To be brief Ecclesiastical histories, from the Apostles deriu● a Christian Church and succession of pastors unto these days. So that a true Christian Church was once planted and established. Which if it be true, then undoubtedly, that now is the true Church, they the true Christians, those the true pastors, that the true fay the, which from the first and primitive Church by a continual succession can be deduced; for the Church is called apostolical not only because is was once planted by the apostles but also because it is descended from them by succession: And they must be heretics and bastard Christians degenerating from their first institution, who can not show this succession, and their Church shall be, 
l. pras. c. 20.  not apostolical, but apostatical. This argument handleth Tertulian in his book of prescriptions where he showeth how all particular Churches were first planted by the apostles, and how other Churches from them received faith and religion; and (sayeth he) if now you will know what religion is the true Christian religion, you must confer it with some former Church from which it is descended, because (say ethe he) Omne genus ad suam originem censeatur necesse est: It is necessary that every kind be valued and esteemed according unto his source and origine. If you will judge of water, mark the fountain, if you will know a man's gentry, look how he descendeth from the first of his family, if you will inform yourself of any man's title unto a lord ship, you must consider how the first lord entered in to possession, and how he is descended from him. And so if we will discern the true Christian from the heretic, we must have an eye unto the root and stock from which he descendeth, for so we shall know whether he be legitimate or bafe-borne. For if he fetch his pedigree from any other than the Apostles, or those which by succession descended from them, than is he a bastard-Christian, and carrieth the mark of an heretic. The Roman and Catholic Church which now is, can derive her pastors, religion, and government, even from the Apostles and those whon they appointed Bishops and successors. For if you run over Ecclesiastical histories, you shall find our Church and the practice of our religion to have flourished from the beginning unto these days, for they treat almost of nothing else but of the progress of our Church, of the persecution where with it was assailed, of the heretics by whom it was molested, of our Bishops, prelate's, ●●artys, virgins, doctors, of our general and provincial Councils & of the miracles which were wrought in confirmation of our faith: in so much that if our matters were not, the historiographers should have had no subject to work or write on. 
●. ●. c. 1. l. 2. cont. Donatistas'. open 363.  Ireneus reckoneth the Popes of Rome from saint Peter unto Eleutherius, Optatus unto Damasus, saint Austin unto Anastasius, 
Sand li de vi sib. mon.  others go farther, and doctor Sanders our countryman bringeth the succession of our Popes, Bishops, Ceremonies, and religion unto Pius Quintus time, Genebrard hath done the like unto Gregory the thirteenth his time, 
Gen. in Chronol. Baron in Annal.  and Cardinal Baronius in nine tomes all-ready set forth, hath most exactly set down the practice of our religion unto Ludovicus Pius of France. And if our Church agree with the primitive Church, if our faith vary not from the ancient faith, if our pastors be descended from the Apostles and their scholars, as all histories and monuments do bear witness, then must our Church needs be the true Church, because it aggregeth with the original, and is conformable to the primitive Church, which as it was nearest unto Christ & his disciples, and was persecuted and honoured for the true Church, so was it likest to be the true Church, unless we will say that Christ and his Apostles never planted a true Church. This succession was counted always a mark of the true Church, which in our Creed we profess, 
Symb. 〈…〉  when we believe in the Apostolical Church to wit that which is by succession derived from the Apostles & planted by them, and the want of it was always esteemed a note to know an heretic by. Wherefore Ireneus sayeth that by succession we confound all heretics; 
Supra.  Saint Austin sayeth that it is the thing, 
Lib. count ep. fund. c. 4 l. d● utilit. cred. c. 17.  which holdeth him in the Catholic Church, because (sayeth he) that Church in which is this succession, is the rock against which the gates of hell can not prevail. If therefore our new Christianes' will discharge themselves of this mark of an heretic, which is want of succession, let them show us (as Tertulian demanded of the heretics of his time) the catalogue of their Bishops, and the origen of their Church, that if in the same we find them to be descended from the Apostles we may acknowledge them as true Christians if we find that they are not descended from so noble a race, we may hiss them out of the Church for heretics. But I am sure they can show no● succession, because they are the first themselves, and can as soon name their predecessors; as they can find out Lutherans before Luther, & Calvinists before caluin. I will not deny but that they can derive some points of their doctrine from Simon Magus, and other ancient heretics: but this succession proveth them also to be heretics as is before demonstrated, but a succession from that Church whichwas commonly counted Christian, they can not show, yea they can not show us a succession of their doctrine from any ancient heretics, but are themselves the first of their family, succeeding to none, but sent and ordained by themselves, 
See the first book & first chap.  borne prodigiously of themselves, Children with out fathers and scholars with out masters. for although they borrow their heresies of other heretics, yet they jump with no heretics in all points, but either add or detract, & so succeed in all points to none. Werfore though sometimes they vaunt that they succeed the Apostles and the primitive Church, yet some times the truth breaketh from them against their wills, as it doth from the devil when by conjuration he is compelled to tell the truth, and then they confess themselves to be the first of their family; but this confession hangeth them. Oecolampadius they call the first bishop of Basil, and Caluin, the first of Geneva, Latimer the first Apostle of Ingland, and knokes of Scotland: And Martin Luther the most ancient of them all, is not afraid to say, that he was the first man that manifested the gospel, and the truth unto the world. 
In prafa●. disp. Lypsi●.  Audemus dicere (sayeth he) à nobis primo diwlgatum esse Christum: We dare say that Christ was first by us made known unto the world. He hath pigs in his belly & therefore he speaks in the plural number, but he hath no brains in his head nor blood in his face to blush with all, and therefore he dares be bold to say that he is the first man that promulgated the christian law. Art thou the first, thou vaunting companion? modesty would yield at least to the Apostles. So he will peradventure, but at least (sayeth he) I am the first after them. O monstrous and Luciferian pride, and now not Luther, but Lucifer. Art thou the first after the Apostles. Where then was the Church all this while? Where were ethe Pastors and Doctors of the same? Where were the Austin's, Ambroses', Gregory's, Hieromes? Was there none all this while to have been employed, but God must needs expect till an Apostata friar leapt out of a Cloister, and married with a Nun notwithstanding that both had promised chastity before god and man by a solemn vow; But they have a shift or twoe by which they think to avoid this argument of succession. The first is this: our doctrine (say they is) Apostolical and we are the Apostles successors because we preach conformable to that doctrine which they have left in the gospels & epistles by them written. But this shift will not serve, 
See the second chap.  because this is to make bare scripture judge of their doctrine (as all heretics have ever done) which not notwithstanding (as is in the first book demonstrated) is no certain rule to square faith & religion by. Wherefore they have yet another answer in store, which is this: They grant that the Apostles once planted a true church, true religion, and established true pastors; but soon after, this Church failed & degenerated from that it was, into the Synagogue of the devil which they call the Papistical Church, and possessed the world for many hundred years, till at length Luther the man of god, builded this Church again, renewed the religion, and appointed new pastors; & so (say they) we succeed to that Church which the Apostles founded, not by a continual succession, but by an interruption of many hundred years. But ask them what year of our lord, under what Emperor or Pope, upon what occasion this Church failed, & then they can not give you a resolute answer! Luther in the Assembly at Wormatia publicly avouched that the Church fell in the time of the Council of Constance in which Wicleph was condemned. 
Tom. 9 l cont Papatum.  The same Martin not always mindful of every word which he hath spoken, in his book which he written against Papacy sayeth that this Church failed a thousand years after Christ, and his reason is, biccause the apocalypse sayeth that Satan for a thousand years shallbe tied, and so for six hundred years he hath been lose. 
l. de Capt. Babyl.  In another place he sayeth that saint Gregory was the last good pope and that since that time the Church and pastors are degenerated. Yet the same man perceiving how little aggreement is betwixt his religion and that which was practised even in the first age, and time of the Apostles, & how unlike his ministers are to those ancient priests and fathers, 
Act 15.  he sayeth that the Apostles themselves erred in their Council held at Jerusalem, or else (sayeth he) we all sin now in eating blood-puddings which they forbade; not knowing (absurd companion as he was) or not acknow-ledging that the precept was but for a time to content the jew. As for the Council of Nice which was with in 300, years after Christ, he avoucheth that the canons and articles of the same are but Straw and Stubble: 
●●pr●.  which epithetons he gives also unto saint james his epistle. 
Ep. ●d Sadol.  Caluin sayeth that Bonifacius the Pope, was the first that was made suprem head of the Church, by Phocas the Emperor, and so he thinketh that then the Church first degenerated, yet the same man in his preface to the king of France, 
Prafat. Inst. ad Regem Galli● in locis postre●●●●ditu.  sayeth that the Church fell not till the time of the Council of Basil. Melancthon sayeth that Pope Zozimus was the first Antichrist, and that since, there was never any true Bishop of Rome. But first this disagreement of the time of this fall, is a sufficient argument that the Church never fell; for if it had fallen (it having been once so famous, so glorious, so conspicuous) the fall thereof, with the time, occasion, and other circumstances could not have been concealed: & as soon may the sons fall from heaven be unknown unto the world, as the fall of the Church, 
Mat. 3.  which is sometimes called a city on an hill, 
Psal. 1●.  some times a tabernacle placed in the some. Secondly if the Church fell then certes it was not builded upon a rock but on the sands, 
Mat. 16. 2. Tim. 3.  then is it not ● pillar of truth; 
Lu●. 22.  then did Christ pray that Peter's faith might not fail, that his father would send his holy spirit to remain with the Apostles for ever (that is in their successors for with them in person he could not remain for ever) and yet was not hard. 
Mat. 28.  Then did Christ promise that he would stay with them for ever, but performed not what he promised; Then was Christ an unfaithful spouse who betrothed himself to his Church, but separated himself from her many hundred years. 
c. 2.  And then did Daniel foolishly compare Christ's Church unto a Kingdom which should never be ruined. 
Ser. 2, in Psal. 107.  But as S. Austin well noteth, it is the property of them who are out of the Church to say that the Church is not. Sed illa Ecclesia (saith he in the person of the Donatists) quae fuit omnium gentium iam non est, perijt. Ho● dicunt qui in illa non sunt. O impudentem vocem. illa non est, quia tu in illa non es? vide ne tu ideo non sis, nam illa erit, etiamsi tu non sis: But that Church which consisted of all nations now is not, it is perished. So they say who are not in it. O impudent voice; Is not that extant because thou art not in it? Look lest thou therefore be'st not, for the Church will be, although thou be not. 
Ser. ●●. in Cant.  Wherefore saint Bernard who was one of this Church doubted not but that she should persever to the end: Ita est, & tunc, & deinceps, non deficiet genus Christianum, nec fides de terra, nec charitas de Ecclesia, venerunt flumina, flaverunt venti & impegerunt in eam, & non cecidit, co quod fundata erat supra petram, petra autem erat Christus: So it is, both then, & after ward the Christian race shall not fail, neither faith from the world nor charity from the Church; fludds have come, winds have blown & have beaten upon her, but the Church fell not because it was founded upon a rock, which rock was Christ. 
Hom. 1. de Pent.  The words of Christ must be verified (saith saint Chrysostome) because heaven and earth shall fail before Christ's words: and what are those words sayeth he? even those and no other: 
Mat. 16.  Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church. This Church sayeth he was impugned but could not be overcome, darts were shot against it, but could not pierce, engines of war were used to overthrow it, but this tower could not be beaten down: Consider (sayeth he) the tyrants, beasts, swords, deaths, darts, which the devil prepared against this Church but all in vain, for the devil hath emptied his quiver and shot all his arrows, but the Church hath no hurt: The persecutors are now dead, rotten, and forgotten, but the Church flourisheth. Where is now Claudius, where is Augustus, where are Nero and Tiberius: these are now naked names, for themselves are not extaunt. 
Ser. post exilium.  And thinkest thou, o devil (saith he) that thou canst over throw the Church that art not able to encounter with a young Agnes, and tender Christian maid, who hath proved stronger than all thy force, and instruments of torments. And if (sayeth he) thou couldst not overcome the Church when she was young and had the jew and Gentiles Kings and Emperors against her, thinkest thou now to give her the foil or fall? And truly he that sayeth that the Church hath failed, must consequently say with the Atheists, that it was the work of men not of God, devised by men to Keep fools in awe; for if the Church was established by God, then by Gamaliel his rule, 
Act. ●.  it could not by any force of man, be dissolved. This argument so presseth them that they dare not stand to this answer, yet they will play small play rather than stand out? 
l. de notis Ecclesiae.  Luther therefore in his book of the notes of the Church, granteth that the Church never quite decayed but only for the most part, and so (sayeth he) it decayed even in the apostles time, for as Christ (sayeth he) from the beginning had his Church, so the devil had his chapel which was bigger than the Church, & so there hath been ever a succession of both, but the chapel as it was ever bigger so was it most famous. And this chapel (saith he) is the Church of the Papists, which is so famous in Ecclesiastical histories. But this shift is poor and ridiculous. For if the Church of the Papists degenerated from the beginning as Simon Magus did, why were not we called by particular names as all heretics are? Why was not our author named? Why is not the time and occasion registered? If our Church was ever the greater than was theirs the chapel, for it is against the nature of a chapel to be greater than the Church. If our Church was the greater and most famous, then was ours that society which was commonly called the Christian Church, than was our society that which condemned heresies and called Counsels, which was persecuted by the persecutors (and consequently was not the devils chapel for he persecuteth not his own) and favoured by Constantine and other Christian Emperors, Kings, & Princes; for which monasteries were erected, Churches builded, in which all the ancient doctors ministered sacraments, preached, teached, ruled and governed. And where was then Luther's little flock? What Historiographer written the progress of it? What Emperors persecuted it? What heretics railed against it? What Churches were builded for it? What ministers ruled it? And what was the manner of government in it? If there were no such societ●e, & no other counted Christian but ours, than either ours was the true Church or else the Church quite failed, & so they must return to their first shift, which yet will not serve their turn, as is already proved. Wherefore if all other fail they have yet another shift, and that is this. We grant say they that the Church never decayed but still stood immovable upon the rock upon which Christ founded it, 
Mat. 16.  but soon after the Apostles time, or peradventure before they were all dead, this Church became invisible, and appeared no more openly, but was preserved secretly in obscure corners, till at the length Luther (whom God and his Church all that while expected) brought it to light again: And all this while (because Ecclesiastical histories convince them) they confess that there was a Church commonly called Christian in which Popes ruled, and Kings and Princes were baptised, but that (say they) was not the Church of Christ, but the conventicle of Papists and chapel of the devil, 
Io. ●.  and thus these evildoers fly the light. This shift serves them for two purposes: for first thus they will free themselves from all iudgement-seats: for if you convent them before Ecclesiastical judges, or the whole Church, they will say that they are not lawful judges, and that it is not the true Church, which summoneth them to appear; and therefore they are not bound to stand to their sentence, who have all authority, on their own side: And if you ask them from whom they had authority, they will say that they had their predecessors to whom they succeed, and their Church whose faith they preach, and that from them they have authority; if you then bid them show some history or ancient monument of their Church, they will answer that it was invisible and so will say what they list, and by no Church passed or present shall you be able to control them, for they have a Gygas ring to go invisible by. Secondly if the Church was invisible you can not urge them to show any continual succession of it from the Apostles. For they will say that their Church succeeded the Apostles, and is the same which they planted, but after the Apostles time, was never seen till Luther pulled away the bushel which covered this light. And truly I will easily grant that their Church before Luther was invisible. For that which was not could not be seen; but that the true Church was at any time invisible, is altogegether improbable. For when happened this darkeness I pray you? 
Mat. 30 Psal. ●●.  The Church was once a city upon an hill, and a tabernacle placed in the son, how then could it on a sudden come to be invisible, and no man in the world to note it. Historiographers write of earthquakes and darknesses; and all the world noted the darkness which happened at Christ's death; and was there no man to note this darkeness which covered the whole face of the earth, and happened after so conspicuous a light? Aristotle sayeth that the same sense judgeth of the object, and privation: as for example, the eye which beholdeth colours and light, perceiveth also or at least gives occasion to the inward sense called sensus communis to perceive darkeness when the light is gone: why then could not they which had seen the Church flourish and shine conspicuously, perceive also when first she lost her light? And if they perceived it, how chanceth it that none ever written of so strange an accident? But what should I ask so many questions where I am sure to find no reasonable answeres? I will now with one argument make all this darkeness of this erroneous doctrine give place to the light of the truth, to wit that the true Church can not be invisible. For Christ bids us when our brother will not hearken unto our admonitions, 
Mat. 18.  to complain on him to the Church. Suppose then that some heretic should preach false doctrine and being admonished to correct his error, would yet remain obstinate; there is no other remedy but to complain on him to the Church, and how shall this complaint be made if the Church can not be found out, as it can not, if it be invisible? Suppose again some Christian or infidel should begin to doubt of his faith, and would fain be instructed; no doubt his only remedy is to repair unto the Church for a resolution, where only truth is taught and salvation is found; but if the Church be invisible or decayed, how shall he have access to this Church which either is not (as they say) or at least is invisible? Truly if the Church either decayed or was invisible, then was the world without means of salvation for many hundred years. But let me demand of them how their Church was invisible, which consisteth of men and is governed by men and maintained by visible government, visible Sacraments and audible preaching? They lived not always in holes, some times they came abroad, and coming abroad and carrying the name of Christians, they were by Papists always enforced to frequent Mass and sacraments, and to profess their religion, else had they been excommunicated, and delivered to seculare power; whence it must needs follow that either Luther's and Calvin's Church was never before themselves began to preach, or that their Church dissembled against conscience for fifteen hundred years. But what do I fight against shadows and that which never was or never was seen? Let me conclude now that which I intended. The ghospellers can not deny but that the true Church was once planted, and that therefore now, that is the true Church, which can by succession, be derived from it (for to say that the Church failed or was invisible is but a vain imagination) and seeing that Catholics can by all Histories and monuments show that their Church is descended from that which was in the time of the Apostles, theirs is the Church, and they are the true Christians, and seeing that the reformers can not thus derive their Church from the Apostles (because before Luther's preaching it was never seen hard nor felt) it followeth that their Church is not Apostolical but rather apostatical and heretical, and they no true Christianes', but heretics.   

The sixth chapter handleth the sixth mark of an heretic which is dissension in doctrine, in which chapter is proved, that peace is a mark of the true Church, and that the dissentious ghosppellers are heretics if ever any were.  
CIcero that famous orator and Merchant of words, 
Philippica 13.  speaking of peace, gives it this worthy commendation: Pacis nomen dulce est, res vero ipsa cum jucunda tum salutaris: The name of peace is sweet, but the thing itself is both pleasant and sovereign. To which opinion of his all men will easily subscribe if they enter into consideration of the nature of peace. For what is more pleasant than that which all things desire? and what more healthful and sovereign then that which preserveth all things? So pleasant is peace that even senseless creatures seem wholly to desire it. The heavens move all from the east to the west, carried with the sway of the first heaven called primum mobile, and yet by their proper motions at the same time they move also from the west to the East & some swiftly some slowly, yet with such uniformity & aggrement, as though they desired nothing more than peace and feared nothing more than jarring and disagreeing in their motions. The Elements when they are out of their natural places, do move speedily, and make great haste to get to their home, because there only they find peace & rest, to which their nature inclineth. Brute beasts also of one kind commonly Keep together, and follow one head as it were with common consent, because one easilier makes peaceable aggreement, than many. 
Li. de va●●● Idolorum.  Bees follow one king (sayeth saint Cyprinan) and obey the humming of one master-bee, In all flocks of sheep, there is one Belwether, and in every heard one is the ring leader; yea sayeth saint Hierome: Cranes follow one in a long order; which they do for love of peace, for in following divers heads, they would be more divided, and less united. 
lib. ciu. c. 1●.  Yea sayeth S. Austin no tiger is so cruel which doth not lick and like her young ones; no Kite but loves her brood and seeks to conserve her family in peace: much more doth man who is endued with reason, cover and desire peace, seem he otherwise barbarous and devoid of humanity. The Passionate man who fights continually against reason to satisfy his passions, seeks to give them their desire without contradiction of reason, and consequently coveteth peace, but this is an inordinate peace. The reasonable & virtuous man, who seeks to subdue his passions, and to make them to yield to reason without repugnance, seeketh an atonement betwixt passion and reason; and this is an orderly peace. The rebellious and mutinous subjects who rise in arms against their lawful Prince, are desirous to enjoy their own will & to possess what they desire without resistance, and consequently intend a peace; but this is an injust peace. And all though by rebellion they break common peace, yet that is not because they hate peace, but because they enjoy not that peace which they desire. The just Prince who maketh war against injust usurpers, 
Aug. ibidem.  even then when he biddeth war, aimeth at peace, and intends not war as war, but as a mean to come to peace; and this is a just peace. Cacus that barbarous fellow who lived in caves as beasts do, & fed himself of the spoils of others, was desirous to enjoy his own desires without molestation, and so desired peace, but a brutish peace. And a● peace is most pleasant and therefore desired of all, so is it most sovereign, and therefore preserveth all. Peace betwixt the humours and elementary qualities in man's body, is health, peace betwxit the two repugnant parts in man's soul, reason and sensuality, is virtue, peace betwixt God and man is Charity, betwixt man and man, is friendship, peace and consort in voices or instruments is music, peace and aggreement in colours is beauty, peace in proportions, is good making, peace in the heavens motions, and in the Elements qualities, is the conservation of all. Peace is the maintenance of families, the preservation of cities, the establisment of Colleges, the strength of common wealths, the force of Kingdoms, and the felicity of all societies. Peace upholdeth heaven, 
Mar. 12. Marc. ●.  & without it hell could not stand, because every Kingdom, which is divided in itself shall be made desolate. Peace and unity (saith the Philosopher) makes natural causes to pass themselves in force and efficacy, because force united, is stronger than itself divided. You may break a thousaunde arrows one being taken from another, but in a bundle or sheaf, not so. Divide the greatest river which is, and a child will pass it, but when the water is united, you must have a ship or boat to sail over. Lay one coal in one corner of the house, and another in another, and you may Stand in the midst, and blow your fingers for cold, but unite them together, and they will warm the whole house. Oxen divided, can not draw that weight which they can united. The greatest army which is if it be divided, is soon defeated, but when the forces are united, it is invincible. To be brief, peace preserveth all things, and gives strength and force to all. And contrariwise dissension is the bane of all. dissension or distemperature of humours in man's body is sickness, disagreement of reason and sensuality in the soul, is vice, jarring of voices or instruments, is ungrateful discord, in colours it is deformity, in proportions, mishap. Diffension is the undoing of families, the dissolution of Colleges, the weakening of cities, the overthrow of armies, the ruin of kingdoms, & the bane of all societies. What Kingdomwas more likely to have stood then that of the Angels? Dissension which Lucifer sowed, had almost quite ruined it. What place better fenced, more fertile, and fruitful than paradise? yet dissension betwixt God and man, yea betwixt man and himself (for when man disagreed from god his flesh began to resist his spirit, and all creatures before obedient to him, began to rise in arms against, him, banished thence the happy inhabitants, and with them all felicity. Who more near than Cain and Abel? dissension was the death of the one, and the reprobation of the other. Who more likely to have lived lovingly together them Abraham and Lot, joseph and his brethren? dissension severed and separated them. What kingdoms more strong and potent than those of the Medes, Persians, Chaldies', and Romans'? read histories and you shall see that dissension was the chiefest cause of their ruins. If then the Maxim of the philosopher be true, that one contrary setteth forth another; by the destroying nature of dissension, you may easily perceive how sovereign a preservative peace is, and how just cause all creatures have, so vehemently to desire it. This jewel Christ bequeathed unto his dear spouse the Church, when soon after his resurrection, standing in the midst of the apostles, he said unto them: 
Io. 20.  Pax vobis: peace be with you. 
Io. 14.  Of this peace in another place he maketh mention where he sayeth: Pacem relinquo vobis pacem meam do vobis: I leave peace unto you, I give my peace unto you. Where, for a legacy he bestoweth on his Church, not gold and silver, nor kingdoms nor possessious (though he permitteth kings to bestow these things also upon her) but that which is more worth than all the diadems and sceptres in the world, to wit peace, with out the which, no society can endure. This peace the prophet Esaie long since foresaw and forthold, 
Is●. 81. 65.  when he said: That the wolf and lamb shall devil together, and the Lion, Bear, and Calf, live peaceably one with another, and that a little boy shall drive them a field. For his meaning is that in the Church shall be such agreement, at least in matters of religion, that they who before their conversion were persecuting wolves and Bears, shall live peaceably with the harmless lambs and Christians, and that a little boy Christ jesus, the author of all this peace, shall drive them a field, that is shall rule and govern them. The same prophet by another metaphor describing the same peace, 
●bidem.  sayeth: In those days the infant from his mother's paps, shall delight & disport himself over the Asps hole without receiving harm: That is, such peace shall be in the Church, that the children of Christ's Church shall live quietly with those, who before they received Christian faith, by heresies, infidelity, or poisoning manners, 
●. 2.  like serpents infected others. For as in the Ark of No those beasts which were by nature savage, so long as they were in the Ark, forgot all cruelty and lived with the rest most quietly, so how soever men before their incorporation and admission into the Church of Christ, were barbarous in manners, and mutinous in opinions, yet when they are once made members of the peaceable kingdom of Christ's Church, they lay a side all sects and factions, and live quietly together, at least in matters of faith and religion. Whereby it plainly appeareth that in the Church of Christ is peace and unity in religion. Which the Apostle also insinuateth in those words: 
〈…〉.  Being carrefall to keep unity of faith in the band of peace, as you are called in one hope of your vocation, one body and one spirit, one faith, one baptism, one god & father of all. By which words we are taught, that as there is one God, one heaven, one baptism, so is there, but one faith, & that they are the true chri stianes w ch conspire in the same. And the reason hereof is because the truth is one never disagreeing from itself, lies are many, mutable and contrary: and therefore seeing that the Church is the pillar of truth, 
1. Tim. 3.  it must needs follow that where the Church is, there is unity, because the truth in which the members of the Church aggree is but one. I will not deny but that the Church consisteth of divers nations, but yet they are so linked in one faith that in Christ jesus there is no distinction betwixt the Barbarous and Grecian, 
Rom 10.  nor between jew and Gentile; and although these divers nations speak divers languages, yet as Ireneus noteth, these divers tongues profess one faith. 
l. 1. c●nt. her. c. 3.  I grant also that in the Church there are divers functions and dignities; for there are Popes, Patriarches, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops, 
Eph. 4.  and so forth, and from them the state of the laity is distinct, and subject to them; but these divers orders make one Hierarchy. I confess like wise that in the Church there are divers states and orders of religious, as of Benedictins, Dominicanes, Augustine's, bernardin's, Franciscanes, jesuits, yet these divers members make one body, all linked under one head Christ jesus by one faith and religion. This unity, peace, and aggreement in one faith and religion, which is to be seen in the Church militant in earth, seemeth to me more admirable than that of the Church unchangeable in heaven. And the reason is, because the inhabitants of that happy kingdom behold God face to face, and see most evidently that which we believe only, and see not at all, and so their aggreement in understanding is not so strange, because the evidence of the verities which they see inclines them to one assent. For as the philosopher sayeth the understanding of itself is prone to give assent unto verity and truth when it is evidently proposed (which is the cause why in things which are evident all men are of the same opinion) and therefore to this proposition: The whole is greater than the half, all men agree, but about the creation of the world, the immortality of the soul, the felicity of man, the substance of the heavens, and such like things which are not so evident, there have been great disputes and contentions, whence hath risen that diversity also of the sects of Platonists, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans, and such like. Wherefore seeing that the happy inhabitants of heaven do see evidently the divine nature, & all the mysteries which we only believe, I marvel not that they all aggree in one opinion, because the evidence of these things moves them to to one assent. But that so many Christians, of so diverse countries, and times, so diversly affected, and disposed, should agree in one faith and opinion, and think, and believe the same of all the mysteries of Christian religion, which they see not, this seemeth to me most admirable, and so strange that I must needs say: 
Exod ●.  digitus Des hic, The finger of God is in this matter, and he it is that is the cause of this peace, unity, 
Scotus q. 2. prologi.  and aggreement. For seeing that the evidence of our mysteries causeth not this aggreement, and that it can not be the devil who thus linketh their understandings (because this religion in all points is repugnant to him and his designments) it must needs be God who inspiring into these diverse nations and natures one light of faith, makes them all to conspire in one belief and opinion. And therefore sayeth Tertulian: Nullus inter multos eventus unus est exitus, 
l. praesc. 28.  errare non possunt qui ita in unum conspirant: There is not one end amongst many chances, they can not err who thus aggree in one. Thus we prove the translation of the septuagint to be of God, 
justinus oraet. paraen ad gent.  because those divers writers, being placed in divers Cells, and forbidden to confer, could never have so agreed in the translation of the Bible out of Hebrew into Greek as if all their translations had been copied out of one, had nor God directed their understandings, and inspired them a like. Scythe then amongst the Catholics only, this unity is to be found, they only are the true Church, to which Christ hath bequeathed this peace and unity, and they only are conformable to the primitive Church planted by Christ and his Apostles, 
Act. 4.  for then the Christian world was of one heart and mind. And for as much as amongst the new Christians of this age, there is nothing but wrangling and dissension and that in principal matters of religion, their Church is the Synagogue of Satan, and they no members of Christ's Church, but heretics, apostates, and members cut of: for by this mark of dissension the ancient heretics were ever known and descried to be heretics. Simon Magus the first famous arch-heretic began a sect, but it remained not one for any time, but by and by degenerated into many, and from the Simonians proceeded the Menandrians, Saturninians, Basilidians, Carpocratians, and from them were descended the Gnostics. From Cerinthus sprung the unappy branches of the Ebionits', Marcionits, Cerdonists and such like. The Arians were no sooner hatched but they were by and by divided into Aetians, Eudoxians, Eunomiā● and divers others. So variable they were, 
l. 2. c 12.  that Socrates reporteth that they changed their Creed and form of belief no less than nine times. The Donatists likewise, were by and by parted into Rogatists, Maximinianists, and Circumcellions. The Nestorians were severed into Tritheites, Theopaschites, Agnoetians, Severites, and such like; The Eutychians into Monophysites, jacobites, Acephalites, and Theodosians. Wherefore the ancient fathers have observed that dissension is a mark inseparably fastened unto heretics. 
l. praescr. c. 42.  I lie (sayeth Tertulian) if they vary not from their own rules, whilst every one at his pleasure altereth and modifieth (he sayeth tuneth) those things which he hath received, even as the first author framed them at his own arbitrement, the increase declareth the nature of the beginning and origin: The same is lawful for Valentinus, and for the Marcionits, which was lawful for Martion: to wit, to devise new sects and opinions as their sect masters did before them. As Donate (sayeth saint Austin) endeavoured to divide Christ that is the Church of Christ, 
l. de agone Christ. c. 29.  so him, his own Scholars by daily hacking and mangling divided into many pieces. Now that the new Christians of this our last age are in like manner divided, and consequently of the same paste and kind, it is toe toe manifest. Luther was the first man who in this last age beat his wit to devise new faiths & religions, and for a time he was followed by many, but in time also, his followers fell from him, who perceiving that they had as good authority to preach new doctrine as Luther had (for they could say also that Christ sent them, and they could allege scripture for their opinions if they might interpret it by their private spirit (as why may they not as well as he?) they thought it more honourable to be followed, then to follow, and to be Masters then scholars, and so leaving Luther in the lurch, they devised also new doctrines different from his, and so became sect masters as well as he. Zuinglius therefore being weary of Luther's service whom he had courted to long, and perceiving how willingly Luther would have denied the real presence (thereby to have prejudiced the Pope) but that the words of Christ (as he confessed) seemed to plain, devised a gloss for those words: This is my body, 
Mat. 26.  and said that Christ called the bread his body, not because it containeth his body really (as Luther affirmed) but because it is a figure of his body. And as Zuinglius dealt with Luther, so did others. For now the Lutherans are divided into severe and moderate Lutherans, and some glory in Illyricus Flaccus, some adore Melancthon, so that now Luther is left of all his Scholars, and not any one remaineth who aggregeth with him in all points. And as Zuinglius dealt with Luther so did others with him, for from him are descended the Osiandrians, Semiosiandrianes, and Antiosiandrians. Yea out of Zuinglius sprung that unhappy branch Caluin who addeth to Zuinglius opinion, that although the Sacrament be but a figure of Christ, yet with it we receive Christ verily & really, but by faith: which doctrine how it can stand with itself, 
In the least book.  we shall hereafter in this work, discourse. And now these men's Scholars, are divided into Lutherans & double Lutherans, Zuinglianes, Oecolampadianes, Caluinists, Anabaptists, Trinitarians, Suenkfeldians, Protestaunts, Puritans, Brownists, Martinists, brethren of the family of love, and of the damned crew, and I know not how many. And it is a world to see, with what animosity these brethren write one against another. Luther writes severely against the Zwinglians, 
l. in Zuingl.  and Sacramentaries; and a little before his death in steed of a benediction which this father should have bestowed upon these his children, he curseth them to hell; refusing all writing and communication with them, saying that in vain they believe the Trinity, and Incarnation, unless they believe also the real presence. To whom the Tugurine Zwinglians, 
Sur. an. 〈◊〉.  answered that Luther sought his own honour, not the honour of Christ, that he was obstinate and insolent, and one who useth to deliver men up to Satan, that will not agree to his opinion. 
Apol. Eccle Anglia.  And yet our Sacramentaries in Ingland, say that Luther was a man of God, and Caluin, sayeth that he taketh Luther for an Apostle, by whose labour especially the truth was restored. It were a tedious thing to recount their dissensions, and it is a pitiful thing to behold in steed of one faith (in which all the world before Luther's preaching conspired) so many faiths and religions. Of this dissension Hilarius complained in these words: 
l. count Const.  It is dangerous and miserable that now there are as many faiths as wills, and as many doctrines as manners, and as many causes of blasphemies as vices, and that whereas according as there is one God, one Lord, and one Baptism, so one faith also should be, we fall from one faith, and whilst many faiths are feigned, no faith remaineth. And as he thus complaineth of the Arians dissensions, so may we of the dissensions of this age, of which also the very authors of these garboils themselves complain most lamentably. 
l. count Zuing.  Luther himself sayeth that there is such dissension in the interpretation of scriptures, that if the world continue, we must have recourse again unto the trial of councils, else we shall never agree. 
Depravat. conf. Aug.  Cithreus complaineth that the evangelical Doctors (he meaneth ministers) are at greater daggers drawing then any quarreling soldiers. 
Ep. de Exoraismo.  Heshusius confesseth that whether soever he turneth his eyes nothing almost occurreth but dissensions, new increase of errors, and falling of great Doctors from the verity. So that even by their own confessions there is nothing but wrangling and dissension in religion amongst them, and consequently their Church is not the Church of Christ, in which peace and unity flourisheth: which hath upholden and shall still uphold Christ's kingdom against the Tyrannies of persecutors, & might and slight of the devil, and all his members: whereas the kingdom of heretics must needs fall of itself by civil discord and dissension. Wherefore Epiphanius compares them to the vipers of divers Kinds, 
In Panarie.  which the Egyptians used to conclude in one place together, without either meat with in, or means to get out: for as they when they were almost famished began with teeth to tear and deevour one another, till that all the rest being consumed, the last having nothing left to exercise his teeth on, dieth for hunger; so heretics ruin one another, and one sect devoureth another, till at length, the last dieth of itself by her own impiety. Others compare them to the Cadmean brethren which were now sooner borne but they killed one another, others say that they are like sampsons foxes which are divided in the heads that is in faiths, but yet are linked in the tails, conspiring all in this intention to ruin the true Church, but in the mean time they ruin their own, & beating themselves against the rock of Christ's Church they do but break themselves as waves do. 
Li. 4. contra Marcionem. Var l. 3 d● regist c 16. Epiph. har. 44.  Tertulian compares them unto wasps, which as Varro witnesseth, are like unto bees, and sing like bees, but gather neither honey nor wax, and can only sting, and therefore are cast our of the hive; but being cast out they make their combs by themselves. For so heretics are baptized like true Christians, carry the name also of Christians, and sing also like them, ever having Christ in their mouths, the Lord, and the werd, but they have neither the honey of sweet doctrine, nor the wax of good works, only they can sting with their heresies & blasphemies, the right bees and Christians, and therefore by the chief Pastor, and as it were the Master be, they are cast out of the good bees company, by the censure of excommunication, and being cast out they make their combs, that is sects a part, which they also fill not with wax or honey, but with the poison of heresy. If therefore some one in Ingland (as there are many such) should doubt of his religion, I would fain know to which of all the Churches, Synagogues, and sects, he should repair for a resolution? If he demand where Christ is, where true exposition of scripture is, where true faith is to be found? the Protestaunts will say that it is to be found amongst them, the Puritans will assure him that Christ is with them; Noah, will the Brownists say, he is with us. And so the poor man shallbe perplex and doubtful to which party he shall adjoin himself; for whilst none of all these sects and sect-Masters can prove their mission, and every one of them will allege scripture and their private spirit, and none can say more for his sect then another, he shallbe in doubt which to follow, because one hath no more reason to induce him then another, and yet he can not follow them all, because their doctrines and faiths are contrary. Wherefore he shall do well to give ear to none of them, but rather his best will be to follow the Counsel of Hilarius: 
l. count Const.  that is to imitate the mariners, who after they have left the haven and are lanced into the main Ocean, if they find storms and tempests, return again to the haven as the only place of security. For so he having left the Catholic Church, and out of it finding nothing but storms, tempests, and contrary winds of opinions, should return again to the same Church as the only peaceable and quiet haven, where is no dissension in faith, but all peace and aggreement. But they will say that amongst us also are great dissensions, and divers sects also of Thomists, Scotists, Nominals, Reals, and such like: To which I answer that this diversity of opinions is not in matters of faith but only in certain subtleties of Philosophy, or Quirks of School divinity, or other indifferent points of doctrine not defined by the Church, but left to the free censure of every man. But yet these men as herein they show themselves men, who commonly never agree where any difficulty is, so they show themselves Christians, who if the Pope or Church define any opinion, are then all ready to yield and agree, and then you shall see how in Christ jesus and his faith there is neither Scotist, nor Thomist, but all good Christians. Which is the cause of the great unity in the Church, which must needs be wanting in the heretics Synagogues, who having left the Church, and refusing to stand to her censure, have nothing to make them agree. For neither is bare scripture, nor the private spirit sufficient, neither have they any visible judge as is proved, and so whilst amongst them every man may believe as he list, they must needs have almost as many opinions as heads. Wherefore to conclude, seeing that in the Catholic and Roman Church, is such peace and aggreement, that all nations which are members of the same, profess the same faith and aggree all in one religion; that must needs be the Church to which christ bequeathed his peace, and for as much as amongst the ghospellers there is nothing but daggers-drawing and wrangling in religion, that can not be the Church of Christ who is the author of peace and concord, but rather it is an heretical Synagogue, and they if ever there were any, must needs be heretics, who were ever noted for wranglers in religion.   

The seventh chapter containeth the seventh mark of an heretic, which is to be of a particular sect.  
THe nature of good is, not to contain itself with in itself, but rather to impart itself, and to make itself common unto others. That goodly Planet & celestial body the Son, which is the light, and eye of the world, and moderator of times and seasons, is not content to abound in himself with light, but he bestows the same bountifully on all parts of the world: and where he can not be liberal in light, he is bountiful in his influences which reach even to the bowels of the earth, and bottom of the Sea. Fire will never be warm alone but heateth also the standers by; the fountain will not only itself be full, but runneth over, to water the fields, meadows and gardens; The sweet balm or odoriferous ointment, contains not itself with in itself, no not with in the box, but perfumeth all about. To be brief, there is no good, which is not good to others. And herein the rivers imitate their fountain, the effects their cause, & the creatures rather resemble their creator, then attain unto his perfection. For he as he is the fountain of all goodness, and goodness itself; so doth he most bountifully impart this his goodness to others. In the creation of the world, what did he but impart himself by participation unto all his creatures, more or less, according to their capacity? But above all, in the Incarnation he hath showed himself most bountiful, by which he hath communicated himself to our nature not by participation as he did in creation, but by hypostatical uniono, in substance and person. And because in man as in a little world all things are contained (for man hath being with inanimate creatures, life wth plants, feeling with beasts, and reason with angels) he hath in man, in some sort imparted him self to all creatures. But especially to the human nature of Christ he hath declared his bounty, to which he hath in such an admiral sorre united his divine person, that the same man Christ jesus is God and man, omnipotent, immense, infinite, and enriched with all the divine attributes, per communicationem idiomatum. Wherefore since the time or Christ's Incarnation in which he so bountifully bestowed himself, God would no more be so sparing of his graces, as to conclude faith and Salvation with in the Confines of judea, 
Psal. 75.  but he would have all saved, would be known to all by faith, and honoured of all, by religion. And therefore now he hath called jew and gentile, the Grecian and the barbarous, and all nations under the son unto his faith, Church, and religion. Wherefore this Church almost from the beginning even when it was confined with in Jerusalem, 
Act. 2.  contained Parthians, Medes, Persians, Mesopotamians, and as the scripture sayeth, almost all nations under the son. And when the holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and Disciples in fiery tongues, 
Ibidem.  and gave them the gift also to speak all languages, that was to signify that the Church of Christ was not to speak English only, or Scotishe and Flemishe only, but all languages. Wherefore God promised our Saviour Christ that he would give him, not England only, not Scotland Flanders and Germany only, 
Psal. 2.  but all nations for his inheritance. 
Psal 71. Psal 81.  And he avoucheth that his Church shall rule from Sea to Sea: and that all nations hall have access unto it. 
Mat. 28.  And so accordingly Christ gave authority to his Apostles to preach unto all nations. Whereby I gather that the Church of Christ is not to be a particular sect confined with in any straits and corners of the world, but rather an ample Kingdom, reaching over all the world. 
Symb. Apost. & Niceph.  And this we profess in our Creed when we say that we believe the holy Catholic Church. For Catholic is as much to say as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 universal: 
l count ep fundamenti c. ●.  Which name (sayeth S. Austin) holdeth me in the Church. And why? because he knew it to be a sign of the true Christian Church which never yet agreed to any heretical sect, 
Ibidem. & li de verae, rel c ● l de vtil credendi c. 7.  either of the manichees (of which once he was one) or of the Donatists, or Pelagians, or any other. And this sayeth saint Austin is so manifest a mark of the true Church, that heretics themselves ambitiously affect the same: but yet if you ask for the Catholic Church, they point to ours, knowing in their conscience that ours only is in deed Catholic. 
●●. ● 2. l. 2.  And so saint Austin and Optatus refuted the Church of the Donatists by this argument especially, because it was confined with in the limits of Africa. And Pacianus saith that so soon as certain singular Sect-masters devised new religions, 
Ep. ●. ad So. phr.  and were called by particular names, the true Christians, to distinguish themselves from particular sects, took the name Catholic even from the beginning (as appeareth by the Creed which the Apostles made) which name soundeth neither of Martion, nor Cerdon, nor Apelles, nor Valentinus, nor Ne●torius, nor Arrius, 
l. count judeos c. 1●.  nor Luther, nor Caluin. And Tertulian so long as he remained Catholic himself, confessed that the true Church was that which was diffused through out all the world. Yea he sayeth that in his time the true Christians not withstanding the violence of persecution filled the Pagans Cities, 
Apol. c. 37.  islands, Castles, Courts, Senates, and only left their temples to themselves; but no sooner was this man become an heretic, but he affirmed most absurdly that the Church might consist of three persons though they were of the laity. 
li de exhor. cast c. 7 l. de pudic c. 21.  Which he did partly because he would make up a Church of Montanus, Prisca and Maximilla, to whom he had united himself, partly to deliver in himself from the name of an heretic to which he saw himself subject, because he was now of a particular sect. So that it is sufficiently proved that the Church of Christ is Catholic, that is, a Society professing one faith in all countries yea and ages also, 
cap. ●.  according to that of Vincentius Lirinensis: In Ecclesia Catholica tenendum quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum: In the Catholic Church that is to be holden which every where, always, and of all, hath been believed. For that (sayeth he) the name Catholic importeth. Now let us see whether the Roman Church & faith, or rather the Church of the reformers, be the Catholic, & consequently the Christian Church, for these twoe Catholic & Christian ever went together. And here I require no divines, nor Philosophers to be judges in this matter, only let me have men that have ears or eyes & I desire no more For the eye will easily judge whether of these two Churches be most like to be Catholic. The Roman Church which the adversary calleth Papistical hath flourished in all ages and in the most part of the world, as all histories will testify. And now at this day our faith and Church, one, and the same; is diffused through out Spain, France, Italy, Portugal and a great part of Flanders and Germany, yea it reacheth even to the indians and other new found countries converted by the Benedictines, 
See the first book & first chap.  jesuits and other religious men. And so it is Catholic, because being one and the same it hath ever possessed all ages, & countries, and still doth even to this day. As for the reformers Church and faith, I see no sign of a Catholic Church in it. For first it began not an hundred years since, 
In the fift chapter.  as before is demonstrated. Secondly it never yet possessed the whole world nor any great part of it, as the eye will bear witness; only it hath gotten entertainment in certain parts of the world, as England, Scotland, Holland, and some Cantons of Germany. Thirdly it is not one Church nor faith that possesseth all these places, but many, yea scarce one religion filleth one shire or city. Wherefore although England were all the world, and this age all ages, yet were not their religion Catholic, because it is not one faith and religion in all the shires of England, nor all the years of this age: for in, England are many sects and religions, and they also different from the new faiths of other countries: for there is great difference betwixt them and the Lutherans in Germany, Hugonots in France, and Gues in Flanders. Nether is it sufficient for any of them to say that their faith is Catholic, because all are invited to it and commanded to accept of it, for so every sectmaster may say of his religion, and I have proved that the true Christian faith, Church, and religion, is Catholic, in that it being one, possesseth all ages and countries. Wherefore to conclude, seeing that the Church or rather Churches of the reformers never possessed all ages and countries, yea never, one and the same filled any one country: it followeth that their Church is not Catholic and consequently not the true Christian Church, and so they are no true Christians but heretics and singular sectmasters, if ever there were any, because in that they are of particular sects they wear the same Badge which Donatists, Arians, Nestorians and such like have worn before them, and for which they were ever counted and called heretics.   

The eight Chapter discourseth upon the eight mark of an heretic, which is to be condemned for an heretic by that Church, which was commonly counted the true Christian Church.  
AS when the subjects begin to make rebellion, the prince suppresseth them or cutteth them of, and when any sheep of the flock are infected the good shepherd separateth them from the rest, least they infect the whole flock: as the surgeon cutteth of the rotten member lest it corrupt the whole body; and the careful Husbandman plucks up the weeds least that they overgrow the good corn: so the supreme pastor of the Church, when any rebellious heretics rose up in arms against the Church, to whom they ought of right to be subject, assembled always his forces together, that is called General Counsels of his Bishops, and by the censure of excommunication suppressed these rebels, lest that by their civil wars they should molest the peace of Christ his Church, and endeavoured to separate these infected sheep, lest that they should infect the whole fold of Christ, and to cut of these rotten and rotting members, lest they should corrupt the whole body, & to pluck up these noisome weeds, lest they might peradventure overgrow the good corn of the Catholic Christians. And although in the beginning, by reason of persecution and want of ability, the Church could not have her General Counsels, yet even then the pastors of the Church assembled them selves together in writing, by which they refuted their heresies, and made the authors Known, that others might the better avoid them. But after that the Church had gotten a Constantine for her champion, and temporal princes for her Protectors, then against Arius she gathered a Council at Nice consisting of three hundred and eighteen Bishops: 
A●han. ep ad jou & disp. con. Arian. Socr l. 1. c. ●. Gen. 14.  by which number as Abraham once subdued five Kings, so our Saviour Christ by Pope Silvester his Vicar, at Nice the city of Victory (for so much the Greek word impotteth) by Victor also and Vincentius, whose names are victorious, got the victory of Arius, and the Quartadecimanes, and defined against the Arrians, that the son was consubstantial to the father, and against the Quartadecimanes what day Easter should be kept and observed. Which being done the excommunication, condemnation, curses, and anathems were thundered our against them: and a Synodical Epistle was written to Pope Silvester, who confirmed the Counsels sentence in another Council at Rome. The Emperor Constantine reverencing this sentence as the sentence of Christ's church, banished Arius, commanded his books to be burned and him and his to be taken for accursed heretics, and after a banquet to which he invited the holy Bishops he conveyed them home as honourably, as he called them together. So against Macedonius was gathered the second Synod at Constantinople by the authority of Pope Damasus, for the defence of the holy ghosts divinity. Against Nestorius a general Council was called at Ephesus by Pope Celestinus, wherein was defined that in Christ is but one person. At Chalcedon by the authority of Pope Leo the first in a general Council, Eutyches was condemned for affirming but one nature in Christ. And the like general consent of the Church in condemnation of the Pelagians, Berengarians, Wiclephistes and such others I could easily allege out of Ecclesiastical histories, and the councils themselves. But this may suffice to show that whensoever any preached new doctrine, the Christian world wondered at them, the Church admonished them, and if they refused to obey her, she in General Councils condemned them, and the Emperors and Catholic Princes executed their laws upon them which were enacted against heretics, and then all good Christians shunned them as infected and infecting persons. 
l. con. proph. haeresum novitates. c. 1●.  For as Vincentius Lyrinensis sayeth: Annunciare aliquid Christianis Catholicis praeterid quod acceperunt, nusquam licet, nunquam licebit, & anathematizare eos qui annunciant aliquid, praeterquam quod semel acceptum est, nunquam non oportuit, nusquam non oportet, nunquam non oportebit: To preach unto Christians other doctrine then that which they have already received, Noah where is lawful, and never shall be lawful: and to accurse as heretics those which preach other doctrine then which before hath been accepted, it was ever behovable, it is every where behovable, and ever shallbe behovable. And whosoever readeth the Ecclesiastical histories shall see how always, they were taken for heretics, who were condemned by General councils, and holden so by that Church which commonly was called Christian. And good reason, for he that will not obey the Church must be by Christ's commandment eschewed as an Ethnic and Publican. 
Mat. 18.  Let now the indifferent reader be judge whether this note and mark aggregeth not as properly to Luther, Caluin, & their followers, as ever it did to, Arrius, Macedonius, Nestorius, Eutiches, and such like, who by their own confession were infamous heretics. They taught strange doctrines never allowed by that Church which was commonly counted Christian; so did Luther and Caluin. At them when they began to preach, the Christian world wondered, so did it when these men began. When they by the Church's admonition could not be reclaimed, the Church by a general Council in which the Pope ruled by his Legates, condemned them as heretics; so when Luther began to preach Leo the tenth Pope of that name warned him of it, and sent Cardinal Caietane a larned and famous divine to confer with him, but he being protected by the Duke of Saxony, though some times he feigned that he would submit himself, remained obstinate; wherefore a general Council was called at Trent, whereby the sentence of the learnedst, gravest, and wisest Prelates of the world, (for there were present six Cardinals, fowe Legates, three patriarchs, thirty and two Archbishops, two hundred and eight Bishops, and five Abbors, seven Generals of religions, and Pro●utatours of religions, and other learned men very many) Luther and all the heretics and heresies of this age were condemned, even as Arrius and other heretics in other Counsels before had been. But they say that it was not the true Church which condemned them. And might not Arrius have said the same? And when I pray you did the true Church that once was and which condemned Arrius, degenerate? Under what Pope and Emperor? In what age? in what year of our Lord? upon what occasion? But this miserable refuge of theirs is already rejected. At least that Church which when Luther began to preach was commonly counted the only & true Christian Church, condemned them, and so if ever there were any heretics, these men also must be counted so, else Arrius sentence, which that society which was commonly counted Christian, pronounced against him, must be reversed, or at least again examined.  
To these marks may be added others, as want of mission, allegation of bare scripture, bragging of the private spirit, contempt of fathers, want of a visible judge, of which we have spoken in the first book, for these were the properties of all heretics and are as proper to our new reformers as ever they were to any ancient heretic, as by the same chapters doth appear most evidently.    

THE THIRD BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SURVEY of their doctrine concerning Christ, in which by many points of their doctrine, it is proved that they are Antichristians rather than Christians.  

The first Chapter proveth that their doctrine despoileth Christ of his divinity, and that they therefore are no sincere Christians.  
EVERY man liketh and loveth that which he professeth and will speak honourably of him whom he followeth in that profession. The Stoics commend Zeno, the Platonistes praise Plato, the Peripatetics Aristotle, the Epicureans Epicure, the Atheists Diagoras, and every one reverenceth and respecteth him whose doctrine and profession he embraceth. If then the reformers be sincere and real Christians (as they will seem to be) they must think, and speak of Christ very honourably, and give that homage to his parson, which his doctrine hath deserved. And so in deed or rather in words they seem to do. Luther when he first began to preach against Indulgences, merits, satisfaction, good works, 
Lut. in c 17. Gal. fol. 2●●.  and inherent justice, affirming, that only to believe that Christ's justice is ours, is sufficient to salvation, used this for a Cloak; that forsooth he gave all to Christ's justice, and nothing to our works. Caluin also in his preface of his Institutions which he written to the King of France, 
In pr●f. Inst. ad Reg. Gal●.  commends his own doctrine for this point especially, that it gives all honour to Christ, & leaveth nothing to our own force & ability. And what doth better aggree with faith (sayeth he) then to acknowledge ourselves despoiled of all virtue that of God we may be clothed, devoid of all good, that of him we may be filled, bond-seruaunts of sin, that of him we may be made free, blind, that of him we may be enlightened, lame, that of him we may be made strait, feeble, that of him we may be upholden, to take from ourselves all matter of glorying, that he alone may be glorious on high, and in him we may glory. So that whilst they deny good works to be necessary & affirm faith only sufficient, whilst they say that we have no inherent justice, but are the best of us though apostles, sinners before god, that our best works are sins, and that we have no other justice than the justice of Christ apprehended by faith and imputed only to us, whilst they deny that we can observe the commandements, or have the power & free will to do any good, or resist any tentation, they attribute, forsooth, all to Christ, and leave nothing to us, that he only may be glorified. But by this book I hope to make known unto the world their deep dissimulation, who in words seem to give all to Christ, but by their doctrine, do rob him and despoil him of all his honourable titles. And first you shall see how sacrilegiously they pluck and pull at Christ's divinity. I will not here relate the blasphemies of Michael servet who yet was a brother of this religion, because they will say that for such doctrine, Caluine caused him to be burned, for he said plainly that God the son was not true God, 
l. Trin. fo. 7 34 35. l 2. fol, 8 & in dial.  not coaquall with his father, yea he said that God the father only was God: which doctrine notwithstanding he gathered, or might have gathered out of Luther's and Caluins' works. Nether will I say any thing of the heretics and new Arians of Transiluania, who in this also aggree with servetus. Luther the grand Patriarch and new Evangelist must not be omitted: who in his book against Latomus sayeth that he can not abide that word Homoousion. These are his words: anima mea odit vocabulum Homoousion: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  My soul hateth the word consubstantial. So did the Arians hate the same word and called it exoticum, strange and unusual. But Athanasius gathereth this word out of scriptures & ancient fathers, 
Ep. Decr. Conc. N●i●.  who in that they affirm that the son is begotten of his father & coequal unto him & one wth him, affirm also that he is consubstantial, & of the same substance with his father, because nothing is equal and coequal to god the father but God, and nothing is God which is not the same substance with him, because there are not many Gods. And why should Luther hate this word but for the signification, for the sound is no more ungrateful than the sound of other words? If he hate the signification, then is he an Arian, who believeth not that the son is consubstantial and of the same substance with his father, and consequently he thinks him not to be God, or else he thinks that there are many Gods different in substance. The same Luther as diverse affirm, in an edition of his commentaries upon Genesis (which I have not seen) calls the son of God the instrument of his father, by which he created the world, 
in ●. ca Gen.  which manner of speech Arius also used; And seeing that the instrument is never of so noble a nature as the principal agent, what is this but to make the son of God inferior to his father and consequently a creature? And this testimony (as I have read) servetus alleged against Luther's Scholars in the Alban disputation. Luther also blotted out of the  prayer books, those ancient words Sancta Trinitas unus Deus, miserere nobis: Holy Trinity one God, have mercy upon us. And why? for some spite belike which he conceived against Christ jesus the second person in Trinity. For why else did he in his  Bibles when he came to the translation of those words of the ninth chapter of Esaie, Deus fortis strong God: Leave out, God? as though Christ were strong but not God. Why did he leave out quite those words of saint Ihons' epistle, 
●. ●o. ●.  Tres font qui testimonium dant in caelo, Pater, Verbum, & Spiritus sanctus & high tres unum sunt. There are three which give testimony in heaven, the father, the word, and the holy ghost, and these three are one? The same Luther in his book of Counsels excuseth Eutyches, 
l. de council. ●. 〈◊〉.  and Nestorius and accuseth S. Leo and saint Cyrill as men which were to eager against them, for (sayeth he) as Eutyches said so may it well be said that Christ's divinity suffered. O blasphemy? did the divinity of Christ suffer? then was it not true divinity, and consequently Christ was not God, because God as God can not suffer. I may use here Alamundarus witty answer against Luther, 
Niceph l. 16 hist. c. ●●. Baron in Annal, anno Christi 509.  which he used against certain heretical Bishops that said that Christ's divinity suffered on the cross: for he, when he hard that they were come to speak with him, commanded his man presently after their entrance to whisper him in the ear; which being done accordingly, Alamundarus started at the whispering and seemed astonished. The Bishops thinking that his man had told him some evil news, demanded what it was at which he was amazed? My man (sayeth he) tells me that Michael the Archangel is dead. Tush, Tush (said they) that news can not be true; because angels can not die. Can not Angels die (said Alamundarus) and think you that God his divinity could suffer? 
Anno 1554.  Melancthon in his book of common places, and in divers other places hath these propositions. 
l. count Stan●. ep ad Elect.  The son of God according unto his divinity prayed unto his father for his Kingdom, glory, and inheritance: The divine nature of the son, 
Ep. 2●. tract▪ pag. 994.  was obedient to his father in his Passion. The like saying hath Beza, yea and Caluin also. Is not this to deny Christ's divinity and coaequalitie with his father? For who but an inferior prayeth? 
●●is. Kemn. epud Bel to. 1. l 3. de Christo in initior Lut ser de 〈◊〉 Domini ●0. ●.  Who but an inferior obeyeth? The Lutheran ubiquitaries also, who affirm that the divine attributes are really communicated unto Christ's human nature, and that in such sort, that the human nature was immense and omnipotent as the divinity was, destroy Christ's divinity, wilest they extol his humanity: for by this doctrine it followeth that Christ's divinity was nothing else but his humane nature deified & really turned into divinity, & seeing that human nature can not in this manner participate of the divinity, it followeth that Christ is not true god, because he hath not true divinity. For although by incarnation man was God, and so consequently immense and omnipotent, by a certain communication which divines call communicatio idiomatum, Yet the humanity could never really be the divinity, nor omnipotency, nor any other divine attribute. And to come to Caluin, 
Li cont Valentinct Gentleman.  he sayeth plainly that the name of god aggregeth to the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per excellentiam by excellency. Which if it be so, then god the son is not so Excellent a god as the Father, and consequently no god at all. He also in diverse places avoucheth that Christ is not god of god, as the Nicen Council calleth him, 
li 1. Inst c 1●. 9.19.23.31.  he denieth that by eternal generation God the son hath his essence from his father, yea (sayeth he in the last place quoted in the margin) the essence of the son is no more generated than the essence of the father. To whom in this point subscribeth our countryman whitaker in his book against ffather Campian. 
pag. 1●3.  O blasphemy & of them that will needs be counted reformed Christians. better were it to deny Christ flatly, then to profess his name, and yet under hand to disgrace him: for dissembled religion is double iniquity. Is not Christ God of God the father? then is he some other God, hath he not his essence from his father? Then is he not the son of God, because the son takes his substance from his father. Is not the sons essence generated? then is not the son begotten of his father's substance, then is he not consubstantial to his father, but rather of another nature, & consequently either a creature or another God. The divines grant that the essence & divinity absolutely without addition, is not to be said to be generated, for than it should be generated in God the father also, but yet they affirm that God the son is God of God and begotten of his father, and that by eternal generation he receiveth with out all imperfection his essence from his father, and consequently that the essence is generated, not absolutedly, but in the son, else were he not a son, neither should he be consubstantial to his father. 
Ep duabus ad Polon. Pet. Mar. duab. ep. Kem. l. de duahus nat. Mel. loc. c. de filio.  The same Caluin accompanied with divers others both Caluinists and Lutherans, affirmeth that Christ according to his divinity was Priest and mediator. To whom jewel in his book against Harding subscribeth, 
jewellus ae 17.  where he sayeth that in Christ there were two natures, the divinity and the humanity, and that the humanity was offered in sacrifice, but the divinity played the priest, and offered up this sacrifice. See here another blasphemy. Is Christ priest according to his divinity? Did his divine nature offer unto the father the sacrifice of the human nature? then certes Christ was not only as man but also in respect of his divinity inferior to his father (for the Priest is inferior to the God to whom he offereth sacrifice, because in oblation of a sacrifice he acknowledgeth God the supreme excellency) and so was either a creature or a lesser God, and so no God at all. The ancient fathers & divines do grant that the same jesus Christ was Mediator betwixt God and man, and God also, to whom Mediation was made, by reason of his twoe natures subsisting in one person for a Mediator like a mean, must participate of both extremes, and therefore sith man had offended, and God was offended, the Mediator must be God & man participant of both, for God only could not satisfy because he could not suffer, man only could not satisfy, because his satisfaction would have been less than was the injury, wherefore it was necessary that one who was both God & man should make this mediation and satisfaction. And so the same jesus Christ God and man satisfied, but not as God but as man, and he as the person offended, received also the satisfaction, but not as man, but as God. In like manner the same Christ jesus was the Priest, the sacrifice, and the God to whom this sacrifice was offered. And so Christ was the priest but not as God but as man, for in this only respect Christ had a superior to whon he might offer a sacrifice: Christ also was the sacrifice, but as man, for his humane nature only suffered; And Christ also was he to whom the sacrifice was offered, but as God, for so he was no less offended and injuried by man's sin then god the father. I refer the Reader to a book which one Aegidius Hunnius a Lutheran hath written against Caluin in which he declareth how Caluin still expoundeth the old and new Testament in favour of the jew, 
Calvinus ludaizans.  as though the places spoke not of Christ, and therefore this man calleth his book calvinus judaizans, Caluin playing the jew. Tell me now gentle Reader, whether these men as they say do attribute all unto Christ, who as thou hast hard, do despoil him of his greatest titles of honour, that is God, & the son of God? But thou wilt say that in many places Caluin & others grant that Christ is true God & the son of God. I will grant it also, 
l. 1. Inst. c. 13.  for Caluin in the first book of his Institutions and thirteenth chapter, endeavoureth to prove Christ's divinity, but yet thou seest also how they eat their words, & deny in one place which in another they affirmed. And so to conclude, either they speak thus wittingly of Christ, and so they are no Christians but renouncers of Christ, or of ignorance, & so thy are not men to be followed in so great mattets as faith is, who have need themselves to learn their Catechism which teacheth how to speak, and to believe of Christ and God.   

The second chapter showeth how by their doctrine they make Christ an absurd redeemer.  
MAN once was free of condition as being created lord over all, and subject to none but God, whose service is no servility; he was noble of birth as being framed by God his own hands of virgin earth, 
Man's felicity in paradise.  which yet was not stained by sin; he was happy in state as being endued with a body immortal, freed from diseases, deaths, and distemperaturs, neither benumbed with cold, nor parched with heat, nor pined with hunger, nor molested with thirst; enriched with a soul filled with grace and spiritual treasures, which was prone to virtue, not inclined to vice, neither molested with concupiscence, nor overruled by passion, but ruled reason, which was ruled by grace. His superior part was obedient to God, his inferior part to the superior, sensuality to reason, the flesh to the spirit, and all creatures to him were buxom and obedient. Besides this inward felicity of soul and body, he was placed in Paradise, where he was environed and compassed about with all delights, and pleasures, and far from all displeasurs. 
Man's servitude after sin.  But when by sin man would not be subject to God, he became a slave to his own flesh, passions, and sensuality, a bond man to sin, captive to the devil, subject to death and mortality, hell, and damnation. And of all this servile subjection, sin was the cause. for when Adam sinned and we in Adame transgressed, we were by & by guilty of death which is the reward of sin, 
Rom. ●.  and by sin we became slaves to sin, and concupiscence. For as Christ sayeth whosoever sinneth is a slave to sin: 
Io 8. l Io 5. 2 Pet 2. Rom. 6.  and being slaves to sin we were slaves to the devil, who hath no authority nor power over us but by sin: and being slaves to the devil we were captives of hell, which is the prison where the devil holds sinners perpetually. And behold here briefly in what bondage by sin the devil had gotten us. After that by sin we were despoiled of grace, if he had tempted us we could not have resisted, and if we had fallen by sin, 
Th. ●. 2. q. 109. a. 7.  we could not have risen again by force of nature, and force of grace we had none, because sin had deprived us of it; and so we were slaves to sin, and the devil also, and captives also and prisoners of hell, which is due to sin; wherefore saint Paul sayeth that We were detained captives at the devils will and pleasure. 
1. Tim. ●.  To ransom this prisoner, and to redeem this bondslave by way of equity and justice, it was necessary that a divine person should become man: 
Man's Redeemer.  for God only could not satisfy, because he was the party offended, and in that he was God could be indebted to none; Man only was not able to pay so great a ransom as sin required, only God and man, was a fit paymaster. For as S. Leo sayeth if he had not been true god he could not have given us a remedy, 
Ser. 1. Nat. Domini.  and if he had not been true man he could not have given example, yea he could not have suffered, and so could not have satisfied. And amongst the three divine persons, the second was the fittest. For who fit to be a mediator then the middle person? Who fit to be the son of man by incarnation, than he who from all eternity was the son of god? Who fit to repair the image of god in man, then hewhoe was the image of his father? Who fit to make an amends for Adames inordinate desire of knowledge, 
Gen. ●.  than he who was the wisdom of his father? Who fit to abate Adam's pride who would have been like to God, than he who was in deed the likeness of god his father, and yet by incarnation, of purpose became in outward show as unlike him as man is to God? Briefly who fit to appease the storm, than jonas for whom the storm was ray said, for it was no other than the son of God for whon the storm in heaven was raised when Lucifer would be like the highest. It was no other than the same son of God for whon in paradise that storm arose, when Adam puffed up with pride, would be like to god in Knowledge of good and evil; for to him is proper the likeness and image of God, which they inordinately affected. The ancient then of years became a child, the word was mute, God became man, the second and middle person played the mediator, the son of God became the son of man, and in man's nature which he had taken upon him, repaired what man had ruined, and destroying sin by flesh, which by flesh was committed, overcame the devil by flesh, by which he had overcome: and where as with one tear, yea one word he might have redeemed us, he would shed his blood for us, and whereas one drop had been sufficient, he powered out all, to show the greatness of his charity, and the greatness of our ingratitude which still commit sins which cost Christ so dearly, to show the malice of sin whose stain could not be taken out without the blood of this lamb, and to show the greatness of the ransom, and the price of our redemption. So great was this price which was paid for us, 
1. Pet. 1.  that saint Peter sayeth We were redeemed not by gold and silver, but by the precious blood of Christ. 
1. Cor. 6.  And saint Paul sayeth that we were bought by a great price; so great, 
Psal. 13●.  that David calls it copiosa redemptio, a copious redemption. Prorsus copiosa (sayeth saint Bernard) quia non gutta sed unda sanguinis per quinque partes corporis manavit: copious in deed because not a drop, 
Sir 22. in Cant.  but a stream of blood issued out at five parts of his body, so rich a price was this blood sayeth he, 
Ep. 190.  That it was sufficient to have satisfied for the sin which shed it. So that Christ is our redeemer Who hath delivered us out of the power of darkness, 
Col. 1.  freed us from the slavery of sin, and the bondage of the devil. 
Ser. 197. Domin. l. post Trinitatem.  For as (saint Austin sayeth) Christ now hath tied the devil in a chain, so that he can no farther tempt us than we can resist: bark he may, tempt he may, solicit us he may, but bite he can none but those, which will wilfully cast themselves with in his reach. Who now is so ungrateful as not to acknowledge this benefit? Who will arrogate unto himself the name of a Christian, who will not also acknowledge Christ for his redeemer? Dare now the reformers deny Christ the title of a redeemer? they dare not. Yet by their doctrine they make him a most absurd redeemer, and so more dishonour him then if they had denied him this title altogether. For they say, that, there is no justice but Christ's justice, no good works but his works, no merit but his merit, no satisfaction but his, & consequently, that Christ's passion was our justice, our merit, & our satisfaction. Out of which doctrine they infer, first, that neither there is any inherent justice or sanctity in man, neither is there any necessary, because Christ's justice is ours by imputation, 
l. 〈◊〉. Inst c. 11. §. 2. Luth. in 2. Gal fol. 29●.  and that is sufficient. So (sayeth Caluin) and to him subscribeth Luther, as shall appear by their words, which shallbe related and refuted in this self same book, as also in divers chapters of the seventh book. Secondly they gather out of the same doctrine that good works are not necessary, because Christ's works are ours, and they are sufficient: which doctrine I shall lay open in the same book and first chapter. Thirdly hence they infer also that no laws, either humane or divine, can bind us in conscience, because Christ's passion was the ransom, which freed us from all laws. Fourthly that we are bound to no satisfaction because Christ's satisfaction was sufficient. Fiftly that no sins nor evil works can hurt, us, because Christ's justice being ours, no sin can make us sinners, which doctrine shallbe set down in the same book. Sixtly that no hell nor judgement remaineth for us: because Christ's justice being ours, sins can neither be imputed to us in this life, nor punished in the next. And in these points they say that Christian liberty consisteth. So that Christ according to these doctors opinions, hath redeemed us from the slavery of sin, because his justice being ours no sin can hurt us, he hath delivered us from the yoke of the law, because no law can bind us, he hath delivered us from hell and the devil, because howsoever we live, if we believe that Christ's justice is ours and our satisfaction and payment, the devil hath no power to punish us in his Hellish prison, because Christ hath suffered the pain dew to our sins before hand. Wherein the discreet reader may easily perceive what an absurd Redeemer they make Christ to be. For if Christ hath redeemed us from the slavery of sin because no sin can hurt us, then doth he open us the gap to all manner of sins and outrages. For who will care for sin that is persuaded that Christ's passion is so imputed to him, that no sin can hurt him? If Christ hath redeemed us from the yoke of the law, because no law now can bind us in conscience; then doth he give us the occasion to transgress freely, and contemn bodily all manner of laws and ordinancies. If Christ hath delivered us from hell because he hath paid the punishment de●e to sin, and requireth no other satisfaction at our hands, then doth he in a manner egg us forward to all vice, from which no man will abstain, if fear of hell do not bridle his unruly appetites, and keep him in awe. And so Christ's passion which was a sacrifice to abolish sin, is a cause of all sin, and Christ who came to redeem the world from sin, filleth the world with sin, and so is an absurd redeemer, so to redeem us from sin, that he inviteth us and eggeth us forwards unto sin. So they make Christ not unlike to that father who seeing the excessive expenses of his prodigal son, doth not command him to use more thriftiness, but pays before hand to all disers, cooks, innkeepers, and merchants, all that possibly he can lose at dise, or lavish out in apparel, or consume in banqueting: wherein he doth nothing else but invite his son to all unthriftiness, who needs never to care how, he spendeth, when all his debts are paid before hand. For so the ghospellers say that Christ perceiving, that we could not keep the law, freed us from all laws, and seeing that we could not avoid sin, imputed his own justice so unto us, that no sin can hurt us, and knowing that we were not able to satisfy for sin, he abode the pain himself, and would have none required at our hands. And in so doing, what else hath he done, but opened the wide gate to all licentious liberty, vice & iniquity? How far more reasonable is the opinion of the Catholic Church, which affirmeth that Christ's passion was not our formal justification nor satisfaction, but only the meritorious cause of our redemption and salvation: which deserved for us at God's hands grace by which together with our cooperation we may be saved and redeemed. For as we fell by our own wills into captivity, so Christ thought it good that by our own wills together with his grace (for without grace we may fall but we can not rise again) we should rise up again and wind ourselves out of the servitude of sin and the tyranny of the devil. So that Christ hath redeemed us from the servitude of the law, not that the law by ndeth us not, but because Christ hath taken away the heaviness of the law, and by his grace which he giveth us, hath given us force easily to fulfil it, which otherwise would have tyrannized over us, in commanding more than we should have been able to have performed. Christ also hath redeemed us from captivity & bondage of sin, not because no sin can be imputed unto us, but because his passion hath deserved grace for us, by which we may dispose ourselves to justification which is a resurrection from sin to newness of life, and by which we may avoid sin whensoever we are moved there unto. Christ also hath freed us from the tyranny of the devil and captivity of Hell, because he hath procured us grace, by which when the devil by himself, or the world or the flesh provoketh us, we may resist, maugre all the force of hell. Christ also hath satisfied for our sins, not because his passion without any cooperation on our part doth suffice, for so, as is proved, the gate were opened unto all iniquity, but because his passion had obtained grace for us, with out which we could not satisfy for the least venial sin, and by which, if we cooperate with it in penance, fasting, almesdeeds, prayer, and works of penance, we may satisfy for all our sins, and all the pains dew unto our sins. So that Christ hath redeemed us from the servitude and heavy yoke of the law, and yet we must keep the law, and now especially, because the heaviness thereof is taken away by Christ his grace: Christ hath freed us from the servitude of sin, and yet we must avoid sin, and now especially, because Christ's grace hath given force to arise by penance from our former sinful life, 
Psal. 〈◊〉.  and to walk in the way of his commandments, and newness of life: Christ also hath delivered us from the tyranny of the devil, because he hath given us grace to resist him; wherefore we must not yield unto him, but now especially we must stand against him: Christ also hath satisfied for us, and yet we must satisfy, and now especially because he hath given us grace by which we may do penance for sin, and satisfy for the pain. For although that Christ hath paid the price of our redemption, yet would he have us to apply it by our cooperation not only in faith (for so he should open the gap to all vice) but in penance, in observation of the commandments, and receiving of the Sacraments. Wherefore our redeemer himself who freed us from the yoke of the law, yet commands us 〈◊〉 Keep the law if we mean to enter into life; 
Mat. 19  and although he hath satisfied for or sins, 
Lue. ule.  yet he commands his Apostles to preach penance unto us as necessary for remission and satisfaction of our sins. And if he had redeemed us in that manner which the Ghospellers imagine, and had set us at that liberty, that no law can bind us, nor no sin hurt us, and that no good works nor satisfaction, nor any other cooperation besides faith, can be required on our part, than had he been a most absurd redeemer (as I have all ready proved) and had rather tumbled us down into the depth of sin and damnation, then redeemed us.   

The third Chapter showeth how by their doctrine they make Christ no Redeemer at all.  
Well did our blessed saviour compare heretics unto Wolves wrapped and invested in sheepskins, 
Mat. 7.  whose manner hath all ways been under praetence of religion, to utter blasphemy, and then to mean & intend the worst, when they speak fairest. What I pray you is so common in our ghospellers mouths, as that Christ only is our Redeemer, and sole mediator? under which pretence they ●ondēne all honour given unto saints, and abandon all prayer and intercessi in valhich is made unto them, as injurious to Christ and his title of a Redeemer. In which truly they seem not unlik to judas, who would needs Kiss Christ when he meant to betray him, and me thinks (and what I think I shall prove anon) in this point they resemble the jew which invested Christ like a King, called him King, and adored him as King, yet in deed derided him as a fool. For so these men call Christ the Redeemer, and rather than they will not seem to mean so, they take from the Saints, the mother, and friends of Christ, all secondary mediation and intercession, and will seem to be so zealous of Christ's honour that they will have none honoured but him; and yet in deed under this fair show, they carry false hearts, and even then whem they call him and adore him as a Redeemer, they rob him and despoil him of that honourable title. 
Lut. in come. Gal. fol. 298.  Luther in his commentaries upon the second Chapter to the Galathians sayeth plainly that, Christ apprehended by faith is Christian justice for whom God reputeth us just. 
l. 3 Inst. c. 3. §. 2.  Caluin also subscribeth that our justice consisteth in the imputation of Christ's justice unto us. And because this justice is extrinsical and is not inhaerent in us, they say that though for Christ's sake we be reputed just, yet the holiest that is, is a greevouse sinner, and all his works are worthy nothing else but damnation, which doctrine hereafter diverse times, & especially in the seventh book shallbe related. hence it is also that they say that our sins are only covered with Christ's justice which is imputed unto us, but are not taken away nor extinguished. This they explicate by a similitude: for (say they) as if a man look thoroughe red glass, all seemeth red, be it black or white, so God beholding us through Christ's justice reputeth us just though in deed we be sinners. 
Abou● in the first chap.  And this Caluin in his preface of his Institutions to the King of France avoucheth not to derogate from christ but to make much for his honour, for what (sayeth he) is to Christ more honourable than to acknowledge ourselves despoiled of all virtue that of 〈◊〉 we may be clothed, that is, reputed 〈◊〉 for his justice which is imputed unto us. But let us see how honourable this is to Christ. I will not deny but that it is honourable to Christ and expedient for 〈◊〉, to acknowledge that of ourselves with out Christ's grace we are sinners and cá do little else but sin, 
Th. 1. 2.q.109.  but to say that notwithstanding Christ's grace wh●●● he hath bestowed on his just, & is ready to bestow on all repentant sinners, 〈◊〉 still sinners, and only reputed 〈◊〉 for Christ's justice which is by faith apprehended and by God imputed unto us, is most dishonourable to Christ. For if we have no other justice than Christ's justice which is imputed unto us, then have we no internal sanctity in us, then are we not truly sanctified, then are we still sinners be we never so just. Caluin and Luther, and all the Lutherans, & Caluinists have no other answer to this then concedo totum: I grant all. Are we then still truly sinners and not truly just? then was the first Adame more potent in malice, than the second in grace and sanctity: for he made us truly sinners, Christ could not make us truly just. Then was Saint Paul deceived who sayeth that Christ's grace exceeded adam's sime. 
Rom. 5.  Are we still sinners and not truly sanctified? then hath not Christ verily redeemed us from the servitude of sin, 
Io. 8.  for whosoever is in sin, is a slave to sin. If we be not redeemed from sin, then are we not freed from the tyranny of Satan, whose only title is sin, by which he domineereth over us. And seeing that hell followeth sin as a just punishment for such a fault, then are we still captives & prisoners of Hell, and Christ is no Redeemer, who hath neither redeemed us from sin, nor hell, nor damnation. The same ghospellers affirm that by sin our nature is so weakened, that not withstanding Christ's grace, we can not resist any temptation of the flesh or devil, that we can not possibly fulfil the law and commandments, that we can not do any good work, but must needs sin in all our actions, as shall appear by their doctrine and their words in the seventh book. which if it be true, then are we not by Christ freed from the devils tyranny, who still so tyranniseth over us, that we can resist none of his temptations; then are we still slaves to our own concupiscence and sensuality, whose assaults we can not withstand; then are we bondmen of sin which so overruleth us that we can do no other thing but sin, then are we not delivered from Hell and damnation which God hath provided against sin and sinners. And so these fair-spoken Christians which call Christ the sole Mediator and only Redeemer, make him no Redeemer at all.   

The fourth chapter showeth how by their doctrine they make Christ no spiritual Physician.  
GOD created man in good plight, sound, whole and immortal, bestowing on him atree of life, whose fruit should have preserved him from diseases, distemperaturs, and death of body, and indewing him with original justice which if he had Kept, had kept him and preserved him in perpetual health of soul. But he not knowing how to use such felicity, by a surfeit which he took of the forbidden fruit, distempered his body with mortality, whence proceed diseases, infirmities, and death itself; and cast himself at one time into no fewer then four diseases of the soul, which divines commonly call vulnera animae the wounds of the soul, which reside also in four parts and faculties of the soul. 
Th. 〈◊〉. 2. q. 85. art. 3.  The understanding whose object is truth, and whose perfection is knowledge, was obscured with ignorance; the will whose mark at which she aimeth, is Good, and whose, perfection is love, was infected with malice. The irascible part whose object is difficulty, and whose glory is victory over difficulties, was weakened with infirmity; and the concupiscible part whose object was moderate delight, & whose felicity was contentment in the same, was galled with the itching, and ill pleasing sore of concupiscence. And Adame was the man of whon we took this infection, unhappy to himself, & unlucky to us, who poisoning himself infected us, and ronning himself through, wounded us. For when this unhappy wight descended from Jerusalem to Hierico, 
Luc. 10.  that is from Paradise the place of peace and pleasure, unto this vale of misery and changeable world as mutable as the Moon (which the word Hierico importeth) he fell into the hands of thieves, 
Th. supra ●eda.  I mean the devils, who despoiled him of his garment and coat of innocency and all supernatural habits and graces, and wounded him even in natural perfection and faculty, which before by original justice was much confirmed and perfected, and gave him the four wounds afore mentioned, 
Luc. 10.  yet so, that they left him half a live; not living the supernatural life of grace because sin had bereaved him of it, but yet living a natural life because he had lost no natural perfection, though he was weakened and wounded also in that, because he lost original justice which gave no small force and vigour even unto nature, 
Ibidem.  and greater than nature of herself could have had by nature. And whilst he lay thus spoiled and wounded; the Priest and Levite passed by him, but gave him no helping hand, that is the law and Prophets could tell him the nature of the disease, 
Io. ●.  but could give him no grace to heal it. Wherefore the Samaritane Christ jesus (who when he was so called refused not the name) played the part of a merciful Physician, 
Io. ●.  and by the oil of his mercy and wine of his blood, which he powered into his wounds, recured him. So that if now Hieremie demand of us: 
Hier. v.  Nunquid resina non est in Galaad aut medicus non est ibi? Is there not rosin in Galaad or is not there a Physician? We can answer him quickly; yes, yes Hieremie, in Galaad the Church of Christ we want no rosin, salves, nor medicines, for we have seven sacraments which all give grace to heal all spiritual wounds; and we have a Physician whose name is jesus which importeth salvation, 
Luc. ●. Th. ●. p. q. ●. ●.  who came not for the whole but the sick, not for the just but for the sinful, & who in all respects hath played all the parts of a good Physician. Physicians are more in company with the sick than with the whole, 
Mat. ●.  so was this spiritual Physician, who one while conversed with pharisees, another while with Harlots, 
Mat. 9  another while with Publicans, and always almost with infirm patientes. Physicians have their medicines, Christ hath his salving sacraments. Physicians to allure their patients to take the prescribed potions, will taste of them first themselves; and Christ to make us patiently to drink down the bitter potion of persecution and adversity which is sovereign for the soul, first began himself unto us, that we might pledge him the more willingly. Physicians to recure us do some times lance and cut us, some times they prescribe us fasting, and some times they let us blood: but this Physician in this point far exceedeth them. for they to diminish the disease will bid us fast, but will not fast themselves, Christ fasted for us forty days and nights to recure our surfeit. 
Mat. 4.  They to rid us of superfluous humours or corrupted blood will lance our flesh or let us blood in a vain, but will not lose one drop of their own blood for us, but Christ permitted his own flesh to be cut in his circumcision, to be torn when he was whipped, and to be pierced when he was crucified, and would be let blood even at the heart, to make a potion for our recovery. other Physicians seek to take away our disease, but will not take it upon them to rid us of it: but Christ hath taken our sins upon him to ease and rid us of them. 
1. Fet. 2.  He hath taken our ague to himself, to take it from us, not that he hath taken the malice of our sins but the pain of sin upon him, and hath suffered it in his body upon the wood of the cross. 
Ibidem.  For as in a corporal ague there is the disease and the pain, and the disease or agewe is a disemperatour of heat and humours, the pain is not the agewe but the effect of it, so in the spiritual ague of the soul which is sin, there is the malice of sin which is the disease, and this Christ could not take unto him because he was incapable of sin, & there is the pain also dew unto sin, which is not the agewe but a burning in Purgatory or hell, if we do not prevent it by other corporal and voluntary pains and satisfaction. And this Christ took upon him in suffering hunger, thirst, cold, and other pains which we had deserved, yea suffering death that we might live, and so by taking upon him the pain dew to sin, hath recured the disease of sin, and hath rid us of our agewe, by abiding the burning of the same. And hitherto we and the Ghospellers aggree, for they also will say that Christ is the Physician of our souls, but yet their doctrine is clean contrary, and so whilst in words & show, they seem to acknowledge him our Physician, in doctrine & deed they make him none at all. 
see the third. chap. of this book.  For if you remember, Luther & Caluin are of opinion that we have no inherent and internal justice or sanctity, but are just only by Christ's own justice, which (say they) makes us reputed just, but not in deed just, hideth our sins but healeth them not, and covereth our spiritual wounds but recureth them not. Which if it be true, then certes is Christ no true Physician, who healeth not but hideth only our sores and diseases. O bsasphemie, o ingratitude, o injury, o sacrilege covered with a a pretence of religion. They will seem forsooth to attribute much to Christ, who as they say hath made us just by his own justice which he imputeth unto us, but whilst they acknowledge no other but christs justice imputed to us, they are enforced to say that christ hath not verily sanctified us, nor verily healed the spiritual sores & maladies of our soul, but hath only covered them & hidden them from the sight of God by an imputation of his own justice, and so he may be a hider and coverer of our wounds but no healer, and no healer, no Physician.   

The fift Chapter showeth how they rob Christ of the title of a la maker.  
IF Moses for prescribing laws unto the jews, Lycurgus unto the Lacedæmonians, Solon to the Athenians, Romulus to the Romans, Plato to the Magnefians, Trismegistus unto the Egyptians, and others for giving laws unto their subjects, were so famous and renowned, What honour must it be unto our saviour Christ to have been the author of the Christian la, and the lawgiver unto the Christians? They prescribed laws only unto some certain people or nation, Christ unto all nations. Their laws had for their scope and proiecte an external and civil peace, Christ's law aimeth at an inward peace of the soul in earth, and an aeternal peace in heaven; Their laws forbade only external sins as theft; murder, adultery, and such like, little respecting the inward desire and intention, Christ's law restraineth even the inward consent, desire, and dilight. 
Chris. 〈…〉 i● Act.  Their laws forbade not all vice, neither commanded or counseled all virtue, for Plato's laws permitted wives to be common and other vices also, Lycurgus his laws were corrected as being toe toe rigorous, which thing he took so heavily and so grievously that he pined himself with abstinence: 
Tertia l. ●● Apilag.  But Christ's law either commandeth or counseleth all virtue not only moral but also Theological & forbiddeth all vice what soever. Wherefore David sayeth that God his la is immaculate converting souls; immaculate, because it permitteth no filth of sin, converting souls, because it induceth us to all manner of virtue. Their laws were full of many superstitions and absurd errors, for they commanded many Gods to be worshipped, and those beasts and serpents, 
Auoust li de Civit.  and some of their wisest, denied gods proviuidence as Aristotle, 
〈◊〉 mundo.  some his foresight and prescience as Cicero, some made god the soul of the world, some confined him with in the heavens, some held the soul to be mortal. But the law of Christ is Praeceptum lucidum illuminans oculos: 
Psal. 18.  a lightsome Precept, illuminating the eyes; that is illuminating our understanding the eye of the soul with true faith and knowledge, & dispersing all clouds of ignorance errors and superstition. And no marvel, because Christ the lawgiver was the wisdom of his father, and when he gave his law he gave his spirit who teacheth his Church all verity. 
I●. 14.  The law of Christ may be reduced to twoe heads, to wit things that are to be believed, & things which are to be observed. We believe that there is a God & him we acknowledge the only God & creator & ruler of all, who takes account of all our actions, and will accordingly hereafter reward us. And although we believe also that this one God is three in persons, and that the second parson was incarnate for us, died that we might live ever, and rose again for our Resurrection, which things are out of reasons reach, yet are not these or any other of the mysteries of our belief against reason, or unbeseeming the divine Majesty, or repugnant to Philosophy, as divines do prove, who can so explicate these mysteries, as nothing shall appear repugnant to reason, and so can answer infidels objections, as that they shall conclude nothing evidently against us. 
A●●● 2. add Anton l. 10 ciu. c. ●9  Yea justinus Martyr and saint Austin do show how the Platonists & other Philosophers, taught the like unto many of those articles which Christians believe. And as concerning those things which are to be observed, to wit the precepts of good life, they are reduced unto twoe, which are the love of God above all things, and the love of our neighbour as ourself: which are most reasonable, because God is the chiefest good, and so most of all to be beloved, and our neighbour is like us in nature and ordained to the same end to which we are, and so to be beloved as ourselves. To our neighbour therefore we must do as we would be done unto, and therefore we must neither kill him, nor rob him, nor injury him in goods, life, or wife, for we ourselves would not willingly be thus injuried. And so we are forbidden all sin against God, and all injury against man: yea we give by our law, to God, that which is Due to God, to wit suprem honour because he hath supreme excellency, supreme love because he is the fountain of all goodness, we yield him gratitude, because he is our best benefactor and redeemer, fear because he is our lord yea our judge. To men if they be superiors we give reverence and obedience and that of conscience, to our aequals we own charity, to our inferiors we condescend by a complying nature. We are forbidden not only to kill but also to be angry, 
 not only to abstain from adultery and fornication, but also from lascivious looks, yea desires, we are bidden not only not to offend our friends, but also to love our enemies. And to induce us to this, the twoe things which contain all common wealths in awe, to wit pain and reward, are proposed unto us pain in hell, reward in heaven, pain to fear, reward to hope for. No law more reasonable than this, none so perfect, which teacheth no error, permitteth no vice, omitteth no good, but either commands, or counsels it. And seeing that Christ is the author of this law which surpasseth all laws, greater is his honour & renovme then ever was the honour of Plato, Lycurgus, Romulus, yea Moses or any other. Wherefore the prophet Esaie recounting other titles of honour dew unto Christ, 
Isay. 13.  amongst others calleth him a lawmaker: Dominus judex noster, dominus legifer noster, dominus Rex noster: The lord is our judge, The lord is our lawmaker, the lord is our King If he be our Lawemaker he may make laws to bind us, if he be our judge he may pronounce sentence against the transgressors, and if he be our King he may punish us, yea if he had called him only our King, it had been a sufficient argument to prove him a lawmaker, because the principal means for a king to rule his subjects are his laws and ordinances Micheas speaking of the promulgation of Christ's la at Jerusalem in Penthecoste sayeth, 
c 4.  That a law shall proceed from Zion & the word of God from Jerusalem. 
c. 2. c. 4 ●.  The same Prophecy hath Esaie in the same words, and addeth that Islands shall expect his law. By which it is plain that Christ is a lawmaker who hath perscribed laws, and therefore when he gave his Apostles authority to baptize and preach, 
Mat. vf●.  he bade them also to teach the Gentiles to keep all those things which he had commanded. 
See the first chap of this book.  And yet our ghospellers who brag that they give all to Christ, despoil him of this honourable title, and avouch that he was a redeemer only but no lawe-make. Luther sayeth plainly that it is the office of the law to command, 
〈◊〉 ●. Gael. Fol. ●18.  threaten and terrify, but the office of Christ is only to embrace sinners who have transgressed the law. 
Ibidem.  Yea sayeth he: If we make Christ an exactor of the law we confound Christ and the law, and make him the minister of sin. 
●ol. 〈◊〉.  Wherefore thus he concludes with this exhortation: Quare Chrestum recte definias, non ut Sophistae & lustitiary, qui faciunt eum nowm legislatorem qui abrogata veteri lege novam tulerit; illis Christus est exactor & tyrannus: Wherefore define thou Christ ae right, not as the Sophists do and the justiciaries (so he calleth Catholics because they affirm inherent justice and avouch that good works are necessary) who make him a new lawemaker that hath abrogated the old la and enacted a new: to them Christ is an exactor and a tyrant. How then I pray thee wouldst thou have us to define Christ? 
Ibidem.  he sayeth that as it is the art of Christians not to care for laws nor to imagine, that they bind in conscience, so is it an hard art, which I (sayeth he) myself can hardly learn; to define Christ after this manner. 
●●idem.  But yet this great Logician, at length giveth us this definition of Christ: Christus autem definitive non est legislator sed propitiator & salvator: But Christ definitively is not a lawmaker but ae propitiatour and Saviour. By which doctrine it is plain, that Luther is of opinion, that Christ came not to terrify us or to exact any law at our hands, but only to embrace the transgressors, so that they believe only that he is their Redeemer from the law; which doctrine how it openeth the gap to vice I shall hereafter declare, 
See the seuent● book.  here I only note that Luther despoileth Christ of the title of a Lawmaker, and avoucheth that he neither made law nor exacteth any law at our hands, which how injurious it is to Christ may appear by the commendation which I have given to Christ and his law. Caluin putteth this difference betwixt the old and the new law, 
l ● Inst. c. 11. §. 17.19.  that the old promised grace and glory with this condition if we keep the commandments, but the new law promiseth these things absolutely without that condition. So that Caluin thinks that glory and salvation is promised by Christ whether we observe the law or Noah, and consequently he thinks that no la bindeth us under pain of damnation. Whence it followeth that Christ neither exacteth neither prescribeth any law under pain of damnation, and so is no law maker. And the same Caluin after that he had discoursed of Christian liberty which he sayeth consisteth in a freedom from all laws, 
l. 3. Inst. c. 1● 3.10.  concludeth thus: we conclude that they are exempted (he speaketh of the faithful) from all laws. Whence it must needs follow that Christ is no Lawmaker; for where there is no obligation, there is no law (as shallbe proved hereafter) where no law, there is no Lawmaker, and therefore if Christ exacteth no law at our hands and binds us to none, he can by no right have the name of a Lawgiver or Lawmaker. Let the Prophet Esaie therefore look how he calleth Christ our Lawmaker, 
c. 33. legifer.  yea let Christ himself correct and amend that saying of his: Mandatum nowm do vobis ut diligatis invitem. 
.  I give you a new la and commandment that you love one another: A new la (sayeth saint Austin) Christ giveth us, 
l ●. count ep. par. c. 2.  because although it be old, as being commanded in the old law, yet it is new, either because Christ hath annexed new grace unto it, which in the old la it had not, or because by this grace annexed, it makes us new creatures who before were old by sin: 
l. c. const. Apost c. 12.  or else (sayeth S. Clement) it is a new la because Christ hath renewed it. Let him also remember his office better, which (as Luther and Caluin say) is not to prescribe or exact laws but to embrace the transgressors. He forgot therefore his office when he bade us Kept the commandments if we will enter into life; 
Mat. 5.  & why he corrected the old law commanding us not only not to kill, but not to be angry, not only to love our friends, but our enemies also. See, See, what open injury against the plain text of Scripture, yea and against all reason also, these men are not afraid to offer unto Christ in taking from him the title and office of a Lawmaker. for if he could make no la, he was inferior to the meanest Prince in the world, who established, a common wealth, his Church, but hath no authority to command his subjects, who instituted Sacraments, yet could make no la to bind us unto them, and therefore when he threateneth damnation to them that will not receive his baptism, 
10 ●.  and protesteth that we shall have no life unless we eat his flesh & drink his blood, 
to. ●.  we may boldly contemn such peremptory commandments, because if Christ be no Lawmaker he could make no la, and where no law is, there is no obligation, and where is no obligation all men are as free, as they who are Lordlesse and subject to none.   

The sixth Chapter showeth how they despoil Christ of the title of an eternal priest according to the order of Melchisedech.  
ALmighty God being highly offended, & justly displeased, that so mean a creature as man should contemn his commandment, and not care for his displeasure; it was necessary that a priest should be found out, who by some pleasing sacrify should appease this his indignation so justly conceived. And many priests in deed have assayed by diverse sacrifices to pacify this angry God, but have all failed of their intended purpose. For neither were they of that authority as to be Mediators betwixt God and man for such a reconciliation, neither were their Sacrifices of that worth as to make amends for so great a fault. Wherefore God by his Prophets complaineth of their insufficiency, saying that he is full & cloyed with the multitude of their sacrifices, 
Isa. 1.  and telleth them plainly that if they offer unto him Holocaustes and vows of fatlings he will not look at them. 
Auio● 5.  
Psal. 10.  Because, (sayeth David) God is not delighted in such sacrifices. Yea so insufficient were all the priests of the old law that God by his prophet Ezechiel threateneth that he will put then out of office, 
c. 34.  and in steed of so many he will give us one Priest, and Pastor, Christ jesus, whom he calleth his servant David, because as man he descended lineally from David and in respect of his humane nature, 
Phiilp. ●.  he was gods servant and inferior. This priest Christ jesus is the high priest and the only high priest of the new law. For although in the la of Moses it was necessary to have many high priests, because, 
Hs●. ●.  (as saint Paul sayeth) their mortality would not permit them to live and remain always, and because death put them out of office, 
 it was necessary that others should succeed them in the same authority. And so the first of this rank and line of priests was Aaron (for Moses was extraordinary) to whom Eleazarus and others succeeded to the number of fowrscore and odd: 
joseph h. l. 22. Aut. c. 2.  yet in the new law one christ jesus is sufficient, who though he hath many vicegerentes, which are bishops and priests of the new law, yet hath he no successors. For no man succeed to another, unless the other either die, or give over his office; wherefore seeing that our Saviour Christ though he died, yet rose again, never to die again, and never surrendered or gave over his office, but still offereth sacrifice, still baptizeth, still ministereth Sacraments, and ruleth & governeth his Church by his vicar's and ministers', he hath no high priest that succeed him, but is the sole and only high priest of the new law, fairy exceeding all the Popes, bishops, and priests that ever were. For his preestly authority (as divines say) was not grounded upon a character which other priests receive in the Sacrament of order, but upon hypostatical union, by which he was the son of God; his authority extended not itself to Christianes' only or them that are baptized, 
●. Cor. 5.  as the Popes and Church's authority doth who have no jurisdiction over them that are out of the Church and who never were baptised, but also even unto infidels whom he commandeth to receive fay the and the Sacrament of Baptism; by his preestly power he instituted Sacraments, established a Church & pastors, and prescribed a monarchical government, which ordonances the Church obeyeth but can not altered: by his authority he could give grace with out Sacraments as he did to saint Mathewe, 
Mat. 9 Lu●. 7.  Marry Magdalen and others, whereas the Pope & bishops and priests of the Church give no grace infaillibly but by Sacraments. And this is the priest who for the dignity of his person, and the value of his sacrifice, was the only priest who could appease gods wrath and indignation. 
〈…〉  This priest must needs be hard because the dignity of his person suffereth no repulse, and the worth of his sacrifice was unspeakable, and he the same that offered the sacrifice, was the God who was angry & to whon was offered the sacrifice. The priest was holier, than the sinner for whom the sacrifice was offered was malicious, & the sacrifice was more pleasing to god, 
Rom. ●.  than the sin displeasing. So precious was the sacrifice that if Christ had put the sacrifice in one balance & the sin in the other it would have over weighed sin as a thing of no weight which notwithstanding is so heavy that it weigheth down to Hell. 
I●b. 6.  For if every operation of Christ be it never so little because it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the operation of God and man, was of infinite value, by reason of the dignity of the person; what shall we say of that heroical operation of Christ's passion which was an act of singular charity, 
Io. 1●. Phil. 2.  courageous fortitude, invincible patience, perfect obedience, and sacred religion, for it was a sacrifice? This priest offered two sacrifices the one at his last supper unbloody, the other upon the cross bloody, or rather one and the same sacrifice (in respect of the thing which was offered) after divers manners and under divers forms. For in his last supper he offered his sacred body and blood after an unbloody manner, on the cross he offerend the same after a bloody manner, at his last supper he offered his body, and blood, under another form, that is under the forms of bread, and wine, on the cross he offered the same in their own form and likeness. The bloody sacrifice was but once to be offered, 
Heb. 7.9.  because it was so precious that one oblation was sufficient. But because it was offered only as a general cause of all grace & price of our redemption, it was convenient that this general cause should be determined by more particular causes, and that this price should be more determinately applied, as by sacraments, faith, and good works, so by the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass. Yea because the sacrifice of the cross being bloody, could not be repeated after Christ's resurrection, he then being impassable and immortal, it was convenient that an unbloody sacrifice should also be offered continually in the Church for the worship of God and exercise of religion, which (as I shall prove in the fourth book) can not stand without a sacrifice. 
See the fourth book.  By the bloody sacrifice Christ was a priest and high priest, but neither according unto the order of Aaron, (because that priest hood by Christ's passion was abrogated and was confined within the Tribe of Levy, of which Christ was not) neither according to Melchisedech, because there was no similitude nor aggreement in their sacrifices. Wherefore seeing that our Saviour was a priest according to the order of Melchisedech (for God affirmeth it with an oath, 
Psal. 8●●. Heb. 7.  and the Prophet David and the Apostle saint Paul avouch it) we must needs have a sacrifice by which he resembled his sacrifice, and was a priest according to his order. 
Heb. ●. 7.  And this saint Paul proveth at large by divers conveniences which were betwixt these two priests and their sacrifices. For as Melchisedech was a King and priest, & a King of Salem that is of peace, so was Christ; As Melchisedech hath neither father nor mother recorded in Scripture, so Christ as man had no father, and as God no Mother; As Melchisedechs' preesthood descended not by carnal generation, so neither did Christ's Preesthood. As Melchisedechs' preesthood was aeternal, because neither the beginning nor ending is set doown in scripture, so Christ's Preesthood hath no end as David affirmeth; 
Psal. 100LS.  As Melchisedechs' Preesthood was of higher perfection than the Preesthood of Aaron (for Melchisedech blessed Abraham and in him the whole Tribe of Levy, 
Gen. 100 Heb. ●.  which argueth Superiority) so was Christ and his Preesthood far above Aaron and his Preesthood; lastly as Melchisedech, offered a sacrifice of bread and wine, so Christ offered his body and blood in his haste supper under the forms and accidents of bread and wine. And this last convenience, is that for which Christ especially is said to be according unto the order of Melchisedech; not that he is of the same order, or that his sacrifice and Melchisedeches are all one, for Christ his Preesthood & sacrifice, far excelled his Presthood and his sacrifice, but because there is most resemblance betwixt them and their sacrifices. And this last convenience saint Paul expressed not, because the jew to whom he written were not capable of so high a Mystery, yet, as the father's note he insinuated it, when speaking of Christ whom he had before called Priest and Bishop according to the order of Melchisedech he added: 
Heb. ●.  Of whon we have great speech and inexplicable to utter because you are become weak to hear. This dignity of an aeternal Priest according unto the order of Melchisedeche, 
Psal 109. Heb. 5.7.  which the Prophet David and the Apostle saint Paul give unto our Saviour Christ, our Ghospellers (who vaunt that they give all unto Christ) sacrilegiously take from him. For although they grant that Christ offered a sacrifice on the cross, yet that is not sufficient to make him an aeternal priest nor according to the order of Melchisedech. And this shall appear most plainly by this discourse. Betwixt a Priest and sacrifice is a necessary relation by which one inferreth the other: for as a father can not be without a son, nor a master without a servant, 
Heb. ●.  so neither can a priest be without a sacrifice, because a Priests principal office is to offer sacrifices to God. And as no son no father, no servant, no Master, so no sacrifice, no Priest. And as a Priest can not be without a sacrifice; so neither can an eternal Priest be without an aeternal sacrifice. Wherefore if Christ never offered other sacrifice then that of the cross, as our adversaries affirm, then is he not a perpetual Priest, because he hath no sacrifice which either by himself or by his ministers is perpetually offerred. To say that the sacrifice of the cross still remaineth in effect, because by that we receive grace and redemption, and from that our sacraments have their efficacy, is not sufficient. For the effects of this sacrifice are no sacrifice, and the sacrifice itself is not perpetual, because it was but once offered, and so that sacrifice is not sufficient to make Christ an aeternal Priest Much less can it make Christ a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech, because there is no resemblance betwixt their sacrifices. If our adversaries would grant, as Catholics do, that Christ in his last supper offered himself as a sacrifice under the form of bread and wine, I could easily see how Christ is an aeternal Priest according to Melchisedechs' order, because that sacrifice is still offered in the mass by the hands of Christ's ministers, and altogether resembleth Melchisedechs' sacrifice; because though it be not bread and wine, as his was, yet hath it the forms of bread and wine, and is unbloody as his was. But rather than they will grant this (such is their hatred against the Mass) they will deny, against flat scripture, that Melchisedechs' bread and wine was a sacrifice. I say against flat scripture, 
Gen. 14.  because in the book of Genesis Moses recounteth unto us how Melchisedech brought forth bread and wine, because he was a Priest of God the highest, which reason arguethe that that bringing for the of bread and wine, was an offering of bread and wine in manner of a sacrifice; for if that bringing forth was but a profane distribution of bread and wine amongst Abrahames soldiers, what consequence had been in that saying: he brought forth bread and wine because he was a Priest? as well might he have said because he was a painter: & better & more to the purpose should he have said, because he was a Baker, or an Innkeeper, or a good howsekeeper: wherefore unless we will say that Moses spoke impertinently, we must affirm that his bread and wine was a sacrifice. And if we will hold Christ to be an aeternal Priest and that according to Melchisedechs' order, we must acknowledge that Christ still offerreth a sacrifice in the Church, and that, under the forms of bread & wine. Wherefore seeing that our adversaries will acknowledge no other sacrifice then that of the cross, they deny Christ to be an aeternal Priest, & in that they avouch that Christ never offered any sacrifice under the forms of bread and wine, lest they should be enforced to admit the mass for a sacrifice, they deny him to be a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech. For although he aggree with Melchisedech in that as God, he had no mother, and as man, he had no father, as also in that he was a King and Priest as he was, yet can he not be an aeternal Priest without an aeternal sacrifice, neither according to Melchisedeches' order unless he have a sacrifice like unto his sacrifice; but both these points our adversaries deny because they will not admit the mass, ergo notwithstanding their bragging that they give all to Christ, they rob him and despoil him of that glorious title of an aeternal Priest according unto Melchisedeches' order, 
Psal. 109. Heb. 7.  which saint Paul and King David give unto him, and God himself avoucheth and confirmeth with an oath.   

The seventh chapter showeth how they make him no judge of the quick and the dead.  
NOthing more frequent in scripture nor more common in the mouths and hearts of true Christians, than the woe adventes & come of Christ. The first Advent he hath already performed in all humility, The second he will perform in all majesty and glory; the cause of the first, was mercy, of the second, 
〈◊〉 ●.  justice; In the first he was as meek as a lamb, in the second as terrible as a Lion; The first was to save sinners, the second to condemn them; In the first he exhorted us to good, & dehorted us from evil, in the second he will reward the good, 
〈◊〉 ●.  and punish the evil. of the first advent prophesied the Prophet Zacharie when he said Behold thy King shall come, unto thee, just, and a Saviour, Poor, and mounted on an ass. Of the second speaketh Daniel when he sayeth he saw, 
c. 7.  that is foresaw one coming in clouds liKe the son of man, to whom the ancient of days gave honour, power and a Kingdom. Of the first speaketh Christ himself when he sayeth God did not send his son to judge the world but that the world might be saved by him; 
Io. 3.  Of the second speaketh the Prophet and Evangelist saint John when he bids us behold Christ coming in clouds, 
Apoc c. ●.  and telleth us that every eye shall see him, even they who pricked him, and that all the tribes of the earth shall bewail themselves upon him. 
Luc 21.  And of this advent speaketh Christ himself who describeth his own coming to judgement in a terrible form and sayeth that then they shall see the son of man coming in a cloud with great power ad majesty. For want of wit to distinguish these twoe adventes, and to apply them to the same person at divers times, some imagined that twoe diverse persons were to come, the one called the son of joseph who they say shallbe slain in the battle of Gog and magog; the other called the son of David, who shall revive again (as they say) the son of joseph and shall redeem Israel, 
Ex Pet. Gal. l. 4. c. 1. de arcanu fid. Cathol.  & restore the Israelits unto their Kingdom again. Others having their eyes dazzled with the splendour of the second advent, can not see the first which is base and humble, and therefore say (which is the common voice of the jew) that the Messias shall come like a temporal King in glory and majesty, and by force of arms shall restore the jew to their former glory; and because they have not as yet seen such a Messias, they say that he is not yet come, but still is to be expected. But by the scriptures alleged it is manifest that one and the self same Christ jesus shall come, first to save the world and after to judge the same. Wherefore saint Peter sayeth that Christ commanded him and his fellow Apostles to Preach to the People and to bear witness that he it is (to wit who before came to redeem us) who is constituted by God the judge of the living and the dead. 
Act. 10.  
Io. 5.  And Christ himself sayeth that God the father judgeth none (that is in a uísible manner) but hath given all judgement to his Son. And lest that any should imagine that Christ only as God is judge but not as man, he addeth, that God the father hath given him power to judge us because he is the son of man. And saint Paul sayeth that God hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world by a man whom he hath raised from death to life. 
Act. 1●.  So that the same Christ jesus; who came first in humble manner to call us by his grace and to receive us to his mercy, shall come again in glory, to give us our final sentence. And God the father, and God the holy ghost shall judge us as well as God the son, yet he only as man and as an under judge shall judge us in a visible manner, and in this sense God the father shall not judge. This judge shall give sentence upon all men, 
2. Cor. ●.  because as saint Paul sayeth we must all appear before the tribunal and judgement-seate of Christ. This judge in this judgement shall exercise the three principal acts of a judge, to wit discussion, remuneration, and condemnation. He shall discuss and examine the cause of every one, and every circumstance of the same, and therefore by the Prophet joel he sayeth that he will dispute with us. 
joel. ●.  A sore disputation, where the Creator disputeth & the creature answereth, where God that is offended will be the judge & witness, where the judge is of such insight that he seethe farther into the guiltless cause, than he himself, & is so watchful that no excusing cloaking, or hiding, can deceive him, so just, that no bribes can corrupt him, so severe, that no tears at that day can move him, so resolute in his sentence, that no reprieve nor appellation can be admitted. This discussion and examination shallbe done in a trise, because it is nothing but a revelation and manifestation unto our consciences, what every one hath done, which shall be so evident, that our consciences shall accuse and cry guilty, before the judge condemn us. This examination and discussion the judge shall use only with Christianes', because their cause of their condemnation (they being Christians) is not so manifest, but not with infidels, because in that they want faith, the cause of their condemnation is evident, and so no discussion shallbe necessary, wherefore saint Austin sayeth: Ad judicium non veniunt, 
Serm. 38. de Sanct. Io. ●.  nee pagani, nec heretici, nec ludei, quia de illis scriptum est, quinon credit, iam iudicatus est. To judgement do come neither pagans nor heretics nor Iewes because of them it is written: he that believes not is all ready judged; that is in respect of discussion of his cause he is all ready judged & needeth not in the general judgement any other discussion for the cause of his exclusion from glory, because his infidelity is a cause most evident: yet (as some divines affirm) for their other sins and for the diversity of their pains, their cause also shallbe discussed, not that god Knoweth it not without discussion, but because he will make it Known unto the world. The second office of a judge which christ shall exercise, is called the sentence of remuneration, which after the discussion of their causes and approbation of their merits, 
Mat. 25.  he shall pronounce for the elect in those most comfortable words: Venite benedicti patris mei percipite regnum etc. come you blessed of my father take possession of the Kingdom which was prepared for you from the beginning of the world. The third office and action of a judge which Christ shall exercise, is the sentence of condemnation which after examination of their crimes, God shall pronounce against wicked Christians and faythless infidels also, because he that believeth not shallbe condemned. 
Mar. 16.  And this sentence shallbe pronounced by the mouth of Christ, and with an audible voice, in those terrible words also which the Evangelist hath set down Ite maledicti in ignem aeternum, etc. 
Mat. 25.  Go you accursed into ever lasting fire which is praepared for the devil and his angels. This is the honourable title and office of Christ, which the ghospellers also confess in words and profess in their Creed, but in their doctrine they deny, as I shall evidently demonstrate by their opinions and words which take from Christ the three offices of a judge already alleged. And first of all to begin with the last act and office which a judge exerciseth, 
●. 2. Inst. c. 16. §. 18.  to wit condemnation, Caluin sayeth plainly that Christ is our Redeemer and is not to mount up into his tribunal seat for the condemnation of a faithful man. Add to this that place of scripture whosoever believes not is already judged, 
Io. 3.  And thou shalt see that Caluin leaves none for Christ to condemn at the latter day. And truly herein Caluin speaketh very conformably to his own doctrine: 
See the fourche book and fift chap.  for he is of opinion that Christ hath so redeemed us that no law can bind us, & no sin can be imputed unto us, which if it be so, the title of a redeemer & a judge are repugnant, & so if Christ be our redeemer after this manner, he can not be our judge. For if our redemption importeth a release from all laws, and such a freedom from sin, that no sin can be imputed unto us, than certes Christ can not for any sin condemn us at the latter day. Secondly they deny all merit, and affirm that all our actions are of themselves mortal sins seem they never so good: 
Li● 2. Inst c. 2. §. 9 ● 3. Inst. c. ●. §. 7. Luth. ●de captiu. Bab●e de bap. & in 〈◊〉. ●. ad Gal  which is the opinion both of Luther and Caluin, and is commonly received of all their scholars; by which doctrine they take away the sentence of remuneration. For if our actions deserve nothing at God his hands, then although he may frankly bestow upon his elect what glory it pleaseth him, yet can he not be said to remunerate & reward their works; for where is no desert, there is no reward, and so though Christ may like a liberal King bestow glory on them, yet he can not like a judge by sentence of remuneration reward them: and so Christ looseth another part of his office. They affirm also that all our sins are equal and they scoff at that distinction of mortal and venial sins, 
Luth. Calv. sup Mel. in locu tit. de diserim pe●. mor & ve●.  and in this also Caluin speaketh according to his grounds: for he sayeth that all our actions are vicious, because they proceed from a vicious nature corrupted by original sin, whence it followeth, that all our actions are alike defiled, because they proceed from the same fountain of corruption. Which doctrine if it go for true, then doth Christ lose the third part of his office which is is discussion of sins and causes. For where there is no distinction betwixt the crimes and offences, there can be no difference in punishment, and where no difference is in punishment, the judge must pronounce the same sentence and give the same judgement, without all discussion either of the offences or the punishments. 
See the seventh book and sixt● chap.  They avouch also that we have no liberty nor free will in our actions, whence it followeth (as I shall demonstrate in the seventh book following) that in our actions is neither virtue nor vice, neither merit nor demerit, and so Christ in his judgement can exercise none of all the three offices which are before mentioned. For where is no virtue, nor merit, there can be no sentence of remuneration and reward, as is all ready proved, where is no vice there can be no sentence of condemnation, and where is no virtue nor vice at all, there can be no difference of works, either in virtue, or vice, merit, or demerit, and where it is no difference of causes, there can be no discussion, as is also all ready proved. And so Christ is no judge at all. 
Epist. 46.  For as saint Austin sayeth, If free will be not, how can God judge the world? And if we have not free will, why are not brute beasts called to judgement as well as we, seeing that nothing can excuse their cruelties but want of free will? 
See the fifth book & first chap.  Lastly they are not afraid to aver that God, and consequently Christ, is the author of all our sins, that judas his treachery and David's adultery were as much God his work, as saint Paul's conversion, yea Caluin sayeth that God urgeth us, eggeth us, and enforceth us to sin: which doctrine if it go for currante, Christ can not justly condemn any, because as Fulgentius sayeth: 
l. ad Mon●mum.  Deus non est autor eius cuius est ultor: God is not the author of that of which he is the revenger, and punisher; and consequently can not justly punish sinners, if he be author of their sins. For with good reason might the condemned parsons make exception against his sentence, and stand to it that by no reason nor justice God can condemn them for that, in which he had as much part as they, & to which he urged them yea enforced them. And so thou seest (gentle reader) how these great boasters who brag that they give all unto Christ, despoil him and rob him of his honourable title of of judge of the quick and the dead, which they profess in their creed, but deny in their doctrine.   

The eight Chapter declareth how to no small injury of Christ, they make every Christian, and faithful man, as good, and as holy, as he himself is.  
LVther, Caluin, and all the pack of their adherents, as in the seventh book shallbe related, and in part, in the second and third Chapter of this third book is all ready declared, are of opinion that we are justified and sanctified by the self-same justice where with Christ himself is just, which is inherent in him, and imputed to us, and apprehended by us with the reaching hand of faith, and so made our own. They are afraid forsooth to grant inhaerent justice, lest they should give us occasion to glory in our own sanctity, and so to fall into Pelagianisme, which affirmeth that Christ's grace is not necessary. But whilst they fear where they needed not, they fear not where they should, but run boldly, and desperately into an absurd blasphemy. 
Ex Aug har. ●●. ep. 9●. 20● 〈◊〉 l de nat. & great. c. 10. & 11.  For Pelagius is not condemned for avouching inherent grace, but for denying that Christ's grace was necessary, either to the observing of the law, or to the meriting of eternal glory, or to the overcoming of temptations, or avoiding of sin: and for affirming that man by his own free will without grace might do all these things. Wherefore to grant inherent grace by which we are justified and sanctified, hath no resemblance with Pelagianisme; neither doth it give us occasion of pride; for though this grace be in our souls, yet is it the gift of God, and an effect of Christ's passion, and so is his, by gift and merit, because he gives it, and deserved it for us, & it is ours only by do nation, and possession. But whilst they seek to avoid Charybdis they fall into Sylla: for if we have no create and inhaerent justice, but are just only by Christ's justice imputed unto us, then doth it follow, first, that so soon as we apprehend Christ's justice as our own, we are at the very first dash come to a full point in perfection, and so perfect that we can proceed no farther. because Christ's grace is so perfect that it never increased, but rather as the first Adame was created in perfect grow the and stature, so he the second Adame, was endued from the first moment of his conception, with perfect sanctity, and was even then at his full pitch & spiritual grow the never increasing either in grace or knowledge, but only in body, years, and experience. And so if we be just by his grace imputed unto us, 
Conc. Vien. Clem ad n●strum de bereticis.  then are we so perfect that as the Beguines and Beguards said, we can be no perfecter, and so are all just a like and consequently shall all receive the same glory as joviniane the heretic said; 
Hier. l. count, illum.  and shall not differ in glory as stars do, in brightness, 
1. Cor. 1●.  as saint Paul avouched. Secondly hence it followeth that we are all as just as Christ. For if we be just by his justice, then is his justice and ours all one, and so we as just as he. They will say, that his justice in him is inhaerent, to us only it is imputed, and is only so much ours as we apprehend it by faith, and thersore we and he may be just by one and the same justice, and yet not just alike. But this will not serve their turn: for although this may make some difference in the manner of justification, yet in justice and sanctity itself, we are as just as Christ: because we are just by his justice which faith apprehendeth; and seeing that faith apprehendeth all Christ's justice, all is imputed unto us, and so we are as just as Christ, or at least reputed as just as he. 
Sir in Nat. Virg.  Let no man then marvel at Martin Luther, for avouching once in the heat of his sermon, that every Christian is as holy as our blessed lady, neither let him think that Bucers' mouth ran over, 
in cap 3. in Mat.  when he said that the vilest of the ministery or faithful is better than S. John Baptist; Noah, he must not be scandalised at those bold speeches of some, 
In explic. ar. de justif.  who, as Tapper relateth, were not afraid nor ashamed to boast that they were as grateful to God as Christ himself is. For if we be just by Christ's justice (which by faith on our part is wholly of us apprehended, and wholly by God imputed unto us) we either are, or at least are reputed as just as he, and consequently are as grateful and acceptable unto God as he. O Luciferian pride, o sacrilege worthy revenge from heaven. For what is this but to make themselves fellowmates with Christ, and consequently to make themselves gods, or him a creature? By Luther's and Caluins' leave, the creature now may compare with the creator, and the redeemed with the Redeemer, and may boldly say not only as Lucifer did, that he will be like the highest, but may add to his pride and aspire higher than he, affirming boldly that he is already as just, as holy, and as good, as Christ, who is the highest. And thus the reader may see how true it is that these men give all to Christ, who give so much to themselves, that they will be as good as he.   

The ninth chapter, showeth how they make Christ ignorant, not knowing what belonged to his office, & how thereby they bring the new testament, and Christian religion in question.  
AS the first man Adame, in the first moment of his life, was created no● a babe, infant, or weakling, but a strong and lusty man, as if he had been at forty or fifty years of age, (for then men at that age were most youthful and lusty) so was he endued with all science and knowledge belonging to his state. For if God gave him from the beginning, a perfect stature and pitch, and an able body fit for generation, because he was to be the common father, by whom mankind should he propagated, no doubt he gave him also a soul furnished with all natural sciences because he was the first Doctor to whom mankind was to go to school to learn of him as of a Master the secrets of nature, the inventions of arts, the knowledge of God, and the mysteries of faith; neither is this my collection only, it is the common opinion of divines, which Ecclesiasticus confirmeth, 
c. 17.  who no little extolleth the first Adames knowledge. If the first Adame was so wise and so rich in knowledge, what shall we say of the second Adames knowledge, who was the high priest, and Doctor of the new la, and was to reveal greater secrets and mysteries to his Church, than the first Adame should have manifested unto his posterity? 
●. Reg. 3.14. Ecclesiast. 1.  Solomon also is famous for his profound wisdom, in so much that holy Scripture gives him this pre-eminence, to wit, that he was wiser then all that went before him or came after him, and excelled all that ever were an Jerusalem, and was more learned than all the Eastern Sages. In so much that not only the Queen of Saba but others also from all parts of the world flocked unto him, to hear him discourse upon the natures of beasts, trees, & plants, even from the Cedar, to the Isope. If Solomon, King only of the jew, who built only a material Temple for God, was endued with so rare knowledge, what shall we think of the second salomon's wisdom, Christ jesus, who was as a spiritual King to rule the whole world, & was to build a Temple and Church for God to devil in, no less than the Christian world, which was and is far more glorious than that of salomon's building, because the glory of the last Temple, 
Agg. 2.  was greater than that of the first? And behold sayeth Christ pointing to himself, more than Solomon here. 
Mat. 12.  Wherefore divines with one common consent affirm, that our Saviour Christ was enriched with the evident and clear vision of God, by which even as man he saw God face to face, & all his divine attributes, and perfections. Secondly they say he was endued with all natural sciences, which are perfections and ornaments of man's soul. Thirdly they say that he had a supernatural and infused science, by which he saw clearly the mysteries of Christian faith, which we beelewe, by which he foresaw all future things even the day of judgement, and penetrated so the hearts of men, that he knew every man's cogitation. 
〈◊〉. 11.  And this the Prophet Esaie insinuateth, when he sayeth that the spirit of wisdom and understanding shall rest upon him, to which S. Paul subscribeth when he calleth Christ the treasure house of God his wisdom. 
G●l. ●.  And this knowledge Christ obtained not by study & labour, but by infusion even from the first moment of his conception; and therefore when he was but twelve years old, and had never been trained up in School or University, he disputed so learnedly with the Doctors, that they were all astonished at his wisdom. 
Lue. 8● Io 7.  And no marvel for he was the wisdom of his father, and the word of God, and his humane nature was the book in which god his word was as it were written by Incarnation with an abbreviation, and so must needs be the treasure house of God his wisdom, and as it were the Academy of all sciences. This is the opinion which Catholics have of their high Priest, chief Doctor, and master, Christ jesus. But the ghospellers and new Christians of this age have nor so honourable an opinion of him, but rather like proud Disciples they will correct this their Master, 
Conc. de nat. Domini Hom Dom. 1. post Epiph.  and accuse him of gross ignorance. Luther will stand to it that Christ knew not when the day of judgement was to happen, yea that some times he was ignorant of other matters. Zuinglius, Bucer and Beza are of opinion that Christ profited in knowledge by little and little and Known not yester day, 
Iren. l. c. 17. Ambiguity l. 5. de fide c 7. libers in Breu c. 19  what he knows to day. Wherein they imitate the Gnostickes, and Agnoits & the author of the book of Christ's infancy, which recordeth that Christ went to School and learned his A. B. C. Caluin in his jarring Harmony upon the Evangelists, 
Isid l 8 etym. c. 5.  
Calu in Har. Luc. 2.  explicating those words of saint Luke: And the child increased and was comforted in Spirit. sayeth plainly, and repeats it twice or thrice, that Christ profited not only in appearance, but verily and inwardly, in grace and knowledge, and was ignorant also of many things even as other men are, saving that ignorance in men is a pain of sin and a part of original sin, in Christ it was not so. 
Calu. in Har. Mat. 24.  And in the same book he sayeth, that Christ as man knew not the day of judgement, not only because he knew it not to tell it to others, but also because he could not inform himself of the same. The like song Caluin singeth in the same Harmony handling that place where Christ is said to have prayed to his father to free him from the Chalice of his Passion, 
●arne. in c. 26. Mat.  if it were possible; for there Caluin often repeats that those words issued out of Christ's mouth ere he was ware, and that fear and grief did so perturbate his mind that he knew not what he said, and therefore corrected himself by and by. O arrogancy more than Luciferian. 
Ps●. 19 〈◊〉 9  Dareth the pot accuse the potter of want of skill? or dareth the creature accuse the Creator of ignorance, and the Christian condemn Christ of folly, error, and inconsideration. If he be worthy hell that shall say (fool) to his brother, 
Mat. ●.  how many hells deserveth Caluin that in effect with the same contumelious words, myscalleth Christ himself. But say they, Christ himself sayeth that he knew not the day of judgement, 
Mar. 〈◊〉  ergo he was ignorant of it. I grant he said so, but his meaning is to be taken. And the ancient fathers rather, than they would say that Christ was ignorant, they would seek to interpret those words so as they might not seem to derogate unto him. 
Greg. l. 4. ep. 〈◊〉.  Some therefore said that Christ sayeth that he knoweth not that day, because he was ignorant of it in his members, 
Amb. in 19 Luc. Naz orat. 4. Theol.  others say that he meant only, that he knew it not by human knowledge but yet denied not but that he knew it by revelation, 
Hier. Chrystheoph in c. 24. Mat.  others say that he said he Known it not, because it was committed to him in such secret, that he might not reveal it, and so knew it not, to reveal it unto others: 
Higher in c. 24. Mat.  yea some rather than they would make Christ to be ignorant, avouched that those words were foisted in by the Arrianes, to prove Christ to be but a creature, and pure man. 
Luc. 2.  They object also that saint Luke sayeth that jesus increased in age, grace, and wisdom, before God, and men. But this argument is as easily answered, for some expound those words thus: Christ increased in age verily, and before God and men, but in grace and wisdom only in outward appearance & before men; others say that he increased in grace and wisdom, that is in actions of grace and wisdom, because as he came to riper years, so he made more remonstraunce of his grace, and wisdom, by meritorious operations, and acts of wisdom, which were in deed meritorious, gracious, & wise, and were esteemed such before God & men. But yet they have not done. Ether (sayeth Caluin) Christ knew that it was possible to escathe death, 
Cal. Harm. Mar. 14.  or he knew not. If he knew, why doubteth he? If he knew not, then was he ignorant. Thus the devil laboureth in his members and ministers, to make the wisdom of God ignorant. To this therefore we must also give an answer: and that we shall as easily. For Christ knew that it was absolutely possible to avoid death and therefore said to his father: all things are possible to thee: he knew also that supposing his father's will and commandment, 
Mar. 14.  he was to die: yet thus he spoke and thus he prayed, to show himself true man, and to declare that according unto the flesh he feared death, yet absolutely according to the will of his superior part, he was resolved to die, as appeareth, by those words following: But not as I will but as thou wilt. As if he had said, as I am flesh and blood, and according to natural affection I fear death as it is repugnant to nature, and in this respect I would fain escape it, but yet because it is thy will (o father) & is expedient, yea necessary for mankind, I am most willing to die, and therefore not my will (that is the desire which as I am flesh and blood is common to me with other men) but thy will be done to which the will of my superior and reasonable part is always conformable. Which twoe wills in Christ are not contrary, because the one fears death as it is contrary to nature and the sensual part; the other embraceth death as it is the price of man's redemption and the object of gods will; neither doth the latter will correct the former, but both are right in their kind. For as death is against nature, it is to be feared, and as it is the object of fortitude, and the means of man's redemption, it is to be embraced, & the one showeth Christ to be a man, the other declares the force of grace wherewith the weakness of humane nature is corroborated. And so Christ knew that his father's will was that he should suffer, and his will also in the reasonable part was resolved, but yet to show himself a man, according to his sensual part he said: if it be possible free me from his chalice. Now if you desire a reason why Christ that under took our mortality, would none of our ignorance; divines will give you one most evident. Because Christ (say they) undertook only those imperfections of our nature, which either were necessary to declare himself a man, or to make satisfaction for our sins, or to give us example; & because obedience, fasting, prayer, humility, poverty, & such like served for patterns for us to imitate, he was obedient, he fasted, prayed, humiliated himself, & lived poorly: and because also hunger, thirst, cold, heat, mortality, were necessary to suffer and to satisfy for us, he was houngrye, thirsty, hot, cold, and mortal; and lastly, because nothing more declared that he was a man then fear of death, which manes nature abhorreth, he feared, and sweat for fear, not water only, but also blood. But because sin was against the end of redemption which he proposed to himself, he would none of that, yea he could not because he was the some of God: and for as much as inordinate motions of the flesh served neither for example, nor satisfaction, yea were rather contrary, he also refused them; and because ignorance also is many times joined with sin, either as the cause, or effect of sin (for whoesoever sinneth, sayeth the Philosopher is ignorant & inconsiderate) yea because this was repugnant to the office of a Messias who was to instruct the whole world in heavenly doctrine, and was not necessary to declare himself to be man, because fear and other imperfections served for that purpose sufficiently, yea could not demonstrate him to be man because angels and devils may be ignorant; he would take no ignorance upon him. But let the heretic blaspheme a while, and let him exceed the devil his father in blasphemy; if Christ were ignorant, he was subject also to sin; because he might have followed his ignorance. For if the understanding may err or be inconsiderate, the will which is directed by the understanding may wander and banger and swerver from reason's rule and Lore, and consequently also may sin; And so our reformed Christians will make a deformed Christ of our Messias, who being himself subject to sin (as he is if he can be ignorant or in considerate) and consequently having need himself of a redeemer, will yet take upon him to redeem others, and to save others, who himself needeth a Saviour. See how basely these men conceive of Christ, who though they say that they give all unto him, yet do make him an ignorant and inconsiderate man; and yet they themselves will be so eagle-eyed that they can find out all the true meanings of Scripture with a private spirit, and know as well as the beggar his dish, their own justification & predestination. But to come nearer to our purpose, and conclusion, if Christ were ignorant and inconsiderate, then can the truth err, wisdom can be deciued, & the way can go out of the way for he was the way, the truth, and the life, and the wisdom of his father. 
Io. 14.  If Christ can be ignorant, he may be deceived, if he may be deceived he may deceive, because he may teach according to his error, if he may deceive, peradventure he hath deceived, and then peradventure his preaching, his gospel, and whatsoever he hath taught of Christian religion, is error, and deceit; and so by little, and little, heresy leadeth to Atheism, and this their blasphemous doctrine, ruinethe Christianity. But fie rather upon these blasphemers, Christ is the wisdom of his father and so can not be deceived, he is prima veritas the prime veritíe, and so can not deceive, and he is summum bonum chiefest good, yea goodness itself, and so will not deceive, and our ghospellers are heretics, that is deceived, and deceivers.   

The tenth chapter showeth how they make Christ a desperate man, who not only feared the judgement-seat of his father, but also despaired for the time, of his own salvation.  
THese Reformers have not yet in their opinion, deformed Christ sufficiently, for not content to have made him an ignorant man, they avouch also that he feared his father's tribunal, and despaired of his own salvation, and so they will make him also a desperate man. Caluin in his Harmony of the gospels sayeth that when Christ was in his agony in the garden, 
In c. 26 Mat. § 37. in fine.  it was not the fear of death only which made him sweated blood and water, but sayeth he: It was the terrible iudgement-seat of God, and the judge armed with incomprehensible vengeance which he proposed before his eyes, and on the other part our sins, which he had taken upon him pressed him with their weight: so that it was no marvel if this bottomless pit and horrible confusion of damnation, did so fiercely torment him with fear, and anguish. And a little after: 
§ 3●.  death of itself could not so have tormented the soul of the son of God, had it not been that he perceived that he had to do with the judgement of God. And again he repeats this his blasphemy, lest you should think that it escaped him unadvisedly: 
Ibidem.  Whence it followeth that he feared a greater evil than death, which provoked him to desire to be exempted from death: which was, that proposing before his eyes the wrath of God, in so much that he presented himself before his judgement-seat being charged with the sins of the whole world, it was necessary that he should be affrighted and afraid of the profound bottomless-pitte of death. And with in some few lines after he sayeth, that this deadly sweat could not proceed but from an unaccustomed and horrible fear. Yea sayeth he, to think that this agony proceeded only from fear of death, were to attribute unto Christ a pusillanimity which we would condemn in an ordinary man. Here Christian Reader, do not they ears burn to hear blasphemy so often repeated? and will thy Christian zeal permit such disgrace to be offered thy redeemer? what John Caluin, did Christ fear the tribunal seat of his father? then feared he the judges sentence, lest it should be pronounced against him, than feared he damnation and doubted whether he should be comprehended in the sentence of venite benedicti, come ye blessed of my father, 
Mat. 25.  or Ite maledicti, go you cursed into fire everlasting; then was he in a perplexity and doubt, whether he should be placed on the right hand with the elect, or on the left hand with the reprobate; And so the son of God who came to save others was not sure of his own salvation. Now therefore if I will show myself a Christian, zealous of Christ's honour, or careful of mine own salvation, I must seek to free him from this fear of his father's sentence: for if he perish (as Caluin sayeth he feared lest he should perish eternally) then must we all perish, because by him only we look for salvation. The wiseman sayeth that at the later day the just shall stand in great constancy, 
Sap. 5.  even then when the sentence shallbe pronounced, much greater noe doubt shallbe the constancy of Christ jesus the son of God, of whom all the Saints that ever were, have borrowed their fortitude and courage. For he being the natural son of God, knew full well that his father neither would nor could deny his sone, and was assured that he who was to sit in judgement and to pronounce the sentence, could not be himself arraigned. And is it likely that God who endued Christ's humane nature with all knowledge, and revealed to him all secrets even heart's cogitations, and the day of doom, which the Angels know not; would keep this only secret from him, & would not let him know what should become of himself at the day of his death? The diumes with one common consent are of opinion that Christ's soul from his conception, received the bliss and glory which at the day of our particular judgement, or at our delivery out of Purgatory our souls shall receive, and they say that to a glorified soul is due a glorified body, because the glory of the soul naturally imparts itself unto the body; and that in Christ, it was no miracle that his body was so glorious in his transfiguration, but rather it was a miracle that his glorious soul did not make his body also partaker of that glory from the beginning; but yet this miracle Christ used that he might suffer hunger, thirst, cold, and other miseries, which he could not have done in a glorified bódy. How then was it possible that Christ should fear his father's tribunal, and terrible sentence, who was all ready in possession of the glory of his soul, and was assured that his glorious soul should have at the length, that is after his passion, a glorified body. But sayeth Caluine: Christ had taken upon him our sins, and therefore might very well fear to appear before his father's judgement-seat. This is his divinity or rather blasphemy. For if he mean that Christ hath so undertaken our sins that he verily made then his own, what more blasphemy could be utter? for although Illiricus avouched that God the father so potently imputed our sins to Christ that he made him a sinner, yet Christian tongues abhor to utter, and Christian ●ares do burn to hear such blasphemous speeches. For saint Peter, who sayeth that Christ boar our sins, 
1. Pet. ●.  addeth with all, that he bore them in his body upon the wood, to signify that he took not the malice of our sins upon him (for then he should have said that he bore our sins in his soul because the soul only is the subject of sin) but that he suffered the pains dew unto our sins, when he suffered the death of body; upon the cross. Yea as when one satisfieth for another's offence, he takes not the offence upon him, but is content to abide the punishment to set his friend at liberty, so Christ our Mediator and Redeemer is said to have taken our sins upon him and to have satisfied for them, because he hath endured the pains which were due unto them: but as for our sins, he was not capable of them, and therefore the same saint Peter in the same place sayeth that Christ never sinned and that guile or fraud was never found in his mouth. Wherefore though Christ might fear death and the torments of the cross, because those he was to suffer for us, yet had he no call to fear hell and damnation, because although that punishment was due unto our sins, yet was not Christ to suffer it, because his passion was sufficient as in the next chapter shallbe proved. And this I hope will suffice a reasonable man. But John Caluin still cavillethe and will not be satisfied with reason. For sayeth he (as is before related) Christ had been very effeminate, 
& in cap. 22. Lucae.  if for fear of death only he had sweat blood and water, therefore it was no less than hell and damnation, whose fear cast him into such an extraordinary sweat. See what care Caluin hath lest Christ should be counted a coward; and yet, whilst to find out a sufficient cause of such a fear, he sayeth that he was afraid of judgement; he makes him to fear that which he was sure should never happen, which is the greatest folly in the world, and argeweth the most effeminate, and cowardly heart that can be. I answer therefore that the fear of death only, was sufficient to make him sweat water and blood; for if as Aristotle sayeth abundance of blood and distemperature of body be sufficient to make men sometimes to sweat blood, 
l. 2. hist animalium c. 19  well may we conceive how fear of death in Christ (which must needs be very great partly because he would have it so and for our sakes also, and partly because he would not impart any comfort or strength unto his humane nature) might cause such a distem perature in his body, that it being already extenuate and emptied of other humours, might sweated blood and water: neither proceeded this from any impotency of mind, for he that giveth such courage to his Saints, could have taken the same himself, but he would permit death and such a death, to do all that such an object could do, and he would not give any aid unto the inferior part of his soul, where this passion of fear afflicted him, that he might begin in the garden the doleful tragedy of his passion, which he acted after wards upon the stage of his cross. But Caluin hath not yet cast all his poison; he sayeth that Christ not only feared judgement and damnation, but despaired also of his Salvation. These are his words which with the other before, I translate out of his french Harmony: 
in c 27. Mat. 11.46.  But this seemeth absurd that a voice of desperation should escape Christ. The answer is easy: that although the flesh apprehended damnation yet faith remained firm in his heart. Where you must note that Caluin having discoursed upon those words my God my god why hast thou forsaken me: he sayeth, that this was the greatest agony that Christ ever suffered and the reason saith he was because he was convented before his father's tribunal as culpable and as one that had God his enemy and as a man all ready condemned, where with he was so scared and affrighted that it had been enough to have swallowed up all other men an hundred times. So that complaining that he was abandoned of his father he speaketh not of faintness nor in jest, for (sayeth he) the vehemency of the grief wrested out of him this complaint, for as he was presented as a pledge for us, so would he sustain verily the judgement of God in our name. And because in these speeches he seemed to avouch that Christ despaired as one forlorn & forsaken of his father, he sayeth that yet his faith remained firm. Is it so Caluin and did Christ as he was man so fear the iudgment-seate, that he despaired? Then, either that despair was deliberate, or sudden and indeliberate. If deliberate then certes did Christ sin most danmably; for what greater sin is there, then to despair of God's mercy? For he that dispaireth either he thinks not God able to save him, or not willing, in the one he doth injury to god's omnipotency, in the other he mispriceth his mercy. If indeliberate, than was Christ inconsiderate and carried a way with Passion like a beast or vureasonable man, which although Caluin sticketh not to grant (for he sayeth that the vehemency of his agony wrested out of him fear and despair ere he was ware) yet do all the fathers and divines in this point stand against him, affirming that never any passion in Christ prevented reason and consideration. Yea they conceive of Christ as of one that was so vigilant over his passions, that never any arose without contideration, and commandment. For when he would show zeal he commanded a passion of anger to arise, yet in that moderation, as it might show him to be zealous and yet neither testy nor furious. Likewise when it pleased him to afflict his heart with fear and sorrow, he commanded those passions to arise in that vehemency, which was expedient to iuffer for us, or to show himself a man, and yet with that moderation that they never exceeded the golden mean of virtue; and he that could command the winds and tempests to cease, could command his passions down again. And so when in the garden he feared death, that fear was prevented and commanded by reason, and so was deliberate, and yet no sin because it is natural to fear death, and if with all the Superior part of the mind be resolute, and will not for that fear transgress gods law or offend conscience, it increaseth the merit, of martyrdom or sufferance of death, because it augmenteth the difficulty. Wherefore divines call Christ's passions, propassions, because he always prevented them, and commanded them to arise, and therefore the Evangelist sayeth not, that Christ was perturbed or troubled with his passions (as we are) but that he troubled himself. 
Augu. tract. ●9. in 10.  In like manner when Christ cried on the crossemy God my God why hast thou forsaken me? that complaint proceeded from the sensual part of his soul which feared death and the pangs thereof, and was not a complaint indeliberately wrested out by vehemency of grief, as Caluin avoucheth, but was deliberate, and yet no sin, because if the Superior pat be resolute, it is no sin though the inferior part fear death as contrary to nature. Nether was that complaint a desperation of Salvation, for Christ (as before is declared) was sure of that, but it was a complaint of the sensual part which complained that it received no succour from the divinity, but was left as it were to itself, to suffer fear, grief, and pain for our Redemption; and yet in that complaint (as I said) was no sin, because death is a thing to be feared, and the flesh and sensual part naturally feareah it; only then this fear is a sin, when it makes us offend our conscience, or to transgress the la of God, which effect it could not have in Christ because the Superior part of his soul was always resolved to die for man's redemption. Now whereas Caluin sayeth that Christ despaired yet retained faith, I can not see how those twoe things can stand together in his opinion. For if faith be an assurance of present and future justice, yea of Election and Salvation, 
See the seventh book, and third chap.  (as Caluine sayeth it is) then if Christ despaired of Salvation, he lost his faith, because he lost that assurance, & so by Caluins' doctrine, was an infidel. Nether will Caluins' shift be sufficient to hold these twoe (to wit assurance and desperation together) for to say, as he sayeth, that this desperation in Christ was indeliberate and so might stand with faith, is to uphold one absurdity by another, for it is most absurd to ascribe unto Christ any inconsiderate, or indeliberate actions: better were it for Caluin to say as divines commonly say that there was no faith in Christ, because faith which is an obscure knowledge, can not stand with the clear vision of God which Christ had, and which gave him a greater assurance of Salvation, than faith can do. Thus thou seest gentle reader how unlikely it is which Caluin sayeth, that Christ doubted and despaired of salvation who was the son of God, blessed in soul from the first moment of his conception, and so assured of the bliss and glory both of soul and body. But because Caluin will have it so, let him still stand to it that Christ was arraigned as guilty at his father's tribunal, and that he so feared the judges sentence that he doubted yea despaired of salvation. But what shall he gain by this doctrine? he shall declare himself to be as he is, a sacrilegious companion, who robbeth Christ of his glory, in uttering such injurious and opprobrious speeches, and shall deserve to be hissed out of the Church and school of Christ, for preaching that doctrine from which Christian ears abhor, and shall demonstrate himself not to be a sincere Christian, who speaks so contemptibly of Christ whom he professeth to honour and to whom he sayeth (but how truly who sees not?) that he giveth all homage, and glory.   

The eleventh Chapter showeth how Caluin bringeth Christ to Hell and the torments thereof, and so makes him a companion of the damned.  
THe sinner when he his once habituated in sin, makes no scruple or sin, and when he is plunged in the depth of sin, he contemneth, and is so far from seeking means to get out of this filthy sink, th●t having once soiled himself he cares not to wallow himself in filth, and to add filthiness to filthiness, and abomination to abomination, without stop, or stay, end, or measure. So it happeneth to John Caluin who having begun to blaspheme, never leaveth blaspheming, but addeth blasphemy to blasphemy, and still redoubleth his blasphemies. For not content to have despoiled Christ of many noble titles, not thinking it a sufficient disgrace to make him an ignorant and desperate man, he now openeth his mouth to utter his greatest blasphemy, and to spit his greatest spite against him, associating him in punishment with the devils, making him a member of the damned crew, and an inhabitaunte of hell it self, and from desperation bringeth him to hell and damnation. 
l. 2. c. 16. §. 10.  In his Institutions which T. N. translated into English and Richard Harison imprinted, in the year of our Lord 1562. having occasion to treat of the descension of Christ into Hell, he sayeth that Christ is said to have descended into hell, not that his soul locally descended (for Caluin acknowledgeth no local hell) but because in soul he felt the pains of hell: for (sayeth he) not only the body of Christ was given to be the price of our redemption, but there was another greater and more excellent price paid in this, that in his soul he suffered the terrible torments of a damned and forsaken man. And a little after, he answereth a question which he supposeth may be moved in this manner: Now if a man should ask of me whether that Christ went down to hell when he prayed to escape that death; 
●ect. 12.  I answer that then was the beginning of it. And seeing that Caluin acknowledgeth no other hell than the pains of hell, that is torments of mind where with the damned are vexed, it followeth that Christ in the garden when he feared not only death as Caluin sayeth, but his father's tribunal also, began his hell, & when he despaired (as he sayeth) on the cross, he entered into the depth of hell, and so those words: my God, 
Mat. 2●.  my God why hast thou forsaken me? Were the words of a damned man. O blasphemy, and that of one who will needs be counted a zealous, and a reformed, and reforming Christian. Thou a Christian Caluin? thou a jew and more blasphemous than a devil. Thinkest thou that Christ redeemed us who could not save himself? If he suffered hell he was damned, because none suffer hell but by sentence of damnation, and seeing that out of hell there is no redemption, he his still damned and so no redeemer. But to redouble the injury with a flout, Caluin will needs seem Christ's greatest friend in preferring him to hell, for (sayeth he) it had been but a small matter to have suffered death of body, 
Sect. 12.  yea that death (sayeth he) would only have redeemed our bodies, but not our souls; and so to make Christ a complete redeemer of body and soul, he bringeth him to hell. Secondly he sayeth that this highly commendeth Christ's mercy and charity. And thirdly he sayeth, that this also showed the power of Christ, who not only by death overcame death, but by suffering hell pains overcame hell also, and by taking the pain which we deserved, acquitted us of the same. Thus he shroudeth his impiety and blasphemy under the show of piety and zeal of Christ's honour, and when he blasphemethe most of all, he will seem to honour Christ with the title of a complete redeemer, and to commend his charity, and power. But to the first I answer that Christ by his death and passion paid a sufficient price and ransom both for soul and body, 
Eph 5.  and therefore saint Paul sayeth that in Christ we have redemption in his blood. 
Col 1.  And again he sayeth that Christ hath pacified all by the blood of the cross both in heaven and earth. 
●. Pet. 1.  To whom saint Peter subscribing, avoucheth that we are redeemed not with gold nor Silver but with the precious blood of the immaculate lamb. And never shall John Caluin find either scripture, or father, that sayeth that Christ suffered the pains of hell for our redemption, but rather he shall find that they attribute our redemption to the passion and pangs of death of Christ's body. And therefore if Caluin will stand to it that Christ's passion was only able to ransom our bodies but not our souls, he detracteth from the dignity of Christ's death, and seeing that the scriptures and fathers acknowledge no other price to have been offered for us then Christ's death and passion, if that were deficient, then according to Caluin, Christ is no complete Redeemer. But he presseth us with an argument which he counteth insoluble, 
Supra.  for (sayeth he) he that satisfieth for another must pay the debt which he oweth, and sustain the pain, which he deserved, and therefore because we deserved the pains of hell, and were to suffer them both in soul & body, it was necessary that Christ in soul should suffer the pains of hell, else had he been but half a redeemer. But by this argument Christ should have endured in hell perpetual torments, and so should never have redeemed us, because he should himself have been a perpetual prisoner; for if Christ must needs suffer the self same pain which we deserved, then must he according to Caluins' rule have endured a perpetual hell, because that was the punishment prepared for us, and seeing that eternal punishment never comes to an end, Christ should never have paid the ransom dew for sin, and so we should never have been redeemed. Wherefore I say that Christ's passion, to the sufferance of which both Christ's body and soul concurred (for the body by itself alone can not suffer pain) was a sufficient ransom to redeem both our souls and our bodies from hell and damnation, and therefore to that only and not to the pains of hell the scriptures & fathers do attribute our redemption. 
See the third book & third chap.  And this (as I have proved already) was a most sufficient price, and so sufficient, that in that it was the passion and death of him that was God and man, it was sufficient to have redeemed a thousand worlds, yea the devils & damned also, neither must Caluin be so rigorous as to think that no satisfaction can be sufficient, unless it be of the same kind with the debt which is to be paid, or the harm which is to be repaired; for if one of Caluins' brotherhood had cut of the arm of another brother, would not a piece of money have made satisfaction for the maim? or would Caluin have exacted arm for arm? And if one had ought Caluin an hundred crowns would not he have been content to have taken the worth or more than the worth in corn, sheep, or such like, but needs must have crown for crown, as though there were no other law but lex talionis? or if satisfaction for these debts and losses may be made by other payments which are of equal value, then might Christ by suffering death which was of infinite price and value, make a full satisfaction for the pains of hell; and yet never feel the pains thereof. And in deed it was not convenient that Christ should suffer the pains of hell. For first those pains are of their nature perpetuaell and so if Christ had once permitted those torments to afflict his soul, he should never have been eased of the same. Secondly it had been dishonourable unto Christ to be fellow mate with the damned: 
Act. 〈◊〉  and although saint Peter sayeth that God raised him from death to life the sorrows of hell being dissolved, yet he means not thereby that Christ once suffered the sorrows of hell, but either that he loosed us from the sorrows of hell, or that he acquit himself from them, because he never was tormented with them. Thirdly to have suffered these pains had been to no purpose, because that the pains of hell are not satisfactory, and therefore after that the damned have endured them many million of years, they are never the nearer an end of their misery. Now as concerning Christ's charity, that was sufficiently declared in that he suffered death for us. 
●o. 15.  For no man hath greater charity then to die for this friend, & especially for his enemies. and this also extolleth Christ's power most highly, who by death overcame death, yea sin also, and damnation. But my hand is weary and my pen seems unwilling to yield any more ink to a longer discourse upon these unchristianes, yea diabolical blasphemies, and I doubt not but the Readers ears do burn all ready to have hard so much of them. Out of this doctrine peradventure proceeded, that blasphemous speech of one who (as Surius reported) was not afraid to say that Christ was damned in hell: 
Anno 1●27.  And for this, as it is very probable, God permitted John Caluin to die so desperately. 
Bolsee in vita calvini. Geneb. li. 4. Cron.  For he that avouched Christ to have despaired and to have suffered hel-lpaynes, at the hour of his death himself dispayted, and seemed even then to begin his hell, because then he cursed the day that ever he set pen to paper (which we also may curse) and leaving to call upon Christ at his death whom in his life he had so dishonoured, he called upon the devil whose instrument & servant he had been, and unto him rendered his miserable soul, which had deserved as many hells; as were and are the souls which were, and still are, by his doctrine deceived.   

The twelfth chapter showeth that the Ghospellers can abide nothing, which is, or hath been belonging unto Christ, which is the last sign that they are no sincere Christians.  
IT is a common saying usual in every man's mouth, and yet not so common as true: Love me love my dog: which not only the common voice alloweth, but also experience & reason approveth. for such is the nature of love and friendship, that as it transformeth one friend into another, & makes us to account of our friend as another ourself, so doth it engender in us an affection unto our friend his friends, kinsmen, alliance, servants, and whatsoever belongeth unto him, or is beloved of him. And the reason is manifest: for if friendship be of that nature, that is maketh one soul as it were in twoe bodies, and causeth us to esteem of our friend as another ourself, then as we first love ourselves, and then others that are linked unto us, so we must love our friend as ourself, and then his alliance for his sake, and we must tender his life, his goods, and commodities as our own. Wherefore we read that Damon and Pythias, did strive earnestly & contend most lovingly who should die for the other. For as the soul by affection is more where it loveth then where it liveth, so Damon thought himself to live better in Pythias then in himself, and therefore to save himself in Pythias, he desired to die in himself. And he that loved Pythias life as his own, would have affected Pythias friends and would for his sake have tendered his goods as his own. we read that David and jonathas were such loving friends, that their souls wero glued together; 
●, Reg. ●●.  which love of David towards jonathas could not be stayed in jonathas his person, but for his sake extended it self to his house and family. King Pharaoh who extolled and loved higly joseph the Patriarch, 
Exod. 45. & 47.  loved not him alone, but for his sake entertained jacob his father, and all his brethren. For this is the nature and law of friendship: love me love mine. Wherefore we see by experience how when we love a friend sincerely, we love for his sake his friends also, & alliance, yea his servants, yea his dog, yea his ring, and image, and whatsoever hath been dear to him or appertaining unto him. And lest that any should think that friendship works this effect betwixt men only, I will show how charity which is the friendship which man hath with God, hath the same properties. For charity makes us not only the servants of God but his friends also, and in a golden chain so linketh us unto him, 
Io. 1●.  that we are as saint Paul sayeth one spirit with him. In so much that saint Paul said that now he liveth not in himself but in Christ, 
1. Cor. 6.  into whom by love he was transformed, 
Gal. 2.  esteeming of Christ as of another himself, in whom he thought he lived better than in himself. And therefore he tendered Christ his honour above his own commodity, and would rather die as in deed he did, than Christ should sustain any dishonour, and rather than he would deny him or forsake him, he denied himself and neglected his own life. The like effect this love hath ever wrought in the hearts of the Martyrs of the Church, who not only desired to die for Christ, as Damon did for Pythias, but died in deed, and suffered most exquisite torments, lest he should sustain the least loss and damage in his honour. And certes they that for love of Christ tendered his honour more than their own lives, did no doubt affect and reverence for his sake his mother, his friends, his image, his cross, and what soever hath been belonging unto him; for love is of this nature that it extendeth itself not only to our friend, but for his sake it tendereth his honour, affecteth his alliance and friends, yea his servants; and for his sake esteemeth of his image, ring, and whatsoever hath been appertaining unto him. Wherefore the greatest lovers and friends that ever Christ had, to wit the Martyr's who died for him, and the first Christian's who first received his law, and professed his name, did so love him that for his sake they respected with reverence his cross, his image, his word, his sacraments, his mother, his Apostles, his servants, yea their images and relics also. 
L●●. ●.  The Angel Gabriel for the honour he owed unto his master Christ jesus, speaks unto our blessed lady with great reverence and respect, because she was to be his mother, knowing that he who honoureth the son, must respect the mother. Saint John the Evangelist whom love made so bold as to repose himself in Christ's bosom, had no doubt a great respect unto his mother who was commended unto him, and therefore some historiographers write that he carried her with him unto his bishopric of Ephesus. Saint Ignatius writing to saint John the Evangelist, sayeth that he was desirous to see our lady of whon Christ was borne. S. Dionysius Areopagita desired to see the body of her, which gave the beginning of life to him who was the way the verity and life itself. Let us now compare these ancient Christians with our new reformers, and if to love our friends alliance, be an evident sign of love towards him, and hatred of them, must needs argew no good meaning to him, let us gather by the affection which these men show towards Christ's friends, what zeal and affection they beat to his person. And to begin with the mother of God, because she is next in dignity unto God, and as near as the mother can be to the son, let us see how reverently they speak of this worthy creature. Luther sayeth that the monks for women's sakes, 
Postilla nat. Mari●.  have extolled the virgin to much, and placed her above the Angels: 
Post Dom ●. Quadr.  and he is angry with the woman in the gospel for calling the womb of this virgin blessed: 
Sir not Ma. ria.  Yea sayeth he every ministers yoke-fellowe may be as good as she, saving that she cannot be the mother of God as she was. 
in Harm. Io. 2.  Caluin sayeth that when she put Christ in mind of want of wine at the marriage, she kept not herself with in her bounds, and another time when Christ said which is my mother and who are my brethren? 
Herm. Mat. 12.  He carped (sayeth Caluin) at Mary's importunity, who preposterousely went about to interrupt his preaching. Yea he also findeth fault with Papists for using those words of the devout woman in the Gospel blessed be the womb which bore thee because (sayeth he) the woman was checked for so saying. 
Harm ● Lu●. ●●.  Oecolampadius condemns her of ambition when she told her son at the marriage, that wine was wanting. 
in Io 2. Antid c. ●. Luc.  Brentius sayeth that when she with Christ's Kinsfolks, came to speak with Christ, she showed herself uncivil, and exceeded the bounds of public honesty, and therefore by Christ was put to public shame. 
H●. 19 Lu●. L●●. etiam post Dom. post Epiph.  The same Brentius sayeth that when she had lost Christ she fell into these cogitations: If this were the Messias how happeneth it that he is disobedient to his parents, and so closely stealeth a way from them? how is he the Messias and author of felicity, 
Hom. 17. in Lu●.  by whom as yet we never had good fortune? And when (sayeth he) this virgin and the disciples saw that Christ was condemned to so shameful a death, than were they scandalised, and then appeared their vain cogitations and impious hearts. 
●pud Ganis. l. 3. c. 12.  joannes Agricola suspects her maidenly honesty and makes the Angel to speak like a lascivious wooer unto her and as one that went about to entice her: thus he makes him to speak: all Hail most gracious lady whose company all men do desire. And think you (sayeth he) what it is to see a trim young man all alone with amayd in a chamber close shut up, and using sweet words and not obscurely insinuating by words & gesturs how much he desired. O lascivious companion that could conceive so beastly of the company of an Angel, who is chaste by nature, and of a virgin who was as free from lust by grace, as an Angel by nature. If now the proverb be true as reason and experience teacheth it to be most true: love me love mine: then judge gentle reader by the respect which these men bear to Christ's mother, 
Calu li. ●● Inst c. 12. §. 1 2. l. 2. c. 20.  what their reverence and affection is which they bear to her son. Besides this it is a common opinion of theirs that no honour or religious respect is to be, given unto the mother of God, 
in Post nat. Mariae & post Annunciat.  or the saints of heaven. And Luther seemeth much to envy at the honour which is given to our lady, saying, (but with a lie) that papists make her a goddess, and run more unto her then unto Christ, expecting more grace and favour of her then of him. Melancthon sayeth that it is plain that amongst papists the blessed virgin is succeeded in Christ's place, 
Ap●l. conf.  and that all call upon her and repose confidence in her, as though Christ were no propitiatour, but only a judge and a revenger. In which as he lieth loudly, so he plainly bewrayeth the envy which he conceiveth against this virgin's honour. 
Harm. c. 2. ●●.  Caluin complaineth that we adorn this virgin with the spoils taken from her son, and that we think her not honoured enough unless she be made a goddess. As for other saints they so revile them and that with such bitter scoffs and flouts, that herein I admire the patience of the divine Majesty which holdeth his revenging hand. Caluin rails at all the saints both of the old and new law: 
l. 1. Inst c. 14. §. 11.  he calleth Abraham a worshipper of Idols and exaggerateth divers sins of Sara and Rebecca, 
in cap. 32. Exo.  he accuse the Moses the mildest and meekest man that was in his time, 
l. 3. Inst c 20. §. 27. derefor. Ecclesia.  of arrogancy and pride. The Saints of the new law he calleth long-eared creatures who can hear so far of: he nick nameth them by contempt, deadmen, shadows, vizards, monsters, beasts▪ wherein he followeth the steps of his father Wiclephe who called the Saints Scurras principis: 
●● Th. Wal. ●o. ● tit. 12. c. 108.  the Prince's jesters. And one Quintine a libertine is so fowl mouthed that when he nameth saint Paul he calleth him the broken vessel, 
on Cal. cont. libert. c. 9  saint John he termeth the foolish younker, saint Matthew, the usurer, saint Peter, the denier. They take also from all Saints the honour which is given them by intercession and suits made unto them. Erasmus to make the way for them, 
Dial. peregrinationi●e  makes the blessed Virgin to say that she likes well of Luther's doctrine which teacheth that Saints are not to be prayed unto, for now (thus he makes her speak) I may be quiet where as before all came to me as though my son were still a babe. 
Sir vat. virg  Luther sayeth that he esteemeth no more of the virgin's prayers then of another Christian; 
l. count Wal.  yea he denieth all invocation of Saints: so doth Caluin also in many places of his institutions. 
l. 1. ●. 14. §. 12. l. 3. c. 20. §. 20. Roding l cot. Schol▪ jesuit.  And one William Roding in a book or libel which he made against the schools of jesuits, (for their teaching and bringing up of youth especially is disliked of heretics) brings in the blessed virgin speaking in this manner: Leave of this saluting me, and in saluting me to honour me, leave of worshipping of Saints and those that are dead, we detest thy salutations and prayers: where thou art, what thou dost, or whether thou be'st alive or dead, we know not, and we care not; so far are we from hearing thy prayers. 
Cal. l de ref. mag. cént 4. c. 6. col● 36.  As for images and relics of Christ, his mother, and his saints, they detest them: and therefore Luther wisheth that all relics were buried in the earth: 
Ser. de Cruse.  yea their breaking and defacing of images, and their burning of relics, argeweth their mind and opinion in these matters sufficiently. 
Ex Cocl l. 3. hist. Hussit.  Wherein they imitate Hierome of Prague who pulled down the Crucifix and defiled and abused it, and yet retained Wiclephs' picture crowned with a diadem; for so these men think the best place of their house not good enough for Luther's and Caluins' pictures, and yet deface and defile the images of Christ, his mother, and his Saints. But they say that this they do for pure love and honour towards Christ, who should be highly injuried, if any but he should be honoured, 
Deut 6. Mat. 4. 1. Tim. 1.  and they have a warrant for the same out of gods own word: Thou shalt adore thy lord god and him only thou shalt serve. And again: To God only honourand glory. But yet because scripture can not be contrary to reason, and much less to it self, they should have sought means to have expounded those words, rather than to have fallen into these gross absurdities: for the same God who commandeth to adore and serve him only, commandeth us to honour our parents and to serve our masters. And reason teacheth us that if we honour and love God we must respect his friends and those that he respecteth, for the proverb must needs be true, Love me love mine, because it is grounded in reason and the very nature of friendship. Wherefore I answer that God is aiealouse God, and therefore will have suprem honour and affection given unto himself only, because he only hath supreme sovereignty, (which only the alleged places do prove) but if it be lawful to make this argument; God only must have supreme honour ergo saints must have none at all; It may also be as well inferred that neither our parents, nor our Princes must be honoured, or affected. Let therefore the reformers call to mind, that to excellency and dignity honour is dew, & therefore seeing that there are three kinds of excellencies, well have the divines distinguished three kind of honours or worships. The first excellency is increate and supreme, which is proper to God, and therefore to him is due supreme honour which is called Latria, and to give this honour to any creature is idolatry. The second is called moral or civil excellency, which consisteth in authority, moral virtue, and learning, or such like, and to this is due a civil honour which we give to Princes, and superiors and morall-honest men, and learned men: for authority, virtue, and learning, are to be respected. The third excellency is supernatural which consisteth in grace sanctity, and glory, & to this is due a religious honour: yet because this excellency is infinitely inferior to god's excellency, we must give unto it a religious, but yet a far inferior honour. And with this honour our blessed lady, saint John baptist, saint Peter, saint Paul, and other Saints whilst they lived deserved to be respected, and sithence that their sanctity is no less in heaven than it was in earth, they are no less after death to be honoured than they were living. And therefore as Civil honour given to Princes, learned, and moral men, derogateth not to God's honour because it is inferior, so neither doth this religious honour, because it is inferior. But Caluin sayeth that religious honour is only dew to God. This he affirmeth but he can not prove it, and therefore I deny it, and will prove the contrary. For religion is a virtue which giveth to god supreme worship, and to Saints, and holy things, inferior honour, and so respecteth every one in his kind. To God this virtue gives a supreme honour called Latria, to the Saints an inferior honour called Dulia to the blessed virgin because she far excelleth the other Saints, it giveth an honour inferior to Latria but superior to Dulia, which divines call Hyperdulia. And I would demand of Caluin, if Saint John baptist were in earth, whether he would honour him or no for his sanctity? If he say he would, than I ask of him, what honour he would give him? not Supreme honour: because that is due to God, not Civil honour; because that is given to moral virtue only, authority, and learning. What honour then shall saint John baptist have for his Sanctity? certainly either an inferior religious honour called Dulia or none at all. And if Caluin would honour him in earth, and religiously also for his sanctity; why feareth he to give him that honour in heaven, sithence that his soul (which is the proper subject of sanctity) is no less living there, than it was here, and is endued with no less sanctity in heaven than is was in earth, and besides that, is also there enriched with glory, which it had not here? Now if Caluin will say that at least images and relics are not to be honoured, because in them is none of these three excellenties afore mentioned: I will tell him that although none of these excellencies be formally in images or relics, yet because these are appertainning unto them who are honoured, they may and must also be something respected and reverenced (but with a far inferior respect) and that for their sakes to whom they appertained. For as the Prince & Superior hath only the civil excellency, and yet not he only, but for his sake, his image, his chair of estate, his ring, and after his death, his dead body also is to be respected, but yet not with that honour where with his own person is honoured, so if God and his saints may be honoured with religious honour, then for God his sake, his image may be respected, and for Christ's sake his name, his, word, his Sacraments, his cross, nails and other things belonging unto him, and for the Saints sake, their images, bodies, bones, clothes, and such like, may and must be religiously honoured, yet with an inferior honour. And the reason is first because in these things also by a certain participation and representation, we behold in some sort their excellency to whom they pertain, and therefore we respect them for their sakes. Secondly the nature of friendship will have it so, that if we honour and love any, we must respect for his sake all belonging unto him, even unto his dog. But Caluin will say that greater would be the honour of Christ, if we gave all honour to him, and none at all to his saints; which he affirmeth and I with more reason do deny. For as then I honour and love my Prince best when I so respect him, that I honour and love not him only, but for his sake his alliance, his friends, his officers, his servants his image, yea his ring: so do I honour and love Christ most, when for his sake I respect and honour his mother, his officers, the Apostles, his friends, the saints, yea his cross and image. And as Princes take it for a dis honour to have their officers, servants, and images abused, & count it an honour to be honoured not only in themselves, but also in their adherentes; so no doubt Christ accounts the honour done to Saints (because it is given them for his sake and because they are his friends and servants) as given to himself, and can not but conceive himself to be highly dishonoured, when his Saints, yea his mother, are reviled, and his Cross and Images are defaced and defiled. Wherefore let not the reformers call us idolaters, 
Wl at 〈…〉 tris 〈◊〉.  lest they bewray their ignorance. For idolatry is to give supreme honour dew to God, unto his creatures, as it is treason to give suprem civil honour dew to the Prince, unto any of his subjects; but as it is no treason nor injury, but rather honour to the Prince, to honour his officers and servants with an inferior honour for his sake, so is it no idolatry but religion, to honour the Saints of God with an inferior honour, for their Master's sake. And if Saints may be honoured, we may make intercession unto them, because it is an honour to Prince's retainers to have suits made unto them. And this may be done also without dishonour to Christ, because to him we give what is due, to wit the title of a Redeemer, and chief advocate, mediator, and intercessor, and we acknowledge Saints as secondary mediators and intercessors, whom we desire for the credit which they have with Christ greater than we have, to make intercession to him for our necessities. And so we pray otherwise to Christ, otherwise to Saints, to him we pray as to our supreme advocate, to them as to secondary mediators, who have no access to God but by him; to him we pray as unto him that bestoweth grace, health & such their benefits on us, to them we pray not to bestow those benefits, but to pray to him to bestow them on us. And if some times we desire our Lady, and other Saints to send us health or to give us grace, our meaning is no other, then to desire them to procure of Christ these benefits for us, by their prayer and intercession. But Saints sayeth Caluin can not hear us so far of; I grant they can not naturally nor by corporal ears, for as yet they have none at all, but yet I say that by revelation, God who revealed many future things to his Prophets, revealeth also unto Saints all things which are belonging unto them, amongst which are the prayers which are made unto them; and I avouch with the divines and holy fathers, that as they see God face to face, so in him they see & know even our cogitations, prayers, and whatsoever is belonging unto them. Wherefore I may justly suspect our Reformers sincerity to Christ, who can abide neither his mother, nor his Saints, nor his cross, nor image, nor any thing belonging unto him: because the nature of friendship is such, that if they love and honour him they must love and honour his friends and servants. 
Gen. 9.29. Num. 220 jos 3. ●. Reg. 1●. ●. Reg. 30  Here I could demonstrate out of scripture the honour dew to saints, because scripture avoucheth that Abraham, Loth, Balaam, and joshua worshipped Angels, that Abdias honoured Elias, and that the sons of the prophets reverently respected Elizeus; who now are much more worthy honour than they were in this mortal life and may accept of it as it well now without prejudice to Christ's honour, as then. Prayer to Saints I could prove out of Gods own mouth, for when he said, 
Hi●●. 〈◊〉  that if Moses and Samuel should stand before him (to wit to make intercession for the people) yet his soul would not be with that people, he gives us leave to suppose that they may pray for the people that vision also of judas Machabeus in which he saw Onias and Hieremie, 
2. Ma●●. 〈◊〉.  than not living, yet praying for him and his army; doth argue that Saints pray for us, and consequently that we may pray unto them. 
Apoe. 5.  and this saint John confirmeth by another vision in which he saw the twenty four Seniors prostrated before the throne of God having every one haps and golden vials full of odours, which are (sayeth saint John) the prayers of Saints. 
Tob. 12.  Yea the Angel Raphael sayeth that he offered up Tobias his prayers unto God: and another Angel prayeth for the people as Zacharie witnesseth in the beginning of his Prophecy, 
Zach. 1.  the like example of prayer to an Angel we read in Osee. 
Osce 12.  And why have we angels which are called our Guardians (as Christ himself sayeth we have) but to protect and pray for us? 
Mat. 1. See Gen. 48. job 5 19 Exod 32. Apoc. 8.  And seeing that the souls of the blessed, are immortal as Angels are, see God face to face as they do, and are endued with glory as they are, they also can hear our prayers, 
1. Reg. 7. job vlt. Rom ●5. Ephes. 6. 1. Thes. 3. 2. Thes. 3. Col. 4. Heb. 13. jac. 5.  as well as Angels, and so are to be prayed unto as well as they. We have many examples also of the prayers of Saints in this life, and seeing that the souls of dead Saints are living and have eyes and ears of soul to see our necessities and to hear our petitions, why may we not pray to them and that also without injury to Christ, 
Exod. 2●. Num. 22.  as well as to the living Saints? Now that their Images & Relics may be worshipped, 
Cen. 〈…〉. Act 3.2. Reg 6. Heb. 9  it is as manifest in the twoe Cherubins placed by the Ark, in the brazen serpent, in the translation of jacobs' and joseph's bones, & the reverent and devout burial of saint Stephen. Yea the respect whhich was borne towards the Ark, Manna, the Tables of the law, & Aaron's rod, which were religiously Kept in the Ark argueth no less. But the afore said reason grounded in the nature of friendship which saveth love me and love mine, honour me & honour mine even to my servant and image, and the absurdity which followeth contempt of saints, Images, and Relics, though we lay aside Scriptures, fathers, tradition, history, and all monuments, is an argument sufficient for the proof of the worship, and respect which is due unto them. And to make it more manifest, I will propose an example, which shall lay open unto the view of any reasonable man, the absurdity which followeth contempt of these things and the traitorous meaning unto Christ, which it implieth. Put the case that some one in Ingland of his majesties subjects should profess great loyalty, love, and honour unto him, yet could not abide to hear a good word of his glorious mother, yea would revile her, and miscall her, but under this pretence that his Majesty is now to have all the honour, and that no honour can be given to the mother, but so much is taken from the son. Suppose he should pass by his lord chancellor, and Treasurer, without moving cap, and appear before his honourable counsel without bowing of body, or bending of knee, and being demanded whether his cap wet not nailed to his head, or whether his knee wanted not a joint, he should answer them, that his cap is nailed to all but his Majesty, & his knee is stiff to all but his own good self: Suppose also he should despise his favourites, and hate them as much as he affecteth them, protesting that he only loveth his Majesty, to whon he giveth so much of his affection, that he hath none left for his friends or well-willers. Suppose that when he enteteth into the chamber of presence he should make no more reverence to his Chair, than to an alehowse bench; Suppose that whensoever he meeteth with his Grace's picture, he should deface and defile it, and should cast into the fire what soever he findeth that hath been used by him, and all under this pretence that he giveth all respect unto his own person, and will not give any at all to any thing else, be it never so near, or so dear unto him, lest he should seem to part stakes, and not to give all honour and affection to his Highness: Suppose also that he should stop all suits which are made unto his chancellor, Treasurer, Counsellors, and other offices, avouching that such suitors are traitors to his Majesty, who in that they go not to him immediately, do seem not to put that confidence in him, which his goodness requireth, but rather do imagine that either he is not able of himself, or else not so willing, as able: would you take this man to be a loyal subject? or would you not, (not with standing all these his goodly pretences and solemn protestatious) suspect his sincerity? and might you not justly fear, least after contempt of all that are belonging unto his Majesty, he would lay violent hands upon his own person? Truly I doubt not but that such a one would quickly be arrested, and apprehended for a traitor. The like case is betwixt Christ jesus, and these new reformers, and zelatours. They profess all honour, duty, and affection to Christ, but they revile his mother, and will have no honour given unto her, lest that in honouring the mother they should dishonour the son. They bear no respect unto Christ's chiefest officers the Apostles, to whom he committed his Church at his departure. They favour not at all the friends and favourits of Christ, the saints, and angels; and this they say they do for fear lest they should incur Christ's disfavour, in favouring them whom he himself did favour. When they meet with the image of Christ or of his mother, or friends, they deface and defile it; When they see the cross of Christ they swell at the very sight of it, as if they were possessed, and can no more abide it, then can the devil, who because he hateth Christ can not brook his cross. If they should hit upon any bone of Christ's friends, they would spurn at it, and if any relic of Christ, or his mother, or his Apostles, and other saints, should be in their way, if a dunghill were not near hand, they would cast it into the fire; All suits and requests, which are made to the Mother of God, or any saint, officer, or friend of Christ, they forbidden and condemn as injurious to Christ, as though (say they) Christ were not able or willing enough of himself, but that the way must be made by mediators and intercessors. These are their goodly pretences, but what little sign of true meaning towards Christ thereby is showed, the la of friendship shall determine, which telleth us, that it we love our friend we must love his alliance, friends, and all appertaining unto him even unto his dog. And if in the other case of that bragging subject who pretends great honour to his Majesty, sentence would be pronounced against him as against a traitor, because although he profess great love and honour towards him, yet he declares the contrary in the contempt of his mother, friends, and officers, I see not bow any indifferent judge can condemn him for a traitor to his Majesty, unless he pronounce these men also traitors unto Christ his person, because where the case is like, and the cause the same, and only the persons different, if the sentence be not the same, the judge is partial, and an accepter of persons.    

THE FOURTH BOOK  
CONTAINETH A General survey of their Religion and worship of God, in which it is proved that they have either no Religion at all, or a graceless religion.  

The first chapter showeth how Preestes and religion ever went together, and that the reformers have no priests, and consequently no religion.  
THE old la being abrogated as able only to show the way, but not to give force to walk in the same, to command, but not to give grace to obey; the old Sacraments being antiquated and abolishep, as signs only which represented grace, but could not effectuate it; the old priests also by good consequence were turned out of office, as able only to judge betwixt corporal lepresies, and to absolve from legal irregularities; because the law, sacraments, and sacrifices, being abolished, there was no use of the Priests who were ordained only for one of these three offices, that is to preach and interpret the la, to minister sacraments, or to offer sacrifice. And in am of the old la, a new la by Christ being established, which was written not with the fingers of an Angel as the old was, 
Exod. ●●.  but of the holy ghost, & not in stones as that was but in the hearts of men; new sacraments also being instituted not only to signify grace but also to sanctify, new Priests of necessity were to be appointed, to interpret this law, and to minister these sacraments; because la religion, and Preestes, ever went together, 
Heb. 9  and therefore as saint Paul sayeth the one being altered the other was to be changed. Three laws there are by which God hath ruled his people, to wit the law of nature, the la written and the law of grace; in all which, 
See the first book & sint chapter.  as I have declared in the last chapter of the first book, were Preestes, and they also diverse, according to the diversity of laws. Wherefore if Christ hath planted a Church, and in it established a la and religion, certainly he hath also appointed a succession of Preestes, because they ever go together, and have such a connexion, that the one can not stand without the other. For if there be no Priests to offer sacrifice, and to minister sacraments, and to interpret the law, no show or face of religion can remain, and as well may a Kingdom flourish without a Prince, or magistrate, 
In the first book, and sixth chap.  as religion without Priests, and bishops. Wherefore, as I have proved before, in the law of nature the first begotten of every family was a Priest, & in the law written, the tribe of Levy was deputed, and dedicated unto Preesthod. 
jos l. 2. cont. App.  In which tribe there were inferior Priests so many that David was fain to divide them into twenty four ranks, which also contained a great number. There were also levites who had inferior offices. And there were high priests which succeeded, one after another's death, to the number of four score & odd, 
●os. li. 22. Aut. c. 2.  and the last high Preestwas Finasius, who lived until the City of Jerusalem with the Temple, was besieged and ruined by Titus & Vespasian. These priests and Levites losing their office with the abrogation of the old law; Christ jesus who gave us a new law, appointed a new Preesthood, of which he himself was the first Priest, and the principal, and the only high Priest, to whom no man succeed in the same authority: and therefore saint Paul putteth a difference herein betwixt the old and the new law, that in the old law many high priests who succeeded one another were necessary because one dying, another was of necessity to succeed, lest the Church should, want an high Priest, but in the new law there is but one high Priest Christ jesus, and he is sufficient, because though he died, yet he rose again, and never gave over the office, but still offereth sacrifice, and still ministereth sacraments, 
See the third book, & sixth chap.  by the hands of his underpreestes. So that he only is the high Priest of the new la, and none but he, because no man succeed him in the same authority.  
But here the adversary will insult, and say unto me that I have affirmed that which he desired; for if Christ be the only high priest of the new law, what need we any Popes, Bishops, and Priests? Thus he argueth, but wth how little reason a blind man may see? For as it is no good argument, to say that now in Ingland, and Scotland, and Ireland, can be but one King at once, therefore there must be no viceroys, nor Deputies, nor chancellors, nor Treasures, nor Dukes, nor Noble men, who are the Prince's Officers, and Princes in their kind, & vicegerentes also, some in more ample some in less ample manner; so it is no good argument to say that Christ is the only high Priest of the new law, Ergo there are no other Preelts but he, for he may have many vicegerentes, who also are true Predsts in their Kind. And so the Pope may be his supreme Vicar in earth, and other Bishops and Priests may be inferior Vicars and Priests also, subordinate in jurisdiction unto the Pope. Yea seeing that the high Priest Christ jesus hath withdrawn his visible presence from the Church, and executeth not visibly and immediately by himself his preestly function, it was necessary that to his visible Church, he should leave a visible succession of Priests who should rule and minister under him and for him in his absence, not as his successors, but as his vicegerents and ministers; for as no Priest no Church, so no visible Priest no visible Church, Wherefore when Christ was to bid his Church far well, he instituted his Apostles Precsts, 
Mat 26.  giving them authority to consecrate, 
10 20. 10.21.  and to offer sacrify, and after his resurrection giving them power also to absolve from sins, and appointing Peter as the high Priest and Vicar under himself; 
Ies●. 22. Can. 2.  which to deny were not only to contradict the Council of Trent (which defineth that in the place alleged Christ made the Apostles Preefts) but also to contemn and condemn the whole School of ancient interpreters▪ yea the whole Christian world, who have so interpreted the places alleged. This Preestly function the Apostles in their time did exercisein preaching, teaching, baptizing, confirming, and offerring Sacrifice also, which is the proper function of a Priest. Yea their Disciples did the same? 
Act. 1●.  for S. Luke sayeth that they ministered unto our Lord, that is sacrificed as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth, and as Erasmus himself trassateth, yea as the manner of speech also importeth. For if they had only preached or ministered Sacraments, well might they have been said to have ministered to the People, but not so properly, unto our lord, unless they had offered sacrifice which is proper to him. Saint Paul sayeth that Timothy was ordained bishop by imposition of hands of the Presbytery, 
1. Tim. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Tim. 〈◊〉. in c. 5●. Isa.  that is, a company of bishops, and he affirmeth that he himself imposed his hands upon him; which imposition of hands is in greek called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and as S. Hierome witnessethe signifieth giving of holy orders. 
Tit. 〈◊〉.  The same saint Paul writing unto Titus, sayeth that he left him at Creta that he should constitute and ordain Priests in every city. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  The same saint Paul with Barnabas, 
Act. 10.  ordained to the people Priests in every Church, by imposition of hands, as the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth. 
Act. 20.  The same saint Paul, as saint Luke reporteth sent to Ephesus & called the elders of the Church, that is Priests for to them he said Look to yourselves and unto your flock. 
1. Tim 〈◊〉.  And of Priests he speaketh when he sayeth: Priests which do rule well, are worthy double honour; 
Iae●. 5.  And again: Against a Priest receive no accusation. Of Priests also speaketh Saint james when he sayeth: If any be diseased among you let them call for the Priests of the Church. And because our ghospellers see that by these places it is manifest that in the Apostles times Priests were ordained, they are enforced (for other wise they could not conceal this from the People) to translate elders for Preestes, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Presbyter. Prestre. Prete. Priest.  notwithstanding that the greek word, yea the Latin, french and Italian, soundeth as much as Priest in English. Of Bishops, priests, and deacons we have mention in the canons of the Apostles, 
Canon. Apo. Cone. N●ic.  and the council of Nice; And Ignatius bishop of Antioch and scholar of saint Paul, in in diverse of his Epistles speaketh of the same. 
Ignat. cp. ad Eph.  In his Epistles to the Ephesians this is his admonition: Endeavour my dearest to be subject to the bishop, 
cp. ad Tral.  Priests and deacons, because he that obeyeth them, obeyeth Christ who appointed them. And again in another Epistle he gives the reason why we should obey them: For what (sayeth he) is a bishop but one who is above all principality, and is as much (as a man can be) an imitator of Christ? What is Preesthood but an holy company, counsellors, and assistants to the bishop? What are Deacons but imitators of Angels who exhibit a pure and harmless ministry, as saint Stephen did to saint james, Timothy and Line unto Paul, Anacletus and Clemens unto Peter? 
Ep. ad Antioch.  And in another place he reckoneth almost all the inferior orders of the Clergy: I salute Subdeacons', Lectors, Singers, janitours, Exorcists: And so forth. By which it is plain, that in the Church of Christ even from the beginning, there was a Clergy of Bishops, Priests, and inferior ministers and that the Church and they even from the beginning, went together, and by later writers and histories it is most manifest, that preesthood was an order which ever flourished in the Church of Christ, ruled also in it and upholded it. And truly religion, and preesthood, are so inseparately united, that the very pagans as they practised superstition and idolatry instead of religion, so did they devise a kind of Clergy and order of Priests, to rule their Church in spiritual matters, to offer their sacrifices, and to minister their Sacraments, as in the pagan writers is mostmanifest to be seen. Now that there is no true Preesthood amongst the ghospellers, they themselves do confess and I shall also prove it; but first let us take their own confession. 
L. de abrog. Missa. l. ad Pragenses de Instit. ministris.  Luther sayeth plainly that all are priests a like, and that Christians are not ordained but borne Priests in baptism: Only (sayeth he) this is the difference, that to avoid confusion, the execution of preestly authority is committed to some only. And this is the opinion of all the reformers even in England, who as they acknowledge no proper and true sacrifices) but only improper, such as prayer is, and a contrite heart; so they acknowledge no● other Priests, than those who offer prayer and thanksgiving, and such like improper sacrifices unto God. And because all may offer such sacrifices, all with them are priests a like. And so the minister is no more Priest than the minstrel, only the minister by election or by the Princes lettre, hath the execution of this preestly function committed unto him. whence it followeth that there is no Hierarchy by their opinion amongst them, nor distinction of the state of Clergy and laity in order, dignity, and power, but only in execution. Wherefore seeing that all are not true and proper Priests, there is no true Preesthod amongst them. This they grant, and by their proof & argument, by which they prove all to be Priests alike, they declare their meaning. for their principal proof is taken out of saint Peter and saint John, 
〈◊〉. Pat. 2. Ap●s. 〈◊〉;  who say that Christ hath made us all a holy nation a Royal Preesthood and priests to God his father; which words argue only that we are metaphorical and improper Priests, who in that we are to offer unto God upon the Altar of our soul, praise, thanksgiving, prayer, contrition, and such like virtues, do in some fort resemble true Priests who offer true sacrifices upon true altars: but as our souls are not true Altars, nor our virtues true sacrifices, so are not all true priests. And therefore S. Peter as he calls us Priests so he calls us Kings, living stones, and spiritual houses: and therefore as we are not all proper and true Kings, as we are not all true stones and houses, so are we not all true Priests. And seeing that by this their opinion we are all Priests a like, there is no true pre●s●hood amongst them by their opinion, and so no Churthe nor religion. For all though there is in Christ's Church true presthood distinct from the state of the laity, in character, order, consecration, and power, as I have already proved, yet in their opinion there is none, and so amongst them by their own confession, is no religion. Because to uphold religion, not only improper Priests (such as ever were all the faithful) are required, but also proper Priests, such as differed in state from the rest of the multitude, and offered true sacrifices, were ever in every law necessary, and true priests and true religion as yet ever went together. And truly as they teach so it is amongst them; for in their Church there can be no true priests nor preesthood, as I will in a word or twoe demonstrate. And first of all if they have any true priests amongst them, let them show us a succession of them from the Apostles, else can they not prove them to be true priests, 
Ephes. 4.  for if Christ ordained his Apostles priests and in them began the goodly order and rank of priests, which by succession he would always have to continue in his Church for the upholding of religion in the same, then certes they are no true priests who can not derive their pedigree from the Apostles as Catholic priests can do, but bastard and apish ministers, who carry the name and coat of Priests, and arrogate unto themselves that office, but are no more Priests in deed, then are their minstrels and cobblers. Secondly who in gods name laid hands upon them? What Bishops ordained them? not Catholic bishops I am sure, and they themselves will think it no credit to retch their pedigree from them: not their own bishops; because before Luther and Caluin who were no bishops themselves, never any Superintendente of their sect, was seen, felt or hard of: and before Luther and caluin, there could be no lutherans nor Caluinists, much less Lutheran, and Caluinisticall Superintendents. Wherefore in the beginning of their new religion they were enforced to make Superintendentes and ministers of our Apostating Priests such as Parker, Grindal, Sands, Horn, and many others were, who were thought passed fit to make such superintendents and ministers on, without any other moulding or knedding. And where they wanted Apostates who were consecrated after the Catholic manner, they took lay men of their own, of which some were base artificers, and without any other consecration or ordination then the Princes or the superintendents letters, (who themselves were no bishops) they made them ministers and Bit-sheep with as few ceremonies, and less solemnity, than they make their Aldermen yea constables and criers of the market. And from this stock proceedeth all the rabble of their ministers who are no more Priests than they were that made them. 
l. breast. Vltra med.  The like ordination and institution of ministers Tertulian recordeth to have been practised by the heretics of his time: Their ordinations (sayeth he) are light, rash, inconstaunte; one while they make ministers of Neophits, another while of lay men and those who are tied to the world, another while of our Apostates, that they may bind them unto them by glory, whom they can not by verity: Wherefore one Bishop they have to day, another to morrow, to day he is made a Deacon who to morrow is Reader, to day he is a priest, who to morrow is a lay-man, for to lay men they enjoin preestly functions. If then they have no Priests, they have none who hath authority to minister sacraments, to offer sacrifice, and to preach unto the people, and so can have no religion, because Priests and religion must ever go together. Thus saint Hierom rejecteth & refuteth the sect of Luciferians: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lucif.  Hilarius (sayeth he) who was the head of the Luciferians, when being a Deacon he departed from the Church, and he alone which his companions (as he thinketh) became the only company and Church of the world, can neither consecrate the eucharist, having neither Bishops, nor priests, neither can he give baptism without the eucharist (For then Baptism, the eucharist, & Confirmation, were given together) and now he being dead, his sect and Church is dead with him, because he being but a Deacon could ordanie no Clerk to succeed him, and that is no Church which hath no priest. Thus he argued against the Luciferians, and the same argument do I make against all the new sects of this age: you have no true priests by your own doctrine, neither in deed can you have any, because all your ministers were ordained without order, that is without consecration and imposition of Bishop's hands, and they have their authority from them, who being lay men could neither have it themselves nor give it to others, and seeing that religion and priests of necessity did ever go together, as is all ready proved, you having no true Priests can have no true religion, and so your preachings, bishopping, and supping, or communicating, and your administrations of other sacraments (Baptism only excepted which in necessity lay men yea women may minister) are no more acts of religion then if the same were done by players upon the stage, because you have no more preestly authority than they have, & so have no true religionamongest you, but only an apish imitation, and a Stage-play of religion.   

The second Chapter proveth that religion can not stand without a true sacrifice, and that the reformers have no true religion, because they have no Sacrifice.  
MAN being composed of soul and body, is to serve his Creator wth both, & therefore must not only believe with heart, but must profess also his belief with tongue, & must not only praise god in spirit, but must use his mouth also as a trumpet to sound out this praise; neither must he pray with soul only butwith lip. pes also, & he ought not only to humble his mind in prayer, but to bow and bend his knee and body also, and he is not only to mind and mean well, but he must also do well, 
Mas. ●.  to glorify his father which is in heaven, & to edify his brother in earth. Which thing is so deeply imprinted in the minds of men, that there were never any either religious or superstitious, whose inward devotion did not break forth into some outward signs or ceremonies, by which was manifested outwardly and by some action or gesture of the body, what was in wardly conceived and concealed in the mind. And amongst all the external whorships and outward signs of inward devotion and religion, sacrifice was ever counted the principal, which therefore as Saint Austin noteth, 
l. 10. cin. ●. 4.  was never offered but either unto God or to some creature, which was esteemed of as God. And therefore all nations of what religion soever they were have ever used to offer sacrifice, as though they thought that they gave not unto their God his right honour and worship, unless they should offer unto him one sacrifice or other. 
l. 〈…〉  Pliny reporteth that the people of Sabea offered as sacrifices unto their Gods all manner of spices but myrrh, where with that country aboundeth; others have offered fruits and herbs of the earth, others brute beasts, others have sacrificed children & men unto their Gods, wherein though many superstitions and abominable idolatries were committed, yet thereby appeareth that noesooner the heart of man is possessed with religion, true, or false, but it thinketh of one sacrifice or other. 
aduers●● Colotem.  In so much that Plutarch sayeth that a man shall sooner hit upon cities without walls, houses, Kings, laws, coins, Schools, and theatres, then without Temples and Sacrifices? 
l. quod non patest suaviter vivi secundum Epis.  and therefore (sayeth he) Epicure, who in deed served no other god than his belly, and consequently had no other Church then his Kitchen, no other Priests than his cooks, and no other sacrifices than his dishes, offered notwithstanding sacrifice unto the Gods, for feat of the multitude. And as these because they had the light of nature offered sacrifices, but because they wanted light of faith offered them to false Gods, and with much superstition: so the true worshippers of God who were endued with the true light of faith offered sacrifice unto the true God. 
In the first book, and last chap.  Adam as I have already proved was a priest & therefore did no doubt offer sacrifice to appease God's wrath conceived against his fault, although the Scripture maketh no mention of it. 
Gen. 4.  Abel●●s the Scripture witnesseth, being a P●●●st, was not content to bear a heart full of reverence unto God, but to make manifest the inward religion of his mind, he killed the first borne and fattest of his flock, & offered them to God as a sacrifice, and God respected Abel and his oblations. Noê also so soon as the Flood was fallen, builded an Altar unto God and upon it he sacrificed and offered holocausts and burnt-offerings of the clean beasts, 
Gen. 8.17.  and fowls which he had preserved from the furious waves of that universal deluge. 
See the first book, last chap.  The like did Abrahame, Melchisedech, job and many other patriarchs, and true servants of God who lived under the law of nature, as is also in the place alleged, proved and de-declared. In the law written the use of offering sacrifice was more frequent, and the sacrifices, and the ceremonies, wherewith they were to be offered, were determined by Gods own mouth, as appeareth by the book of Leviticus and other parts of scripture. And for this purpose especially God commanded Solomon to build that stately Temple and would have no sacrifice offered but there, which is the cause why the Iewes since the destruction of their Temple, though thy exercise other acts of their religion, yet in no place dare they offer sacrify. Wherefore in the new la also, if Christ hath planted a Church, and in this Church, religion, then hath he also amongst the offices of religion, instituted a sacrifice. And this in part the Ghospellers will not let to confess, 
Isa. 53.10.10. Ephes. 5.  for they grant that Christ offered his own self upon the Altar of the cross as a sacrifice unto his father, which was the complement of all the old sacrifices, the verity of all those shadows, and the price of our redemption. But yet because this sacrifice is not sufficient to uphold religion and the worship of God, either they must show us some other sacrifice, or else they can not maintain any true religion. For first I have proved that religion can not stand without a sacrifice; wherefore seeing that the sacrifice of the cross is paste, & never to be reiterated, another sacrifice is necessary for the continuance of religion. Nether will it suffice for an answer, to say that the effects and virtue of the sacrifice of the Cross remain, for these effects are no sacrifices, but only graces which by virtue of the sacrifice of the cross are bestowed upon us. Much less can it serve for a good answer to say that Christ still in heaven presenteth unto his father the sacrifice of the cross; for that presentation is not a true, nor a new oblation of a sacrifice, & if it were yet because it is in heaven, it is not sufficient to uphold religion in earth, because a visible Church and visible worship of God in earth, requireth a visible sacrifice in earth. 
L. 10. cont. Faust. c. 11.  Seconndly as S. Austin sayeth never as yet did any society consort together in one religion but by practice and use of the same visible signs, & Sacraments, and therefore seeing that sacrifice is the proper, & principal sign of the homage, which we give to God (because it was never offered but to God or at least to that creature which was esteemed as God) it is impossible that this visible religion & worship should continue without a sacrifice & visible sacrifice also, that to the oblation of it the people may meet together. And seeing that the sacrifice of the cross is no more visible, and is not to be reiterated, neither is a visible sign at the which the people may meet together to worship thereby almighty God uniformly & externally; that is not sufficient to uphold religion in the Church of Christ. for as religion began with visible sacrifices and changed with change of sacrifices (which is the cause why the Prophets when they complain of the fall of religion they complain also of the fall of Sacrifices) so doth it continue with sacrifices, 
2. Par. 13. Dan ●. & 12  and can not stand without a Sacrifice. For as in Ingland where kneeling is a proper worship dew unto the Prince, it is not sufficient by cap or cursye to show your duty, because these ceremonies are given to every noble man or gentleman, yea to all those also who bear any sway in the common wealth, and therefore to deny his majesty that homage, were to despoil him of his honour: so to take a way sacrifice which hitherto hath been offered unto God, and never unto any but such as were esteemed gods, were to rob God of his principal and proper worship, and consequently to ruin feligion; which as it principally respecteth God as his proper worship, so can it not stand with out the same. And why, I pray, you should we fear to grant a sacrifice in the new Law? because (say they) Christ abrogated all sacrifices. True, I grant he abrogated all the old sacrifices, because they were but shadows, and figures of future things, and therefore the son Christ jesus rising in the horizonte of the new haw, and the light of the verities appearing, the dark figures, and obscure shadows, were to give place, but yet this is no argument to prove that he hath not instituted a new sacrifice in the new law: for so he abrogated all the old Sacraments, as circumcision which was a sacrament only and no sacrifice, and yet as saint Austin sayeth, 
l. 19 contra Faust. c. 15.  he hath prescribed new Sacraments for the new la, Greater in virtue, better for profit, easier in use, and fewer in number. They will say peradventure that the old sacrifices being abrogated, it is sufficient now to worship God in Spirit or at least by praise, thanksgiving, and such other virtuous offices. But then I must tell them that because still we are composed of soul and body, it is not sufficient that we honour God in spirit only, and because the Church is a visible congregation it must have a visible sacrifice neither are the external acts of virtue sufficient, because they (as is proved) are no true sacrifices but only metaphorical and improper, and therefore as hitherto and in all laws, besides those improper sacrifices it was necessary for the maintenance of religion to have some proper sacrifices, such as Abel, No and others did offer, so in the new law besides the metaphorical Sacrifices of prayer, thanksgiving, contrite hearts and such like, we must have some proper sacrifice, because that and religion ever goeth together. And if we have no sacrifice it followeth that the jews honoured God more than we do, because they offered unto him sacrifice which is the greatest honour that can be given, and therefore was all ways reserved for God. A sacrifice than is necessary in the new la; and what more likely to be this sacrifice then the Sacrifice of the mass? Melchisedech and his sacrifice were figures of Christ and his sacrifice, as before is proved; wherefore seeing that there is no likeness betwixt Melchisedeches sacrifice and the sacrifice of the cross, we must find some other in the new law which doth more resemble it; and what more can resemble it then the Sacrifice of the Mass, which though it be not bread and wine, yet hath it the accidents and outward show of bread and wine. 
●. 12.  Daniel prophesying of the havoc of religion which Anti-Christe shall make, affirmeth that he shall take a way the daily sacrifice: And what Sacrifice I pray you? not the sacrifice of the cross because that is past and which is done can not be undone, not improper sacrifices of prayer contrite hearts and such like, because he speaketh of one sacrifice, they are many, and of a proper and public sacrifice, they are improper and metaphorical. He speaketh therefore of some public sacrifice which for fear of persecution shall not be offered any more in public manner but very secretly and not so commonly as it was wont to be. 
This sacrifice is proved with Christ's preesthood in the third book.  And what other sacrifice is there in the Church for Anti-Christe to take a way, then that of the mass? Let the ghospellers name us it, if there be, or ever were any other. Malachi the prophet or rather God by the mouth of his prophet, 
 sayeth that he is weary of the jews sacrtfices, that his will is not amongst them, and that henceforth he will receive no gifts that is no sacrifice which is offered by their hands, but (sayeth he) From the rising of the son to the setting of the same, my name shallbe great amongst the gentiles, and in every place shallbe offered unto me a clean oblation. And what oblation or sacrifice is that? Not the jewish sacrifice; because he sayeth this sacrifice shallbe offered among the gentiles, yea he protesteth that he is weary of all jewish sacrifices. Not the idolatricall sacrifices of the gentiles, because he would never have called them clean sacrifices, neither can they besaied truly to be offered unto him, but rather unto the devil. Not improper sacrifices of prayer, thanks giving, and good works; because he compareth sacrifice with sacrifice; and so promising a new sacrifice instead of the old, as hereiecteth proper sacrifices, so must he in licu of them, provide another proper sacrifice, which in the dignity of a sacrifice surpasseth them all. Yea by this clean sacrifice according unto the reformers opinion, it is impossible that he should mean prayer, thanksgiving, or such like good works because the best of these sacrifices, in their opinion, 
See the 〈◊〉 books.  are so unclean that they are mortal sins, and abominable in the sight of God. Nether can he mean the sacrifices which job and others offered amongst the gentiles, because he speaks of one sacrifice, those were many, and could be no cleaner than those of the Iewes, yea those were oftered but in few places, and so can not be the sacrifice which Malachi sayeth shallbe offered in every place even from the East to the west. He speaketh therefore of a Sacrifice which in the new law shallbe a most clean and pleasing sacrifice, and which in all the parts of the Christian world shallbe offered unto God. And what such sacrifice can the reformers name, but the sacrifice of the mass? What other oblation was ever counted a sacrifice in the Church? what other sacrifice is offered every where, but the sacrifice of the mass, which is a most clean sacrifice not only in respect of the out ward form, which is unbloody, but also in respect of the most chaste, pure, & virginal flesh and blood of Christ which it containeth? 
Mat 26. Luc. 22. Mar 14. ●. Cor 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  And this is the Sacrifice which Christ offered at his last supper, when taking bread and wine in to his hands he blessed them, and by blessing, turning them into his sacred body and blood, he told his disciples that it was his body and blood which he gavefor them. In which words he can mean no other thing then the sacrifice of his body and blood, which he offered under the forms of bread and wine. For to gloss those words as Caluin doth (as though Christ had said: this is my body: that is, this is a figure of my body which shallbe given for you,) is very violent and repugnant to the text, because the greek text useth the presentence which is given for you, which is powered out for you: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  And therefore understandeth some thing which even then was given for them. And seeing that Caluins' bread and figure, could only be said to be given to them, but not for them, that which then he gave for them, was his body and blood, which under the form of bread and wine he offered for them. And seeing that he bade his Apostles to do as he had done, that is to offer the same sacrifice which he did, for so much the Latin word (facite) in that place and with such circumstances importeth; It must needs follow, that he commanded the Apostles, and in them their successors, to offer Sacrifice, and the same sacrifice which he offered for his Apostles at his last supper, which is the sacrifice of the mass. This verity I could prove more largely by other circumstances of this place, especially according to the greek, and I could allege that place of saint Paul, where he compares table to table,? 
1. Cor. 10.  that is altar to altar saying that we can not be partakers of the table of our lord and of the devil: that is we can not participate of that which is offered on the altars of the gentiles, and of that also which is offered on the Christians altar, and out of this place I could prove that in saint Paul's time there was some thing offered on the Christians altars, which he opposeth to that which was offered on the pagans altars. 
Hier. ep ad Marcellam. Aug. l 16 cit c. 22 lib. ● count ●●uersarium egis. c. 10 Damase l. 4. de fice c. 14. Theoph in c 5 Heb▪ Arnob in Psal. 109.  I could also press our adversaries and oppress then with the authority and multitude of father's who all acknowledge that Christ at his last supper offered a sacrifice of his own body and blood under the form of bread and wine, and that thereby he was a priest according to the order of Melchisedech: but this verity I have partly proved already in proving Christ to be an aeternal Priest according to the order of Melchisedech, partly I shall hereafter prove when in the last book upon occasion I shall demonstrate the real presence of Christ's body & blood in the sacrament of the Altar; & as for the father's authority, it were but lost labour to allege it for any proof of this verity, 
l. de abrog. Missa.  because Luther hath already debarred us from such proofs, and will tell us plainly that they are not to be credited in this matter, because they were but men. And Caluin also will tell me, 
l ● Instit c. ●●. §. 10.  that seeing that this supper is the supper of the lord, there is no reason why we should be moved with any authority of men or prescription of years. Wherefore let them carry away the bucklers, let them be credited before practise of the Church which as yet always offered sacrifice, before reason which telleth us that religion can not stand without a sacrifice, 
Mat. ●6. Luc 22. Mar. 4. 1. Cor. 11.  before the plain text of scripture which in plain words affirmeth that Christ gave his body and powered out his blood at his last supper for his disciples, which words can import no less than a sacrifice, before all fathers also because they were but men and our reformers as it seems are gods: let them gain the goal and get the victory in this controversy; what shall they game thereby? truly only this: that amongst them is no religion. For if they have no sacrifice, as they confess that they have not, and in deed they have not; & if sacrifice, as being the principal office of religion and proper unto God, as is proved, is so necessarily required, that without it regilgion can in no wise be supported; the conclusion to w●hich my former discourse driveth, must needs follow, to wit that t●e reformers have no religion, because no sacrifice, no reilgion: And seeing that in the Catholic and Roman Church only is found a sacrifice like to Melchisedechs', and correspondent to that of which Daniel and Malachi have foretold as the Sacrifice of the new law, and the same which Christ offered at his last supper, and commanded to be offered by his Apostles and their successors, it followeth that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, and that in it only is practised true faith and true religion.   

The third Chapter showeth how the reformers amongst them have rejected all the Sacraments, and so can have no religion, because Sacraments and religion ever go to together.  
IT is a common opinion amongst the holy fathers and divines that since the fall of Adam, Sacraments were always necessary, partly to declare man's duty towards God, and partly for man's own instruction. For first man being composed of soul and body, was to serve God not only with inward affections, but also by outward and visible signs. Secondly because he was to receive grace from Christ against the malady of sin into which he was fallen, he was also to profess his faith in Christ from whom this grace proceedeth, and to acknowledge it as descending from his passion, by visible signs and figures; such as Abel's sacrifice, and Circumcision were in the la of nature, and such as the Paschal lamb, and other sacraments were in the law of Moses, and such as baptism, and the sacrament of the Altar are in the law of grace. Thirdly because he had offended God by use of corporal things, it was convenient that by corporal and sensible Sacraments, and by the religious use of the same, he should restore God his honour which sin had taken from him, and make him satisfaction by such things as he had done him injury. For man's behalf also Sacraments since Adames sin were always requisite. 
Gen. 3.  For first, because man's sin proceeded of pride, and a desire to be like to God in knowledge of good and evil, it was convenient for man's humiliation that he should be set to School, 
Prou. 6.  to learn not only of the Ant, diligence, and of other brute beasts, other virtues, but also of these senseless creatures, such as Sacraments are, his faith and religion. Wherefore as the Paschall lamb brought the jew into a grateful remembrance of their delivery and passage from Egipte, and Circumcision did put them in mind of a spiritual Circumcision: 
Rom. 6.  So Baptism setteth before our eyes the burial and Resurrection of Christ. For when the infant is dipped into the water we think of Christ's burial, and when he is lifted up a new creature regenerated to a new life, we call to mind the resurrection, by which Christ is risen to a new and an immortal life. And in the Sacred eucharist which by the forms of bread representeth the body of Christ, and by the accidents of wine, the blood of Christ apart, 
Mat. 26.  we commemorate the death and Passion of Christ. Secondly as man by sin had preferred the creature before the Creator, so was it meet and convenient, that he should as it were beg grace and seek his salvation by the means of these sensibles signs and Sacraments, which are far inferior unto him in nature. Lastly as by abuse of corporal creatures he had wounded his soul by sin, so was it expedient that by use of the same, his diseases and spiritual sores should be recured: And so it was most requisite that Christ in the new law should institute sensible signs and Sacraments. 
●i. 19 cont. ●eust. c. 10.  And therefore saint Austin sayeth that as yet never any society could join in one religion and worship of God, but by the use of the same Sacraments. In which point the reformers aggree whith us, for they all avouch (Suenkfeldius only excepted and some other Libertines) that Sacraments are necessary, but in the number they vary not only from the Catholics but also from one another. The Catholic Church hath ever used seven sacraments, which are, Baptism, Confirmation, the Sacramen-of the Altar, Penance, Order, Marriage, and Extreme unction. 
●. p q. 65. a. ●.  Which number saint Thomas the divine proveth by a very pregnaunte reason, or rather similitude, which is betwixt the corporal & spiritual life of man. For in our corporal life, seven things are required to which are correspondent seven sacraments in the spiritual life of man. In a corporal life first is necessary generation, which giveth the first being and essence: and to this is answerable Baptism, which regenerateth us again unto a new life and spiritual being of a Christian, by which we are new creatures, borne of water & the Spirit, unto a new life. 
Io 1. l. de Bapt.  Wherefore Tertulian calleth Christians spiritual fishes, because though they have their corporal life from earth by carnal generation, yet their spiritual life and being, like fishes they receive from the water, by spiritual regeneration. Secondly in a corporal life is necessary augmentation by which the little infant (for all beginnings are little) waxeth, groweth, and gaineth due proportion, quantity and strength, by which he is able to exercise operations and actions belonging to corporal life, as to eat, drink, talk, walk, labour, to defend himself, and to assault his enemy; And to this is correspondent the Sacrament of Confirmation which perfiteth us in the spiritual life received in Baptism (which is the cause why some fathers say that before this Sacrament we are not perfect Christians) and gives us force to defend this our spiritual life by confessing our faith before the persecutor, which faith is the ground of spiritual life. Thirdly because this corporal life of ours fadeth & diminishethe continuaily (for every hour we lose some part of our substance, partly by reason of the conflict of the contrary elements which consume us whilst in us they strive one against another, partly by reason of the continual combat which is betwixt natural heat and moisture, which is as it were the tallow of our light and life) we stand in need of nurture and nutrition, which restores that substance which is daily lost, and so prolongeth our life: And to this in our spiritual life answereth the Sacrament of the Altar, 
Ioh 6.  which containing in it the body and blood of Christ (who calls himself living bread and sayeth that his flesh his truly meat & his blood truly drink) nourishethe the soul spiritually and conserveth our spiritual life here, 
Io. 6.  and prepareth us to an immortal life in heaven. Fourthly man having a mortal life subject to sickness and diseases which partly come by disorder in diet, partly by extrinsical operation of the Stars, air, and wether, to which our bodies are subject, partly do proceed from the complexion and constitution of man's body which is composed of contraries; it was necessary for preservation of corporal life that God should provide us of Physicians and corporal Physic, which restoreth us to health after sickness: In like manner our spiritual life which is grace, in this life being not so stable but that it may be lost many times by mortal sin; and our health being not as yet so confirmed, but that we may fall into as many diseases, as by our free will we may commit sins, it was not only expedient but also necessary, that Christ our spiritual Physician should provide us of Physic, and of a general salve, and medicine, against all the sores and maladies of our soul. And this is the Sacrament of Penance, which is a remedy against sin committed after baptism, and which by the Priest our spiritual Physician, is to be applied unto us. For to him as being successor unto the Apostles, Christ gave this power and authority when he said unto his Apostles: Whose sins you forgive are for given. 
Io. 20.  Wherefore saint Chrisostome sayeth that the Priests of the new law have power not only to give sentence whether we be infected with the lepry of sin or Noah (which authority only the old Pre●sts of the old law had concerning the corporal lepresie) but also to cure, 
l. ●. de savard.  cleanse, and purge this lepry. Fiftly when man is recured, often times there remain the relics of his disease, which keep him low a great while, and therefore he yet needeth Physic nor so much healing as confirming, and perfiting health, which consisteth in some confortatives or restauratives. The like happeneth unto man after that by the Sacrament of penance he is recured; for after that, he still hath a kind of weakness and infirmity, & evil habits and inclinations, yea little diseases also such as venial sins are: And therefore against these Relics of his disease, Christ hath provided him the Sacrament of Extreme unction, which is given at the hour of death to purge us clean from all relics of our diseases, to recure the corporal infirmity if it be expedient for our salvation, and to prepare us to a better health of the next life, whih is immortality. And these five things are requisite in a corporal and spiritual life, for every man in particular, but besides them, twoe things also are necessary for the community. The first is conjunction of man and woman, without which mankind can neither be propagated nor preserved, and to make this conjunction lawful, matrimony was ever necessary. And to this in the new law which is a la of grace, the Sacrament of matrimony answereth very fitly, which before Christ, was a civil contract but no Sacrament, as now it is. 
Ephes. 5.  For now as saint Paul sayeth, it is a great sacrament in that it signifieth the conjunction of Christ with his Church by Incarnation and grace, and giveth grace unto the married by which they may love one another as Christ did his Church, and bear the burdens of wedlock more easily. The second thing is constitution of Princes, governors, or magistrates to rule this humane society, which matrimony hath propagated. For if the confused multitude were left to itself, and had not some head to govern it, it would be like a ship without a Pilot, or a body without a head, which by mutual dissenssion and disorder would soon ruinated itself. To this is answerable the sacrament of order by which Bishops and Priests are ordained to minister sacraments, to offer sacrifice, to teach, preach, and instruct, and by laws and censures to govern this multitude, and to direct it in those things, which concern good life, spiritual peace, and religion here, and life everlasting hereafter. These seven Sacraments are those seven pillars, which as the wiseman sayeth, 
Prou. 9  wisdom itself christ jesus hath made to support the huge palace of his Church. And the seven times sprinkling of the blood of the calf, 
Levit. 4.  prefigured these seven sacraments, in which the blood of Christ is as it were seven times sprinkled, because it giveth them their force, virtue, and efficacy. 
●. Reg. 5.  Yea Naamans' seven washings were a figure of the same sacraments, in which the soul of man is seven times washed, and so freed from the lepresie of sin. But these are but congruences (sayeth our adversary) let us see the plain word of God for seven Sacraments else were are not to admit them. I grant that these are not plain demonstrations, because as Divines say matters of fact can not be demonstrated, but yet are they better arguments, than they can bring for their lesser number of sacraments. I could allege also fathers for every one of the Sacraments before named: but they will say that fathers are men. And are not our adversaries also men? yes say they, but we praeferre the word of God before men's traditions. But then I ask of them what express word of God they have against these men? The fathers avouch seven Sacraments, where read they in scripture that there are but twoe, or three? We have no such number expressly named (say they) but we gather by good consequence out of scripture that there are but twoe or three. Do you so? And did not the fathers out of scripture also deduce seven Sacraments? For although they never say that there are just seven, yet sometimes they name one, sometimes twoe, sometimes more, and many of them amongst them have given testimony for every one of the seven sacraments in particular, 
Scholastici in 4. dist. 2.  & none deny seven. Yea for these 500 years all the divines have defended seven sacraments, who also never mentioned this number as any new article of belief, but accepting it from their forefathers, sought by argument to defend it, & by scriptures also to confirm it. 
Con. Flor. in decreto. Trid. sess. 7. can. 1.  Yea the Counsels of Florence and Trent have avouched the same number, and thought themselves backed herein by authority of scripture. But they were all deceived sayeth our adversary. Were thy so? And how can you warrant us that you in denying seven sacraments are not deceived? If you say that you deduce your twoe or three Sacraments out of Scripture, they will say that they also out of Scripture deduce their seven? And so the question is not whether that Scriptures or fathers are to be believed, but whether the Church, councils and fathers, who prove seven Sacraments out of scripture, are to be credited in the exposition of Scripture, or rather your new biblists' who began to study but yester day, and never studied so many days as they have done days and nights, who also neither for gravity nor sanctity, neither for wit nor learning, were worthy to carry their books after them. But lest our adversary triumph that we can not prove our sacraments out of scripture I will bring Scriptures for every one of them. But first I must agree with them upon certain conditions. for first of all they must not exact of me to pro we that these seven are expressly called by the name of Sacrament: for so they can not prove their two or three sacraments, 
Ephes. 5.  because matrimony only (which they deny to be a sacrament) is expressly called a sacrament. Secondly they must not demand of me any place of Scripture which sayeth that there are seven Sacraments, because they can allege no such place which sayeth that there are not seven, or that there are but twoe or three. And the reason is because scripture useth to treat of many things, but not always to number them; For Scripture relateth Christ's miracles, and yet numbers them not, and it sets down many articles of faith, as the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and many others, yet never setteth down any certain number. They must be content then that I deduce by as good consequence out of Scripture that there are seven Sacraments, as they can gather their twoe or three Sacraments. And this I can do, and if this I do, I shall refute all their opinions of which some hold one, some twoe, some three, some four only, and all conspire in the denial of seven. But before I do this, I must suppose which they will grant, & cannot deny, unless they will deny all sacraments, that to prove seven sacraments out of Scripture, shallbe sufficient if I can find in scripture either in express terms, or by good deduction, an external rite, commandment or Institution, and a promise of grace in every one of the seven Sacraments aforenamed: for thus our adversaries prove their Sacraments, and because they imagine that some of these conditions requisite to a sacrament, are deficient in some of the seven, they deny them to be sacraments. 
●. 18.  Wherefore in the Apology of their confession these words are to be seen: If we call Sacraments, rites, which have a commandment from God, and to which is annexed a promise of grace, it is easy to judge which are properly sacraments. And a little after by this rule they gather that Baptism, the supper, and Penance are sacraments. To begin therefore with baptism; the external rite we gather out of the third of saint John, and the last of saint Matthewe, which is water and washing, the commandment and Institution is proved out of these words unless a man be regenerated of water and the holy spirit: 
Io. 3.  The promise of grace which is annexed to this Sacrament, the last chapter of saint Matthewe proposeth in those words: he who believeth and shallbe baptised, 
Mar. 16.  shallbe saved. And to go on with the Sacrament of the Altar, the external rite of this sacrament is bread and wine, or the forms of bread & wine: The institution and commandment is contained in those words: 
Mat. 26.1. Cor. 15.  Dee this in commemorat●n of me. The promise of grace we gather out of saint John he who eateth this bread shall live for ever. 
Io. ●.  In Confirmation also we find an external rite, which is imposition of hands, by which the Apostles, and Apostles and Bishops only, used after Baptism, to give the holy ghost: 
Act ● 19 Dionis. l. 〈◊〉. Hier●p. 3. c. 2▪ Tert l. de res. ●arnis. & lib, de baptis Cip l●. ep. 12● Aug. l 2. cont. lit Pre. ●. 〈◊〉  The promise of grace appeareth by the performance, because all they upon whom the Apostles laid their hands, received the holy ghost, and consequently grace. The institution and commandment we may well presume to have proceeded from Christ; because Apostles can not institute Sacraments, nor cause any external ceremony to give the holy ghost infallibly, and they would never have presumed such a thing, without a commandment from Christ their master. Wherefore saint Austin speaking of this sacrament sayeth in plain terms, 
Supr●●  that the Sacrament of Chrism, is to be numbered amongst the sacred signs, even as Baptism is. The same conditions of a sacrament, are easily to be found also in the sacrament of Confession: 
Io. ●●.  for Christ sayeth unto his Apostles and in them to all their successors: Whose sins you shall forgive, are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, are retained. In which words he gives authority to Priests as his under judges, to absolve from sins and to detain sins, and because the Priest can not absolve unless the penitent confess his sins, 
Ambiguity l. 1. de p●n ca 7. Aug l. 5 de Bapt c. 20.  and the penitent can not know that he is absolved, unless the Priest pronounce some audible sentence, we gather that the external rite of this sacrament is an audible absolution, and confession; the promise of grace is found also in this Sacrament most evidently; because Christ promiseth that whose sins the Priest forgiveth shallbe forgiven, and seeing that sins can not be forgiven without grace, if the priest can forgive sins, he can also give grace by this sacrament. The institution and commandment is contained in the same words because priests have commission from Christ to absolve from sins, & to hold and detain our sins, & consequently sinners who must reconcile themselves to God must do it by confession to the Priest, else can not he absolve, for no judge can give sentence without knowledge of the cause, & otherwise he can not be said to detain our sins, for if he detain our sins we can not be loosed but by his absolution, and seeing that all sinners must seek to free themselves from the bands and bondage of sin, they must come to the Priest, who only under God, bindeth, and looseth. In the Sacrament of Order we find also an external rite, to wit imposition of hands, 
1 Tim. 4, 2. Tim. 1.  which in Greek is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which as saint Hierome sayeth sig●●neth ordination of Clerks. 
in c ●8. Isa.  The commandment and institution we gather thus: 
Supra.  saint Paul bids Timothee not to neglect the grace which he had received by imposition of hands, wherefore saint Paul knew that infallibly that external rite gave grace: but it could not give grace if Christ had not instituted it to that end, and S. Paul would not have praesumed to have used it to that end if Christ had not commanded and instituted it, 
Aug l. ●. count. ep. Parn c 13. l ●. de bap c. 1.  ergo this external rite was instituted and commanded. The promise of grace we gatther by the performance, because saint Paul sayeth that Timothy had received grace by imposition of hands. 
Ephes. 5.  That matrimony also is a Sacrament saint Paul will witness, who because this seemed most unlike a sacrament or holy sign, calleth it a great Sacrament, because it signifieth the conjunction of Christ with his Church. As if he had said; Matrimony to a worldly eye may seem to have little sanctity or mystery in it, but I say that in this respect that it signifieth the Marriage of Christ with his Church, it is a sacrament and a great sacrament. The external rite of this sacrament is the contract which by words or signs is made betwixt man & wife, and therefore S. Chrisostome and S. Hierome upon this place affirm that saint Paul called this contract, a great Sacrament: The Institution we have in Christ's own words: 
Mat. 19  what God hath conjoined let not man separate: The promise of grace thus we gather: because Christ hath made this sacrament indissoluble, and consequently he must give grace by it tobeare the burden of perpetual wedlock easily, else had the law of matrimony pressed more heavily the necks of Christians than the law of the jew, because they in case of fornication might leave their old wife and take a new, and so shake of the burden. Secondly S. Paul sayeth that this Sacrament signifieth the Marriage of Christ with his Church, which Marriage was made not only by Incarnation but also by grace, and therefore the Church is called Christ's loving spouse, 
●. G●r. 10.  and saint Paul biddeth men to love their wives as Christ loved his Church; wherefore unless we will say that matrimony is an idle sign, we must say that it hath a promise of grace annexed, by which man and wife may love one another, and bear also more easily the heavy burden of Marriage. Wherefore saint Austin sayeth: in the marriages of Christians, 
l. de beno coniug c 19 vide c●●am cap. 24.  the sanctity of the Sacrament is of more value then the frutefullues of the womb. last of all, that Extreme unction is also a Sacrament, it is plain by the words of saint james: 
cap 5.  Is any sick amongst you? let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray upon him, anointing him with oil in the name of our Lord, and the prayer of faith shall save the sick-man, and our lord shall alleviate him, and if he be in sins they shallbe forgiven him. In which words who seethe not the external rite, to wit prayer, that is the form of words used in this Sacrament, and the anointing with oil. The promise is alleviation and forgiveness of sins, which are never remitted without grace. The institution and commandment is easily deduced: because an Apostle who may promulgate and minister Sacraments, but not institute them, would never have so bodily promised forgiveness of sins by an external rite and ceremony, had he not been assured that Christ had instituted it to that effect. Wherefore saint Bernard in the life of saint Malachias affirmeth that he anointed a woman knowing that in this Sacrament sins are forgiven. 
Berinthia in vita Ma! Inno entius ep 1. ad Decentium. c. ●.  And thus much for proof of seven Sacraments. Now let us see what sacraments the reformers have. Luther very peremptorily avoucheth that he must deny seven Sacraments and allow of three only for the time, 
l. de cap. Bab.  he sayeth for the time, because he was not sure how long he should remain in that mind. And what are those three Sacraments which for a time he is content to allow us; Baptism (sayeth he) penance, and bread. Zuinglius allows also of three, but not the same which his Master Luther admitteth, 
l. de vera & falsa rel c. de inatr. l. 4. Inst. c. 19 §. 31.  which are baptism, the supper, and matrimony. Caluin admitteth also three Sacraments, but not the same which Zuinglius grauntethe, Baptism, the Supper, and ordination. 
Mel. in locis.  Melancton is more liberal for he affordethe us four, to wit, Baptism, the supper, penance, and order. The softer Lutherans in their conventicle at lipsia, allowed of seven Sacraments, 
l. 20. hist. an. ●8.  for so Sledan the Historiographer, relateth. Out of this diversity of opinions I gather, first that they have amongst them denied almost all the sacraments and so can have no religion or a very graceless religion, because religion and sacraments ever went together. Secondly I gather that if any man will forsake the Catholic Church and her belief of seven Sacraments, that he hath no moral nor probable assurance of any Sacraments, for seeing that he hath no more reason to credit Luther when he said once that there was but one sacrament, 
l. de cap. Barnes. initio.  another time that there were but twoe Sacraments, 
in fine.  then when he admitted three for the time, he is not to credit him at all. And seeing that he can allege no more for himself than others (that is scripture interpreted as he pleaseth;) and they no more than he, no man can have just cause to believe any of them, and so if he leave the Catholic Church, he may doubt of all the Sacraments. Lastly seeing that the reformers can not bring express scripture for any of the Sacraments but Matrimony, which not with standing almost all of them deny, and seeing that by deduction (as I have declared) we may gather out of scripture as probably seven Sacraments, as one, if the reformers leave the authority of the Church and fathers, and trust only to their own wits in gathering by deduction, and consequence, their Sacraments out of scripture; then as one distrusteth another's deduction, so may he distrust his own, and so they have no certainty of any sacraments at all, & consequently have no probable assurance of their religion, because sacrametes and religion go together; which Luther himself will confess, 
l. de not. Eccl.  who affirmeth that consent in doctrine of the Sacraments, is a note of the true Church and religion.   

The fourth Chapter showeth of what little importance they make the Sacraments to be.  
THe reformers as by the  chapter appeareth, are very sparing in their Sacraments, some and the most of them not affording us above twoe or three; but these also they seem to grant us with an evil will, because they so detract from their dignity, and attribute so little unto them, that they might as well with Suenkfeldius have denied these also; because as good never a whit as never the better. For they deny with common voice that Sacraments give grace or effectuate any jot of sanctification in our souls. To what purpose them serve they, or what necessity was there of them? Melancthon sayeth that they serve for badges to distinguis he us from Infidels; 
l. de loc c. de signi●.  but for this effect we needed no sacraments at all, because the yellow cap of the jew in Rome, or some noble man's cognisance would have been more fitting for this purpose. For seeing that Baptism according to Melancthons' opinion giveth no character, after the child is washed in baptism, and the water dried up, what sign remaineth I pray you to distinguish a Christian from an infidel? And will not profession of our faith which is no sacrament, distinguish us better? 
l de vera. & falsa rel c de sacramentis.  Zuinglius maketh Sacraments no better than soldiers marks, by which they are admitted and distinguished, but this is refuted by the same argument by which we have rejected Melancthons' badges. 
l. captain. Bab. c. de bap. c. vl.  Luther grants a little more unto Sacraments; for he sayeth that Sacraments are external signs, ordained to no other purpose then to stir up faith which only justifieth, and therefore when he and his Lutherans sometimes say that sacraments do sanctify us, and that baptism doth regenerate us, they mean not as Catholics do that Sacraments immediately give us grace, but only that that they stir up faith which sanctifieth: wherefore sometimes they call sacraments pictures which put us in mind of Christ & his passion. But than it followeth that they who have pictures of Christ or his passion, or books of the same subject, stand in need of no sacraments, because these things are more apt to stir up faith than sacraments. Secondly Baptism is to no purpose in children, because it can not stir up their faith at all, who have no use of reason at all. This so presseth Luther that it had made him an Anabaptiste, had he not had a shift in store which also is a very poor one. 
l. count Cocle●●.  he sayeth therefore that infants at the time of baptism have use of reason, and that they understand what baptism signifieth, and so believe also in Christ? And this he proveth by the example of saint ●hon Baptist who rejoiced and acknowledged Christ in his mother's womb; 
Luc. 1.  but by the same argument he might have proved that all asses can speak, because Balaams' Ass by miracle once spoke to the Prophet. 
Num. 22.  for as it was a privilege that saint John had use of reason in his mother's womb, so was it that Balaams' Ass did speak, and therefore if this be a good argument: Saint john had use of reason when he was an infant Ergo all children have: this also is a good argument; Balaams' Ass could speak ergo all asses can speak. At least wise by this argument of Luther we May experience in him, What an ass can speak, and is not ashamed to utter. And truly if children at that age were as wise as Luther will make them, we must condemn them of heinous sacrilege, 
Aug ep. 57  who by their crying and by the resistance which such little onescan make, show how unwillingly and with what little respect they receive this sacrament. 
l 4. Inst c 14. §. 1.5.14.  Caluin sayeth that Sacraments are but Seals which outwardly sign the grace which we receive by the promises of God, and therefore he sayeth flatly that Sacraments give no grace, 
. §. 23.22.  and that the Sacraments of the new law are no better in this respect than were the Sacraments of the old la. 
1 Cor ●.  Yea he addeth that as saint Paul said that Circumcision is nothing, so he might have said, that baptism in this respect is nothing worth. And their reasons why they will give no virtue unto Sacraments are twoe especially. First say they if we grant that Sacraments give grace, then followeth it that we must put our trust in Sacraments, and seek for salvation else where, then at the hands of Christ, which can not but derogate much from the passion and person of Christ. But this reason seemeth to have little reason. For as the sick patient principally after God, puts his trust in his Physician, yet expecteth health also by the medicines which he prescribeth, & so puts his trust in the Physician as in the principal cause of his health, and in the medicines as in the instrumental causes, and yet doth no injury to the Physician, yea rather in allowing of his medicines doth him great honour: so may we put our hope and confidence principally in Christ as our spiritual Physician, and yet hope also for health by the means of his Sacraments as by his medicines and instrumental causes of spiritual health. Secondly they are of opinion as shallbe hereafter related and refuted, that only faith justifieth: wherefore they must consequently say that sacraments give no grace, for if they did give grace, they should also justify and sanctify, and so only faith should not justify. And so following this doctrine some of them say that Sacraments are only badges to make us known Christianes', others say they only stir up faith, others make them seals and signs of former justice, and all deny that they sanctify us. Against all these opinions might suffice that place of saint Paul, 
Gal. 4.  where to put a difference betwixt our Sacraments, and the old, he calleth the old naked elements that is bare figures and of no force nor virtue to give grace. but we want not many other places of Scripture which may also prove this verity. 
Io. ●.  Saint John sayeth that if a man be not regenerated of water and the holy ghost, he can not enter into heaven, ergo not only the holy ghost but water also regeneratethe, and consequently not only the holy ghost as a principal Agente, but also the water as an instrument, worketh grace in us by which we are regenerated. 
Io. 4.  The Sacrament of the altar Christ himself calleth true meat which giveth life and nourisheth. The Sacrament of Penance remitteth sins, 
Io. ●●.  because Christ giveth power to his Apostles and in them to their successors to remit sins by the sentence of absolution. 
1. Tim. 4. 2. Tim ●. c. 8.19.  And saint Paul will witness that Order giveth grace to Preestes, & the Acts of the Apostles avouch, that the Apostles when they confirmed the first Christians, 
Act. 8.19.  gave the holy ghost by imposition of hands. The like proofs I could bring and have before brought in the former chapter for the other Sacraments. But be it so that Sacraments give no grace, then doth it follow that they are to no purpose, because other things we have more fit to distinguish Christians from Infidels, and to stir up faith, which are by our adversaries opinion, the only effects of Sacraments, and so it followeth that if Sacraments give no grace, that they are of no virtue and altogether superfluous, and so as good it were to have no Sacraments as Sacraments, because as good never a whit as never the better, and no Sacraments no religion, because as before, Sacraments and religion ever went together.   

The fift Chapter showeth how in effect the reformers take away from us those few Sacraments which they seem to allow of.  
OUR Reformers are so liber all as to afford us twoe Sacraments, to wit Baptism and the Eucharist or the sacrament of the Altar which they call the Supper, for though some of them allow us also Order, and some, Penance, yet in these Sacraments as is before declared, they do not agree. But yet if we consider the estimation which they make of these twoe Sacraments which all of them allow us, we shall see that herein we are not much beholding unto them. And as concerning baptism, 
in Synop. Col. c. 17.  Luther is of opinion that no form of words is necessary, yea he thinketh it sufficient, if you baptise the child in the name of the lord. And being demanded once whether it was lawful to baptize in milk or bear, he answered that any liquor that is apt to bathe or wash, is sufficient; And so you see how he taketh a way the matter and form of baptism, or at least bringeth them both in doubt. And as touching the usual form of words Caluin jumpeth with him in the same opinion, 
l. 4. Inst. c. 17.  and addeth that such forms of words are mere magical charms and enchantments: Brentius sayeth that if the minister after that the Creed is read, say only, In this faith I was he thee depart in peace, it will serve well enough. 
in c. 26. Mat.  And Bucere denieth that words are necessary in the eucharist, and would say no doubt the same in baptism. The same Luther as is before related, is of opinion that actual faith even in children is necessary, and that Sacraments have no other effect then to stir up this faith, wherefore seeing that Baptism ca not stir up children's faith, because they have no knowledge of the signification of such mysteries, it must needs follow that to baptize children is but laterem lavare to wash a tile, and to lose labour. Caluin also is neither afraid nor a shamed to say, 
l. 4. Inst. c. 17. § 17.  that saint John Baptistes washing was as good as Christ's baptism. 
Act. 19  And yet saint Paul rebaptized them with Christ's baptism whom saint John before had baptised; which argued his baptism of insufficiency, and proveth Christ's baptism to be of more perfection, which suplyed that which was wanting in saint Ihons' baptism. The same Caluin sayeth that in necessity women may not baptize, 
§ 22.  and that if the child die without baptism, he may be saved if either he be predestinated, or be the child of faithful parents, yea he sayeth that few do mark how much harm that doctrine hath done, which teacheth that Baptism is necessary unto salvation. And if you urge him with those words of our Saviour unless a man be borne again of water and the holy ghost etc. 
Io 3.  he will father gloss the text most grossly, then yield unto you that baptism is necessary to salvation. 
l. ● Inst. c. 16 § 17.18.  The meaning is not (sayeth he) that material water is necessary, but this is the sense: unless a man be borne again of the holy ghost, which like water washeth, he can not enter into heaven. And so by this exposition water is not necessary, only the regeneration and washing of the spirit is necessary, and this Baptism according to Caluins' opinion, children may have without water, even in their mother's womb, if they be predestinate, or children of faithful parents. This is Caluins' doctrine, I say Caluins, for it is his singular opinion contrary to the opinion of the Church and all the ancient fathers and councils, yea contrary to scripture itself. For scripture tells us plainly that we are all born children of wrath, 
Ephes. 2. Rom. 5.  and that we all sinned in Adam and consequently are conceived and borne in original sin, 
job. 3.  wherefore job who was predestinate curseth the day of his nativity and night of his conception, 
Psal. ●●.  and David not only prede stinate but borne also of saithful parents confesseth that he is conceived in sins that is in original sin, for the he brew word signifieth sin in the singular number, which not with standing the Translator translated sins, because original sin is the root of all sins. 
Gen. 13.  And where as Caluin allegeth the blessing of God to Abrahame and all his seed and posterity, that serveth only to bewray his ignorance. For first after that God had made that promise, yet he commanded Circumcision and threatened that those that had it not, should peris he. And so although Caluin were of Abraham's seed and his parents also, yet do the it not follow that he shallbe partaker of that benediction without baptism. secondly that promise and benediction is now to be understood, carnally, or spiritually; if carnally, them are none but Iewes capable of the benediction, because they enly are the carnal children of Abrahame, and so Caluin hath no part in it at all. If spiritually then they only are partakers of the benediction, who as saint Paul sayette, 
Rem. ●.  do imitate the faith & works of Abrahame, 
Gal ●●  wherefore seeing that children even of faithful parents do in no wise imitate either Abrahames faith or works, they can not be partakers of his benediction until they be baptized, and so by receiving the Sacrament of faith the, do in some sort imitate Abrahames faith. And if Caluin say that at least by predestination children may be saved without baptism, he shall but discover herein how blockish a divine he is. For none are predestinare but by the passion and merits of Christ, 
Io. ●.  which first are applied by baptism and not without baptism at least in desire, & therefore Christ threateneth damnation to all that are not baptized. Wherefore although all children that are predestinate shallbe saved, yet not without baptism, and they which die without baptism as by Christ's own sentence they are excluded from heaven, so are they not predestinate. But let us see more of Caluins' doctrine, not tofollow it, but to beware of it, not to embrace, 
Suprae. 16.  it but to detest it. The same man affirmeth that the reprobate, or the children of infidels not predestinate, are not to be baptised least baptism be contaminated and be made a false seal, because (sayeth he (baptism is a seal of former justice, and therefore if defiled infidels be baptized, the water is contaminated, 
Ibid.  and the seal is falsified. He addeth that the children of the faithful or the predestinate, need not baptism as a necessary means unto salvation, and therefore if they die without it they may be saved. Yet (sayeth he) baptism is not to be contemned, because it is commanded as a ceremony to incorporate us members of the Church. Now put all this together, to wit that Baptism is no better than saint Ihons' washing, that it is not necessary for the predestinate, o● children of faithful parents, because they may be saved without it, and that it can not be ministered unto the children of infidels, lest it be contaminated; & it followeth evidently that Baptism is not necessary, yea that it is superfluous, because to the children of the faithful and the predestinate is not necessary, and to the children of the faithless (not with standing that Christ's bad his Apostles to baptize all nations which then were infidels) it is not be given; 
Mat. vl●.  then is there no necessary use of baptism, because it serveth to no other purpose, but to scale former justice, which sealing is not necessary, because salvation is sure enough without it, or to bring us into the Church by an external ceremony, which is altogether need less, because if it be omitted, children if they be of faithful parents, or predestinate are sanctified in their mother's womb, and so before God are members of the Church and capable of salvation, before, and without baptism. And thus baptism is gone. Nowv as concerning the blessed Sacrament of the Altar, 
l. ●onf. Lusheri.  Luther seemeth very liberal in this point, affirming that Christ's body is really and substantially in this Sacrament not by consecration but by ubiquity. For he is of opinion that as Christ's body is united to the divinity, so it is in every place where the divinity is, and consequently in the bread and wine. But whilst Luther thinketh to fill our mouths in giving us bread with Christ's flesh, he taketh away all true eating of Christ's body, and drinking of his blood. For eating is a conveighaunce of meat from the mouth into the stomach, and therefore if Christ's body be every where with the divinity, it can not be eaten, because is was before in the stomach and every where, and so can not be conveyghed by eating into the stomach, because conveighaunce importeth a motion of a thing to some place where before it was not, Caluine giveth us a bare figure and an empty sign, avouching that Christ hath given us a figure of his body, which in substance is but common bread, yet because Christ hath made it a sign and figure of his body, it is called Christ's body, as Caesar's image is called Caesar. Which opinion of Caluine maketh Christ a niggard, and his sacrament of little or no importance. For Christ although he made a great show of a magnifical supper, yet according to Caluin, his supper was not only inferior to Assuerus his banquet, but also to the meanest that ever was. This supper Christ would have to be praefigured by the heavenly manna, 
Exod 16.  where with he fed the jew in the desert, 
Io 6 Sap 6. Psal. 77.  by the paschal lamb which the jew were commanded to eat in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt, 
Exod. 12.  
Gen. 14.  by Melchisedeches' sacrifice and diverse others: he would also have it foretold by Malachi the Prophet, 
Mal. 2.  saying that a clean oblation shallbe offered unto him every where; by the patriarch jacob who foretold that the Messias should wash his stole, 
Gen. 49.  that is his human nature with which the divinity was clothed in the blood of grapes, that is in his own blood which he called the blood of grapes, because it was to be vealed under the forms of wine; 
6 Mac.  which is called in scripture the blood of the grape. He would invite also all the world to this banquer, exhorting them to eat the bread and to drink the wine which he hath mingled for them, 
Prou. 9  he made this banquet also a little before his death for a farewell to his loving and beloved spouse the Church, and yet after all this ostentation, after this solemn invitation, notwithstanding also that the time of farewell, the dignity of Christ's person, and the pre-eminence of the new law above the old, required a most sumptuous banquet, when the supper was prepared, it proved but bread and wine, and after all this boast, the guests who were bidden, had no roast at all, but only an odour and smell of good cheer, that is a bare sign and figure of Christ's body and blood. 
Io. 6.  And whereas Christ promised a twelue-monethe before that he would give them another manner of meat and more excellent than manna was; for (sayeth he) notwithstanding that your forefathers were fed with manna yet they died, but who soever eateth of the bread which I shall give, shall live for ever; yet if we believe Caluin, he performed nothing less. For if Christ's bread be but common bread in substance, and only a sign of Christ's flesh which is the true food, 
Ibidem.  than was not only manna, but the Paschal lamb also far more precious than the bread of Christ. For the Paschall lamb was flesh, Christ's banquet is but bread and wine in substance, and as this is a figure of Christ, so was that and a more apt figure. Manna also was made by angels hands, and in the air, Christ's bread or rather calvin's cake, was moulded and baked by men's hands, and in no better place, than the backhowse; manna had all tastes and delights, 
Sap. ●.  Christ's bread if it be no better than Caluin maketh it, hath but one taste and that not very delicate. And as Caluin sayeth that Christ's bread is a sign and figure of Christ, so was manna also, as Christ's bread stirs up faith because it is a sign, so was manna as fit for that purpose, because it was a sign, and as good a sign, because it signified the same thing, which giveth perfection unto both signs. Wherefore unless this Sacrament contain Christ's body & blood in another manner than the sign containeth the thing which it signifieth, Christ's banquet is no better, yea it is not so good as manna was, and so the verity shallbe inferior to the figure. But Caluin sayeth that this Sacrament is not a bare figure but such as bringeth with it the body and blood of Christ: and if he did mean as he speaketh, I would not dispute with him but would shake hands with him as with a Catholic. 
l. 4. Inst. c 1●. §. 11.  These are his words: I say therefore that in the mystery of the Supper by the signs of bread and wine, Christ is truly delivered, yea and his body and his blood. And a little before those words he giveth the reason; 
§. 10.  because (sayeth he) Christ's words: This is my body, are so plain, that unless a man will call God a decever, he can never be so bold as to say that he setteth before us an empty sign. And yet again he repeateth this his assertion: 
§. 32.  In his holy Supper Christ commands me under the signs of bread and wine to eat his body and drink his blood, and I nothing doubt but that both he doth truly deliver them, and I do receive them. And lest you should think that he talketh only of eating & receiving Christ spiritually by faith, 
Eodem cap.. §. 6.  he hath prevented you by saying, that he meaneth really, 
Hom. 60.61. ad pop.  and he allegeth Saint Chrysostome who sayeth that Christ mingles his substance with ours in this Sacrament not only by faith, but also in very deed. What think you now of this man? is he not a Catholic? do the he not really avouch the real presence? But if you unmask this wily fellow, you shall see a wolf under a sheeps skin. for the same Caluin in the same chapter in plain words tells you, 
Sect. 20.21.22  that Christ is not really in this Sacrament nor any where else out of heaven, but yet (sayeth he) the bread & wine is called the body and blood of Christ by a figure, which calleth the sign by the name of the thing itself, as the Ark or rock, may be called Christ because it was a figure of Christ. What meaneth he then when he sayeth that with the sign we receive the body and blood of Christ verily? His meaning is, 
Sect. 16.  that although Christ's substance be as far from this Sacrament, as heaven is from earth, yet because this sign stirreth up faith, and faith apprehendeth Christ, by this sign, and with it we receive the body & blood of Christ. But here Caluin seemeth to go from himself, 
Supra.  for as you have hard he said before that we eat not Christ only by faith, but also in very deed; yet to save himself from contradiction, he hath devised a subtle distinction: 
Sect. 5.  I grant (sayeth he) that there be that in one word define, that to eat the body of Christ, and to drink his blood, is nothing else but to believe in Christ, but I say that the flesh of Christ is eaten by believing, because by faith it is made ours. So that Caluin is of opinion that this Sacrament is but a sign and containeth not really the body and blood of Christ, but yet because this sign stirreth up faith which apprehendeth Christ's body, we receive verily the body & blood of Christ with this sign, and by it, because faith apprehending Christ, uniteth him unto us and maketh him verily our own. This is Caluins' opinion. Out of which let us take as granted that Christ's body and blood is not really contained in the Sacrament, and consequently that this sacrament is no better yea nor so good as manna was, which was as good a sign of Christ, as this Sacrament is, if this contain not Christ really, & was as apt to stir up faith. Secondly let us prove that if Christ be not really in this Sacrament, that faith can not really unite him unto us, and consequently that in, and by this Sacrament, we can in no wise really be partakers of Christ's body, and blood. For proof whereof I demand of Calnin how faith can really conjoin us with Christ? either this faith really plucketh Christ out of heaven, which Caluin neither can say, because faith is but an apprehension, neither will say, because he sayeth that Christ's body since his ascension was never out of heaven: or else it really lifteth us up to heaven, which is against experience, and so can not really unite Christ unto us, because it neither bringeth him really unto us, nor us unto him. And so in believing in Christ by faith which is but an apprehension of the understanding, we do no more really eat the body of Christ, then doth the hungry man his dinner, when he apprehendeth, and desireth it, but can not have it. And so calvin's boast is greater than his roast, and his promise is more ample than his performance, and Christ's supper is but a bare sign, and no roast at all, but only a savour and sign of good cheer, and our eating is no real eating, but only a naked apprehension. And seeing that preaching, and pictures, can better stir up faith then bread and wine can do, this Sacrament of Christ is altogether needless, because as good never a whit as never the better. And so my intended conclusion followeth to wit, that amongst our reformers there is no religion because, five or six, of seven Sacraments they have quite taken away, and the other in which all of them aggree, to wit baptism and the Eucharist, they have so disgraced and defaced, that they are to little purpose, and so they have no religion, because no Sacraments no religion.   

The sixth Chapter showeth that according to their doctrine they can have no prayer, and consequently no religion.  
ONe of the greatest benefits which God hath bestowed on man is prayer, by which man hath access unto God, and the creature is admitted unto the speech of his Creator, 
in Psal. 75.  and flesh & blood converseth familiarly with the divinity; for as saint Austin sayeth, when we read scriptures which are the word of God, than god speaketh to us, but when we occupy ourselves in prayer, them do we speak familiarly unto God; which is so great a thing that Angels dare not do it, without covering their faces with their immortal wings, blushing to appear before such Majesty, and trembling to speak to a Prince so mighty. Prayer is honourable to God, honourable also and profitable to ourselves, it is honourable to God because it is an act of religion, by which we prostrate even our souls and spirits unto God, acknowledging him the supreme essence, fountain, and author of all goodness, and ourselves his needy and naked creatures, who have nothing of ourselves, yea nothing not from him, not so much as our ourselves, because he gave us ourselves, & being for nothing, and of nothing. It is honourable to ourselves, first because it aequalizeth us with Angels making us Choristers of their chapel, where by prayer we join voices with them, in praising God as they do, and praying unto him. Secondly because it procureth familiar conversation with God, which is so honourable a thing, and so raiseth us in state and dignity, as almost nothing more. 
Orat. 1. de orando D●●.  For as saint Chrisostome sayeth if it be such an honour to converse familiarly with Caesar, that such men though other wise never so base and poor, can not whilst they are in this credit with him, be any more either base or poor: how can they who in prayer converse daily and familiarly with the divine majesty, be of base or low condition? It is profitable also unto us because by it we obtain at gods hands what is expedient for us. For god is the Source and fountain of all goodness, and perfection, sufficient of himself, and with in him self, needing not in any thing the help of any. 
Psal. 15.  To whom when we have given all the praises, and offered all the Hecatombs and sacrifices in the world, we have not abettered his state or his person, and when we have reviled him and blasphemed him to the uttermost of our malice, we have not made him a jot the worse; but man in that he is a creature is dependant of his Creator, no less, yea more, than the rivers of the fountain, the branches of the tree, or the son beams of the Son: who of himself hath nothing, yea is nothing, but is to live by begging & praying. And well he may so obtain those things which he wanteth. For if any Prince would promise his subject, that what soever he asketh he should obtain, might not that subject think that Prince very bountiful, and himself a most happy subject? Thus God dealeth with us; 
Mat. 7.  he bids us ask and we shall have; and seeing that God is so faithful that he can as soon deny himself as go from his word, because his word is himself, he can not, not perform, what soever he promiseth: and seeing that prayer is the thing by which man obtaineth at God his hand what soever he justly desirethe, what an inestimable gem and precious pearl is prayer, which procureth our hearts desires in all things, because it is the price of all? And if we some times pray, and obtain not, either it is because our prayer is not such as it ought to be, or that the thing which we pray for is not convenient for us. For if he that prayeth, believeth that God can help him, and hopethe also that he will help him, if he himself who prayeth, or he for whom he prayeth, be not odious to god by reason of sin, If he pray with humility, and without a doubting mind, if he adjoin to his prayer attention, to his attention, devotion, and to both, perseverance, and if the thing for which he prayeth be necessary or expedient, (for other wise God is a greater benefactor in denying then granting our petition) then certainly, such is the virtue of prayer, that what we ask we have, and what we pray for, we obtain. Prayer certs is better than the Philosopher's stone, although that were of that virtue which it is feigned to be of: for that as fools have feigned was able to turn all into gold, but prayer turneth all to our good be it gold orsiluer, riches or poverty, health or sickness, grace or glory. Yea it is better than Fortunatus' hat is feigned to have been, because that procured all wishes good or bad indifferently, but prayer then only obtaineth what we wish for, when our wishes are expedient or convenient for us. Besides this unspeakable virtue which prayer hath, to obtain what we ask for, it satisfieth for sin also, especially when it is joined with alms deeds and fasting, 
To●. 1●.  which are the wings of prayer, by which it soreth speedily even to the throne of God: it meriteth glory as other good works do, and that more especially also, in that it is a prayer; it giveth us great confidence also if it be frequent and usual, because as before I have said, prayer causeth familiarity, and familiarity imboldenethe, & boldness breedeth confidence. It is a great motive also unto humility, and peradventure you shall not find a greater, because it puts us always in mind that we are but beggars. And lastly (if I may say so of prayers commodities which are without end) it makes us to fall out of love with this deceitful world, because it makes us to converse in heaven, and admitteth us to familiarity with God and his Angels. In the Church unchangeable prayer is used, because the Saints and Angels pray to God for us, In the Church militaunte prayer also is practised, as shallbe proved, only in hell and hellish Synagogues prayer is abandoned. Wherefore in the la of nature, as they used sacrifice, so did they also practise prayer, and although Enos be called the first of them who by prayer, most especially and frequently called upon God, yet no doubt Adame and Eve amongst other acts of penance, omitted not prayer as one of the best dispositions unto reconciliation with allmighnie God. Abel their son also as he was religious in his Sacrifices so was he not slothful in prayer. Noê also taught his posterity prayer, 
Gen. 2●.  Abrahame was much given to prayer, Isaac his son in his diligence in prayer and meditation also declared himself whorthilie to have been the son of such a father. 
Psal. 11●.  David prayed seven times a day, and rose at mid night often times, shortening his sleep to lengthen his prayer: 
Dan. ●.  and Daniel three times a day, called upon his God. By prayer Moses made the Sea to divide itself and procured victory to the Israelits so long as in prayer he held up his hands, 
Exod. 1●.  yea by prayer he obtained pardon often times for the people and bound as it were the hands of the omnipotent. 
1. Reg. 1.  By prayer Anne the wife of Helcane obtained Samuel, 
4. Reg. 2●. T●b. 12. 1. Reg. 1●.  Ezechias by prayer prolonged his life fifteen years, Tobias by the same exercise was restored to his sight, Elias after a great drought by prayer obtained rain. 
Mat. 1●. Luc. ●.  In the new law Christ our high Priest prayed oftentimes all the night long, 
Mat. 2●.  and a little before his departure out of this world, he prayed three times in the garden; yea he him self taught us the prayer which in English we call our lords prayer. 
Mat. 6.  And no soener was Christ departed, but his Apostles and disciples assembled themselves together, & in prayer attended the holy ghosts descension. 
Act. ●●.  Saint Peter and saint John ascended into the temple to pray. 
Act 1. Clem. Rom.  Saint Peter furrowed his face with the streams of tears, which trickled yea streamed from his eyes in prayer. Saint Bartholomew is said to have prayed on his knees an hundred times in the day and as often in the night. Saint james his knees by prayer became as hard as camels knees. Whose examples the first Christians after the Apostles, 
Bar to. 2. an 100 l. 10 ep 97● Tert Apol. c. 2.  following, met together daily at prayer, even before they had Churches, in so much that Trajan the Emperor was feign to forbid such flocking together. And Pliny Perfect of this Emperor, informed him of the assemblies of Christianes' to prayer before day. To be brief, the Ecclesiastical histories are full of the Churches, and monasteries which have been builded for prayer, and speak almost of nothing else but of Christianes' prayer, 
Hiero. ep. ad Eustoch. Athan. l. de virg. Basi 37 Cl●m. l. ●. Const. c. 4.  Masses, liturgies, canonical hours, as nocturnes, lauds, the prime hour of prayer, third, sixth, ninth hour, Evensong, and complete; yea so is prayer divided in divers Churches and monasteries, 
Tho. Wald. to. ● desacra●●ntal. c. 24.  that in every vigil of the night in one place or other, pravers and praises aresonge unto God; yea seeing that our Church is dispersed through out the world, & that the hour which is to one country, one, to another is twoe, to another, is three a clock, and so forth, there is no hour in the day or night in which prayer is not exercised publicly in the Church. So that well may the Catholic Church be called the house of God, 
Isa 16. Luc 1●.  because it is the house prayer. Now let us see how like unto this house of God, which is the house of prayer, our Reformers Synagogue is. In most places they have no prayer at all on working days, and on holy days (which now they have brought to a less number because they celebrate few Saints days) they spend all the time that they are in the Church, in yelling out a Geneva Psalm, to which they add a Sermon; and generally in Ingland now adays, you shall find few that use any private prayer in their Chambers, but as dogs go to their Kennel, so they go to bed, and so they rise in the morning, shaking or stretching themselves, but never bowing knee, Noah nor opening mouth nor heart in prayer. In so much that when one of our Catholic Priests in his Inn in London was found by the chamberlain Kneeling by his bed side to say his devotions, proclamation was by and by made, that he was a Priest and a traitor (for then in Ingland they were all one) as if their own consciences had accused them, that prayer is no sign of a man of their religion. And truly this contempt of prayer amongst them is not to be blamed by their preachers, because it is most conformable to their doctrine. For first they say that prayer meriteth no reward at God's hands. 
Cal. l. ●. Inst. c. ●0. Melanct. tit. de procat.  Secondly they avouch that it can not make the least satisfaction, for the least sin in the world. Why then should we wear our hose out in the knees with praying, if prayer neither satisfieth, nor meriteth any thing at God's hands? Truly if we wear our hose out in the Knees, we lose more than we get, 
See the seventh book.  if this doctrine be true. Thirdly Caluine avoucheth that the justifying faith is a firm & full assurance that we are elect and just by Christ's justice; & seeing that faith is a necessary disposition to prayer (for as saint Paul sayeth) how shall they pray and call upon him, 
R●m. 1●.  in whom they believe not?) it followeth that before we settle ourselves to prayer, we must firmly believe that we are just & that our sins are forgiven. Whence I gather these conclusions. The first is that in vain the faithful man prayeth for justification or remission of sins, because before he prayeth, his sins are forgiven, and he is justified, or else his full assured faith is a lying, and deceitful faith. The second is that no faithful man can pray for justification or remission of sins, unless he will be an infidel and forsake his faith by praying. For he is bound by Caluin to believe assuredly that his sins are forgiven, because this is his justifying faith, and if he stagger or doubt he is an infidel, because he hath not the right faith; whence it followeth that in praying for remission of sins, he loseth faith, because in that he prayeth, he showeth that he hath not that assurance; for who will pray for that which he is assured of already? Or if he pray it is an argument that either he thinks that he hath not the thing for which he prayeth, or that he doubteth thereof, or that he feareth, of which every one is sufficient to make a man an infidel in Caluins' opinion, because they despoil him of that assured faith. The third conclusion is, that he cannot pray at all for remission of sins, would he never so feign even with loss of his faith. For as if I be in good health, & assure myself of the same, I can not pray for health, though I may pray for continuance of it, so if before I pray, I be assured that my sins be forgiven, though I may with lips, yet with heart I can not pray that God would forgive me; & if I could, in vain should I pray for that, which I have already. The fourth is that no faithful man can pray for eternal bliss in heaven: for if before I pray I must have faith (as saint Paul sayeth that I must) and if faith be a full assurance that I am not only just, 
Rom. 1●.  but also elected, and chosen to be one of the Citizens of heaven, I can not with heart pray that I may be received into heaven. Well I may pray that speedily God will take me to him, and his glory, because I am not sure when shall be the time at which he will call me, but to pray absolutely to be admitted unto God his glory and Kingdom, I can not possibly, because by Caluins' faith, I am already assured of this kingdom & glory. 
I●●. ●.  But Caluin will object against us that saint james bids us to pray in faith and confidence, nothing doubting or staggering. I grant him therefore that we must believe that God can help, & hope also that he will help, and so we must not pray doubting, but yet we may and must pray betwixt fear and hope. For if I hope not, but despair of obtaining, I have no cause to pray, and if I doubt of God's mercy, I do him injury, yet if I be cock sure, I can not pray, and therefore I must fear the worst and yet pray for the best: 
●ee the soventh book.  Moreover Caluin telleth us that the justifying faith assurethe us not only of present, but also of future justice, that is, acertainethe us not only that we are now at this present just, but also that we shall persever unto the end: whence it followeth that we can not pray to God for perseverance in grace, or that he will so assist us, that no tentation of the devil, insurrection of the flesh, or allurement of the world, give us the foil or fall; 
See the same book.  because by faith we are assured of our standing. He avoucheth also that sin hath so weakened man's nature that he can not with all the grace that Christ hath given, resist any tentation. Whence ensueth also, that he can not pray, not to be led into tentation, that is not to be permitted to yield to any tentation, because he is assured by Caluins' doctrine, that he cannot but yield if he once be tempted. And although these two last points seem contradictory, because the one sayeth that a faithful man can not fall from justice, the other sayeth that he can not but yield to sin and tentation, which is the fall of the soul: yet Caluin hath away to avoid this contradiction, because (saith he) though a faithful man yield to tentation, yet God imputes not it as sin, because he is faithful. and so sayeth he a faithful man is assured that he can not fall; and then say I that I am assured that he can not pray that he may stand, and not fall by tentation. He is also of opinion that the best works of a just man are so unclean that they are mortal sins: which if it be true; then can we not pray that God's name be hallowed and sanctified in us, that is in our works, because neither in us, nor in our actions, 
All these opinions of Caluin see in the seventh book.  is any one jot of true sanctity. He denieth also free will & all voluntary cooperation with God's will and grace, And so we can not pray that gods will be done in us, for such a prayer argueth some dependence of gods will on ours, which so would have us to do well, as it will leave it in our power to resist the will and grace of God. And if Caluin object those words of Scripture: 
Rom. 9  who resisteth his will? I will answer that no man can resist gods will when he will absolutely have it fulfilled and independently of us, but yet we may resist gods will when he willeth dependently of our wills, 
Mat. 2●.  else would he not have said how often would I have gathered thee as a hen gatherethe her chickens together, and thou wouldst not. Now put all this together and you shall see that the Pater noster or our lords prayer, must be cut out of the Catechism, and blotted out of the gospel: for although that Christ taught his Apostles that prayer, yet according to Caluins' doctrine no faithful man, that is, no Caluiniste, can in conscience recite that prayer. And so either Christ is deceived or Caluin teacheth false doctrine; but Caluin will swear that he teacheth the truth and that he is sure that a faithful man is sure of his justice, remission of sins, and election; and therefore you know what followeth. But lest you think that I do injury to Caluin in affirming that he taketh a way the lords prayer, as unlawful and quite repugnant to Christian faith, I will prove it manifestly and by no other argument, then by calling to mind that which is already said. In the first petition of our lords prayer we desire that his name be hallowed in us, which is a prayer clean opposite to Caluins' opinion, which teacheth that there is no sanctity in us or our works, and so holding his opinion, we must omit the first petition. In the second, we pray that his Kingdom may come and that we may be received into it, which petition we can not make from our heart, if before we pray, we are assured by faith, that we are elect and predestinate to that kingdom. The third is that Gods will be done in earth as in heaven: which petition also according to Caluin is frivolous, for if we cooperate not with God by our free will, in vain do we pray that his will be done in earth, because that argueth some dependence of Gods will one ours, as is before demonstrated. The fourth is that God would give us our daily bread that is all those benefits either of Nature or Grace which are belonging either to soul or body: which petition also can not stand with Caluinsfaithe; because if faith assurethe me of present and future justice, yea and of glory also, than I can not pray either for justification, or remission of sins, or perseverance in grace, or final glory, because no man can pray for that which he is assured of as is before declared. And so we can only pray for health, riches, fair wether, or such like corporal benefits; yea if it be true that all these things come by fatal necessity (as Caluin must say that they do) because he affirmeth that God's foresight and decree imposeth a necessity upon all things, 
l. 1. Inst. c 2●. §. ●.  and consequently on these things also because he foreseethe and decreethe these things no less than he doth men's actions; then in vain also do we pray for health, or wealth, or fair weather, because these things of necessity shalbe● or not be whether we will or Noah, and as vain it is to pray for health or wealth, as for the son rising which of necessity riseth whether we pray or Noah. The fift petition demandeth that God would forgive us our trespasses & offences, which as is before proved we can not pray for, without loss of our faith, which, if it be right, assureth us without all doubt that thy are already forgiven. The sixth & seventh are that God would not permit us to fall into temptation, and by tentation, but rather will deliver us from all evil especially of sin: which petition also is vain yea impossible if Caluins' faith be true. For if by faith I be assured of future justice, I can not pray with heart that God will assist me that I fall not from justice, because I am (as Caluin sayeth) full well assured that I shall not fall, and so I can no more pray, that I may not fall by tentation, then that the heavens may not fall upon me, being as sure of the one, as the other. And so the lords prayer can not stand if Caluins' doctrine do go for currant; and seeing that this prayer was made by Christ, if we will follow Caluin we must forsake Christ, & for as much as this prayer containeth in a brief somme, and method, all things which we are to prayer for, if sin and other evils befall us of necessity (as Caluin sayeth they do) in vain do we pray to be delivered from all evil. And if by Caluins' doctrine we can not say this prayer, which is a Compendium of all prayers and petitions, we can not pray at all, and so no prayer can be used in Caluins' Church according to Caluins' doctrine. Wherefore I marvel not that so little prayer is practised amongst them, I wonder not that thy build no new churches, but pull down the old which were builded for prayer; rather I marvel that they sometimes exhort men to prayer seeing that their doctrine & prayer can not stand together. And I like better of Luther and of his plain dealing in this matter, for he having once pronounced sentence that faith only justifieth, affirmeth consequently that prayer is not necessary, 
Ser de Dom. 4. Aduent. edit. an. 1525.  these a● his words: Every heart how much the more perfect knowledge (he meaneth the knowledge of faith) it hath of itself, so much more ready is the way for God unto it, although in the mean time a man should drink nothing but malmsey and walk upon roses, and never pray one word. And so if Caluine would deal as plainly as Luther doth, as he aggregeth with him in the premises to wit that only faith sufficeth, so should he also agree with him in the conclusion, which is, that prayer is not necessary. But it is time now that I also come to my conclusion, to wit that amongst our reformers is no religion, because by their doctrine they can have no prayer: which conclusion if the premises be called to mind doth follow easily, and evidently. Because prayer in all laws was ever necessary to the upholding of religion, as I have proved by induction, and the reason also is, because it is one of the most principal acts of religion, by which we acknowledge God's sovereignty, and our own baseness and beggary; but amongst the reformers no prayer, not so much as the lords prayer, can be used, as is also proved, ergo amongst them there is no religion: because prayer and religion must of necessity go together: And so our reformers have no service to use in their Churches but only a sermon; which also I see not to what purpose it is amongst them if men have no free will; for then as well may their ministers preach to a flock of sheep as to a Church full of faithful people, because these have no more free will (if we believe Caluin) than they have, and so are as absurdly exhorted by a Sermon as they. And if Caluin would laugh at a Minister that should persuade sheep and asses to abstinence, labour, & such like, we may laugh at him and his ministers, when by a laboured sermon, they go about to persuade us to virtue, or to dissuade us from vice, who have no more free will to follow such persuasions, than sheep or Asses have.    

THE fift BOOK  
CONTAINETH ASURVEY of their doctrine concerning God, in which it is declared, how impious the Reformers are, and how injurious their doctrine is unto the divine Majesty.  

The first Chapter showeth how they make God the author of all sin and wickedness.  
SImon Magus the first Archeretike of fame, was the first man that ever durst open his mouth to the utterance of this blasphemy, but he had no sooner broken the ice, but by and by Florinus, Blastus, 
Tert. l praesc. ●. 31.  Cerdom, Martion, and Manicheus, with open mouth, and common voice, applauded to his blasphemy, aggreing with him that God is the author of all sin and evil. Yet because this doctrine seemed to offensive to Christian ears, they devised a kind of moderation, to make their doctrine more sailable. Wherefore Simon Magus said that God was the author of sin, not that he immediately moveth us to sin, but because he hath given us such a nature which of necessity sinneth, and so by a certain consequence, he said God was the author of sin. Cerdon and Manicheus also were ashamed to father sin upon the good God, & therefore they affirmed, that there were twoe Gods, the one good, the other bad, and that the evil God was the author of sin, and evil. But Caluin and his followers (as it is easier to add then to invent) have far exceeded and excelled them in malice, avouching that God immediately and directly, is the author of all wickedness, which Simon Magus durst not say, yea that the good & the only God worketh & effectuateth this malice, which those ancient heretics were ashamed to say. These are Caluins words or rather blasphemies: 
l. 4. Inst. c. 28. §. 6.  God not only foreseeth man's sins, but also hath created him of determinate purpose to that end. And a little after; God not only permitteth sin but willeth it. 
§. ●.  yea sayeth he: It is not likely that man by himself by the only permission of God, without any ordinance, brought destruction to himself. 
l. ●. c 1●. §. 4.  And therefore, when Absalon abused his father's wives, it was Gods will (sayeth he) so to punish David's adultery, 
l. 2. s. 4. §. 2. ● 4. Ibidem.  and God commanded him to do it to that end. Again he saith that God blindethe and hardnethe the reprobate not only by not illuminating them nor mollifying them by grace, but because he stirreth up their wills: And not only suffers sinners, but boweth and turneth their hearts. So that according to Caluins' opinion God not only foreseeth that we will sin, but ordeynethe us to sin, not only permitteth us to sin, but willeth and commandeth, yea boweth our hearts to sin. And lest you should think, that at least God hath no part in those sins, to which the Devil and wicked men provoke us, or that the injuries, which they do us, proceed not at all from him, he avoucheth that Satan & evil men in these evil offices, are but the instruments of God, and that God sets them on, and is the principal agent and author. 
l. 1. ●. 17. §. ●.  I grant (sayeth he) that thieves and murderers and other evil doers are the instruments of God's providence, 
c. 17. §. 2.3. ●. 2.6.4. sect;. 2  whom the Lord doth use to execute those judgements which he hath himself determined. Yea he sayeth that what our enemy mischievously do the against us, he doth as suffered and sent by God; And he is not afraid to say that God armeth as well the devil as all wicked men against us: And that Sennacherib was an axe and instrument of God directed and driven by his hand to cut. 
Sect. 6.  Finally sayeth he: 
Sect. 6.  the unclean spirit is called the spirit of the Lord, because he answereth his commandment and power, being rather his instrument in doing, than an author of himself. By which speeches who seethe not that Caluin maketh God a greater Patron of sin, than the devil, because the devil is but his instrument and minister in all the evil he doth, God is the principal Agent and commander. The like saying hath Melancthon, who avoucheth that David's adultery and judas treachery, were as much the work of God, as saint Paul's vocation. 
In c. 1. ep. Rom.  The like hath Beza & divers others whose blasphemies I list no more to relate, than Christian ears desire to hear. Much more honourably doth the Catholic Church speak of the divine majesty, which averreth that God is the author of the pain of sin, because in that is no sin, but justice, but not of the malice of sin: which confesseth that God permitteth all sins that are, because he will not force men's liberty, yea suffereth also the devil and his ministers to provoke us to sin, but neither willeth, nor commandeth them so to do; which teacheth also that God is so the author of an essence and goodness, that he concurreth with our will to the substance of the act of sin, but hath no part in the malice of the sin: And where scripture seemeth to say that God is the author of evil or commandeth evil men, or sayeth that the wicked are his instruments; the Catholic Church sayeth that this is to be understood by permission only. Yea this Church teacheth us that God never useth evil persons as instruments moved by him to sin, but only permit the them to sin, and after wards useth this their sin, either to the just punishment of others, or to the glory of his servants, whose patience by evil persons is tried, or to a greater repentance of the sinner, who being fallen into such abominination, thinketh of a greater repentance, as Mary Magdalen did. And certainly it is as evident that God can not be the author of sin, as that he can not but be God. For first of all God is of a good nature and goodness itself, and therefore as evil fruits can not proceed from a good tree, because they are contrary to the good nature and disposition of the tree, 
Mat. 7.  so from so good a nature as God is, who is summum bonum and goodness itself, we must not look for so evil fruits as sins are, in which is no goodness at all; and therefore to say that he is the author of sin, is to make him an evil God, and of a malicious nature, as Cerdon and Manicheus did, and so no God at all: for God and good must of necessity go together. Secondly sin is as opposite to God's goodness as falsehood is to his verity, but God can not lie nor authorize a lie because he is the first verttie, ergo he can not be the author of sin, because he is the chiefest goodness: or if such goodness can do evil, such verity and truth may lie, and so the scriptures lose their credit: For if God can lie peradventure in scriptures he hath lied; and so to say that God can be the author of sin, is to say consequently that he may be the author of lies, which is to open the gap to Atheists and misprisets of scriptures. For as well may be move the writers of Scriptures to write lies, as he may move them to sin and wickedness. Thirdly if God be author of sin, 
Psal. 11●.  then by his will which is the cause of all things he worketh sin, which if it be so, then sin is according to gods will, & so no sin: because that which is according to the Princes will, can neither displease his will, nor impeach his commandment, and consequently is neither offence nor prevarication, four every error is a swerving from the rule which is prescribed, and therefore the artificer banguereth when he worketh not according to his platform, or idea, and the singer erreth when he singeth not according to his Gammot, and the writer scribleth, when he follows not his example, and the subject transgresseth, when he lives not according to the Prince's law, and the moral man offendeth, when he followeth not reason, which is the lore, rule, and square of all his actions. And because all these workers are distinct from their rule, they may swerver from the same and so commit a fault in their art, but God (sayeth saint Thomas) is to himself a rule, 
Th. 1. p. q. 63. ●●. 1. in Cor.  and followeth no other law or rule then his aeternal reason and law, which is himself, and so can no more sin (which is to swerver from his reason) them he can deny himself, or go from himself. Lastly sin is an aversion from God, and an offence which highly displeaseth him, and so by consequence, if god could sin; he should as it were turn himself from himself, and be averted from himself, and displeased with himself, and so he should be so far from endewing others with felicity, that he should want it himself, and live in a continual misery, as he must needs do, who hath an aversion from himself, and is displeased with himself. But Caluin sayeth that although God be the author of sin, yet he is no sinner, because he worketh it for a good end. 
l. 2. s. 4. sect. 2  As for example (sayeth he) of the same sin which the Chaldees committed in unjustly afflicting job, God was the author, Satan was the author, and the will of man was the author; but because God was the author of it for 2 good end, to wit, for the exercising of jobs patience, he sinned not in that action, but did well and justly in the same action in which they sinned, and transgressed. But this will not serve for an answer, for first if god may be the author of sin to exercise the patience of the just, or to chastise the wicked, he may also be the author of a lie, for the punishment of sinners, and so Scriptures must lose their credit, because peradventure they are lies which God hath put in the tongue and pen of Monyses, the Prophets, and the evangelists for a good end; that is to show his justice in the jew & gentiles, whom, for a just punishment he hath seduced, and deceived with a false written la, because they would not follow the la of nature, which he had graven in their hearts. Secondly to make a sinner, it is sufficient if he be the author of sin, and▪ good end or intention will not excuse when the means and election are nought. Wherefore if God be the author of sin he sinneth whatsoever his intention be, and if a good intention may excuse, it may also excuse us, and so a man may steal to help his parents, or to offer Sacrifice and oblations of his thefts unto God, and yet god condemneth such offerings and saint Paul sayeth plainly that evil things are not to be done that good thereby may happen. 
Rom. ●.  But now it is more than time to draw necro our conclusion, and therefore out of Caluins' blasphemies I will deduce these illations. The first is that such men if they had lived in Plato's time (who by la banished those that would father their sins upon God) they should not have been permitted to have lived in any city or common wealth; 
l. 2. de Repub.  and if that learned jew Philo had been appointed their judge, 
l. de. Agricult.  he would have adjudged them to be stoned to death. Secondly I gather hereby that these men are not led by the Spirit of God, and that their doctrine can not be of God, because it is unlikely, yea impossible, that the spirit of god should dictate such doctrine, which is so injurious to God and so opposite to his goodness; rather this doctrine is like to proceed from him who said that he would be a lying spirit in the mouths of all false Prophets. 
1 Reg 22. 2. Para. 1●.  Thirdly I gather what little credit is to be given unto them in other matters, who banger so grossly in this opinion which the light of reason argueth of falsity, and is as evidently false, as is is evident that there is a God.   

The second Chapter showeth how their doctrine maketh God not only a sinner, but also the only sinner.  
IT is the opinion of John Caluin and of the Caluinists also, 
l 3. Inst. c. 21. §. 4.  that God is not only the author of sin, but that his will and power also doth so domineer over the will of a sinner, that he can not resist God's motion, which eggeth and urgeth him to sin, but must of necessity sin. Yea, 
Sect. 〈◊〉.  I (saith Caluin) will not doubt to confess, simply with Austin (he would have said without Austin because he hath no such thing in the place, 
l de Gen. ad lit. c. 15.  which he allegeth) that the will of God is a necessity of things, and that what he willeth, must of necessity come to pass. Since than God willeth all our sins, as Caluin hath in the former chapter confessed, it followeth that we of necessity sin, because Gods will is a necessity of things. He affirm the also (as is already declared in the last chapter) that the devil in soliciting and tempting us, is the instrument of God, and the executor of his will & determination, and consequently it is God's will that he should tempt us, and seeing that as Caluin sayeth his will is a necessity of things, it followeth also that the devil of necessity, tempteth us. Out of which premises followeth evidently my intended conclusion, to wit that God only is the sinner. For if God so forcebly moveth the devil by his own will and ordinance that the devil can not chose but tempt us, and if the will of God do the so overrule and press the will of man, that when God will have him sin (as Caluin sayeth he will) he can not resist, it must needs follow that God is the only sinner, and that man & the devil are to be excused. For as Caluin affirmeth God is the author of all sins, and consequently is a sinner, because his good intention can not excuse him, as is all ready proved in the last chapter, neither can he allege necessity for an excuse, because there is none which boweth his will by force, but he himself most frankly and freely willeth and worketh our sins: and seeing that the devil as God's instrument is violently, or at least necessarily moved to tempt us, he can not sin, because he can not justly be blamed, for that which he could not avoid; and for as much as man's will is compelled to sin by the overruling will of God, he also for the same reason can not sin, and so God is the only sinner, and man and the devil are innocentes, worthily to be excused, and in no wise to be counted sinners.   

The third Chapter showeth how their doctrine which affirmeth that the commandments are impossible, maketh God an unreasonable Prince.  
IT is a common Maxim amongst the ghospellers that the commandments of God are impossible, and that a man can as soon touch the heavens with his finger, as fulfil the least commandment. Luther sayeth that when the Scripture useth these words or the like: 
l. de serve arbitrio.  If thou wilt keep the commandments; or keep the commandments, God dealeth with us as the mother dallieth with her infant. For as she calleth her child to her, not in earnest, because she knoweth well that he can not walk, but to make him to see his own imbecility, and to show his desire to ●ome unto her, so when God bids us keep the commandments, according to Luther, he jesteth with us, and bids us observe the law, not because that he thinks we are able, but because he will make us know our own impotency, and yet to show our good will and desire to keep his laws, if we were able. But this is a strange jesting and dallying, wnen god will command us things impossible to make us know our insufficiency, and yet will damn us eternally if we observe not these his commandments. 
l. 2. Inst. c. 7. fact. 2.  Caluin sayeth plainly that the law is impossible, and therefore was never fulfiled by any; and he gives a reason, because (saith he) it is hindered by the ordinance and decree of God that it shall not be fulfilled. And if you object that christ said unto the young man: 
Mat. 19 Calu in har. ibidem.  If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments: Caluin will answer that Christ said so, not that he thought he could keep them, but because he would repress his pride in proposing a thing which he could not do. As if Caluin should vaunt that he is a new Apostle, and one should say unto him to repress his vanity, if thou be'st an Apostle, work I pray thee some miracles, for proof of thy Apostleship, which he can not do. And if you again reply that the young man said that her had observed the commandments from his you the. Caluin will be so bold as to tell him that he lied, 
Ibidem.  which Christ himself would not say, though he knew better or at least as well as Caluin, how truly he avouched that he had kept the commandments: 
c. 1●,  and saint Mark sayeth that our Saviour loved him which is at least some argument that Caluin rather lieth in saying that he lied, because Christ loveth neither lies nor liars: 
Sap. 18.  Because to God is odious the impious and his impiety. I could here use many arguments to prove that the commandments are not impossible. And might begin with the old testament and prove that the jew were able to keep the commandments, and consequently that much more Christians are able, because that on them God best●oweth his grace more liberally. For after that God had given unto that people the law and Decalogue he in diverse places telleth them that he commandeth them not to do more than they are able. 
Exod. 20.  
Deut. 30.  The commandment (sayeth God) which this day I command thee is not above thee not placed far from thee, not in heaven not beyond sea, that thou mayest pretend an excuse: but my speech is very near thee, in thy mouth, in thy heart that thou mayest do it. To this subscribeth our Saviour Christ the lawegiver of the new law, 
Mat. 19  telling us that if we will enter into life, we must keep the commandments. And lest we should excuse ourselves by a pretence that his commandments are impossible, 
Mat. 11.  he preventeth us saying, that his yoke is sweet and his burden light. And saint John his loving and beloved disciple avoucheth that his commandments are not heavy. 
l. Io. 5.  Now if the commandments be impossible then are they as far out of our reach and power, as if they were in heaven or beyond sea, then are they not near us, then are they not so at hand, that God may say, that they are in our mouth, and heart to do and full fill them: For what is farther of than that which is clean out of our reach and power? If the law be impossible, than it is not a light burden: For what can be more heavy, then that which we can not bear at all. But to me this only argument seemeth sufficient to stop Caluins' mouth; that if the commandment were impossible, God should be the most unreasonable Prince in the world. Nether can that suffice which Caluin allegeth, to wit that although the commandments be impossible, yet God had reason to command them to show us our infirmity, & to provoke us to show our willing mind to do what we can: this I say will not suffice to excuse God from being unreasonble, because at least in that over plum which exceedeth our force and power, he showeth himself unreasonable. as for example if the King would command a cripple to follow him, though thereby he might make him see his own impotency and give him occasion by his motion of his body, to declare his desire to follow, yet if he command him in deed to follow, he is very unreasonable. Or if Caluin will say that God will seem only to command us, because he would make us to see our imbecility and to do what we can at least to show our desire; then followeth it that there are no commandments, because God doth not verily command them but seemeth only to command, to make us see our own infirmity, and to show our desire. Or if Caluin will not be so bold as to deny all commandments, then must he grant that God is unreasonable, in commanding us more than we are able to perform. As for example if the master would command his servant not only to run but also to fly on his arraund, and for a shorter cut to leap over a river, over which he can scarcely see; would you not think him unreasonable and quite beside himself? The like doth almighty God if we believe Caluin; for he commandeth us to love him above all and our neighbour as ourselves, he bids us not to steal, not to kill, yea not to covet our neighbour's wife or goods, which is as if he should command us to fly or to move mountains, or to leap over the sea: because these things in Caluins' opinion, are no more impossible, then are the commaundamentes, and therefore in these commandments God showeth himself as unreasonable, as he should do in the other. Yea if once we grant that god may command impossibilities; then is there no reason why brute bealles may not be commanded not to kill one another, not to live of spoil, to fast sums times, and to honour yea love their Creator; because God commandeth man to do these things, who yet is no more able to do than, than beasts are. And if beasts could speak & would tell almighty God that he hath no reason to command them to do these things because they are not in their power, then may men make the same exception, and accuse their Creator as a Prince most unreasonable, who commandeth them to execute those laws which they no more can fulfil then oxen, and asses can do. And if god will condemn them as guilty of offence, for not obeying his commandment, they may answer with saint Christostome: 
Hom 16 in ep. Heb.  Si impotentes nos fecit & deinde imperat, culpa eius est: If he hath made us impotent (as Caluin sayeth he hath because by his decree and ordinance he hindereth us) or at least if we be already by Adam's sin made impotent, 
Supra l. 2. Instis. c. 7. sect. 5.  And yet he commandeth us, the fault is his, and not ours if we transgress his commandment.   

The fourth Chapter showeth how the former doctrine maketh God a most cruel tyrant.  
CErdon that infamous heretic, 
Ex Ter. l. prasc c. 51.  and divers of his followers, reading in the old testament, what severity in that law God had sometimes used, and not considering that the enormity of sin is such that it deserveth not only temporal, but also eternal death, and imagining that such severity could not proceed from the good God, who is goodness itself (as though God were merciful, and not just also) they affirmed that there were twoe gods the one good, the other cruel the one the author of the old testament, the other of the new, the one Creator only of superior substances, the other of this inferior world. Against these men saint Austin written a book entitled. Against the adversary of the law and Prophets, in which he proveth that in the new law God hath showed as great severity, to wit in the death of Ananias, 
Act. 3. Mat. 2● & 5.  & Saphita, in and threatening eternal danation (which passeth all temporal punishment) against those that shall not give alms, and not only against those that shall kill, but also against them that shallbe angry, and shall call contumeliously their brother fool. Whence it followeth that one and the self same god is severe and sweet, just and merciful. And good reason, for as the king must not only be gentle but just also, and therefore the Egyptians Hierogliffe of a king, was a Bee, whose honey signifieth the sweetness which ought to be in a Prince, and his sting importeth, that he must be with all severe, and just also, where mercy and fair means will not serve: so God the king of kings offereth his grace most frankly & bestoweth benefits on us bountifully, and many times winketh at our defaults & expecteth patiently amendment and repentance; but if we contemn his benefits and abuse his patience, then doth he lay it on severely upon us, because as he is good so is he just, & must be just, else were he not God. And although some, respecting only the shortness of the pleasure which they have taken in sin, think it hard to be punished eternally for a momentaire pleasure; yet if they consider what it is to offend so great a Majesty, and how when we sin, we do in affection desire eternally to persever in that sin, and pleasure or commodity, 
l. 4. dial. c. 44.  we will think with saint Gregoire that it is good reason that the sinner who hath sinned in his eternity, should be punished in god's eternity? Yea if Princes for a momentary transgression may justly punish their subjects with perpetual exile and death itself which of itself is perpetual, because a resurrection is not natural, why may not God justly punish us with eternal pains, for our temporal faults, especially seeing that they which die in mortal sin, never think of repentance, but remain perpetually obstinate in their malice, and so may justly be perpetually punished, because sin as long as it remains, is worthy pain, and therefore if it remain for ever it may justly be punished for ever and ever? But although it be so that there are not twoe gods as Cerdon said, the one meek and mild, the other cruel and Churlish; and although the self same God, and the good and the onlygod, be & must be, because he is God, merciful and just, and consequently gentle & severe without all cruelty, because justice is no cruelty; yet if we will avouch Luther's and Caluins' doctrine for currant, we must of necessity confess, that God is the cruelest tyrant that ever was or can be. For they affirm as we have related in the former Chapter, that God commandeth us things altogetherimpossible; and they can not deny but that for transgressing these commandments, the wicked are tormented in hell perpetually (for Christ bids them go accursed in to everlasting fire, 
Mat. 2●.  who clothed him not in his members when he was in them naked, & who fed him not when in them he was hungry) which if it be so, then is God most cruel and barbarous. Luther once well perceived, that this consequence, to wit that God is cruel, followed evidently out of their permises, to wit that the commandments are impossible; & what think you doth he answer to it, or how doth he free gods goodness from cruelty? he saith that by light of nature and grace, 
l. de servo arbitrio.  it is unsoluble, how God damneth him who can not choose but sin and transgress, and (here sayeth he) both the light of nature and grace do tell us, that the fault is in God only and not in miserable man: but by the light of glory (which the blessed enjoy) God justice herein is manifested, which now seemeth injustice. 
Ibidem.  Yea (sayeth he) God's justice in this point is now incomprehensible. So that Luther sayeth that now neither by light of nature nor of grace, that is faith, (for so I think is his meaning in his obscure distinction) we can excuse God from injustice and cruelty, who commandeth things impossible which we can not perform, and yet punisheth us eternally. And truly if it be so as they say, that God commandeth impossibilities and yet punisheth and damneth the transgressors, than not only by the light of nature, and grace, but by all light and reason in the world, it is manifest that god is most cruel and tyrannical. For if that master be cruel and barbarous, who commandeth his servant that is lame to run or leap, and because he doth not so, beateth him black and blue, breaketh his bones, & in fine killeth him also, them certes God himself who commands us impossibilities, and for not doing them, doth not only punish us temporally, but also damneth us perpetually, and condemneth us to those aeternal flames of hell where we shall ever feel the pangs of death and yet never die, where we shall always be dying and never dead, where after million of years of imprisonment & torment, we shallbe never a whit the nearer an end of our misery; he I say must needs be most cruel and inhuman, more barbarous then any Scythian, and so tyrannical, that in respect of him, Nero, Domitian, and Dionysius, were no tyrants but Clement Princes.   

The fift chapter maketh it manifest, that the reformers pull the true God out of his throne, and place an Idol in the same, of their own imagination.  
TErtulian that ancient and learned writer when he was best disposed (that is when he was a Catholic and a writer against heretics, in defence of the Catholic and Roman Church and religion) was of opinion that all heresies are idolatries, and all heretics idolaters. Which opinion though at the first blush, it may seem to rigorous, yea erroneous, yet if it be well weighed and considered, it may very truly be verified of the heretics of his time, and of this our unhappy age, and in some sort of all heretics what soever. But before we come to the proof of this his opinion, we will first set it down in his own words, which are these: 
l. praesc. c. 4●.  Ether they feign another God to the Creator (as the Marcionistes did) or if they confess the only Creator, they declare him otherwise then in deed he is; so every error concerning God is in some fort a variation of a kind of idolatry. By which appeareth, that in his opinion every Heresy is a kind of idolatry. And truly there is no Heresy but either directly or indirectly it denieth the true God. For either it denieth some thing in God, and then it directly denieth God, or it denieth some thing which pertaineth unto God, and so indirectly and by a certain consequeace, it taketh away the true God. As for example the Marcionites affirmed that God was cruel and that the good God was not Creator of this inferior world which containeth the four elements and all those things which are compounded of them; and seeing that there is no such God who is cruel, or who is not the Creator of the whole world, they denied the true God and confessed an Idol of their own imagination. In like manner the Arians denied that God the father had a Son coequal and consubstantial unto him, and seeing that the true god is one god, which is the father the son and the holy ghost, the Arrians in denying the second person to be God coequal with the father, denied the true God, because the true God is not distinct in nature from God the son, and they adored an Idol of their own imagination, that is a God who hath no son, or not coequal and consubstantial unto him. 
Ser. 3. & 4. sent. Arianos  Wherefore Athanasius complaineth that the Arrians under pretence of religion, had brought in idolatry, and abandoned baptism which can not be equally ministered in the name of the father the son and the holy ghost, if those three persons be not all equal in deity and dignity. Other heretics there were which held no error concerning the divinity or any divine person, and so could not be said, directly to deny the true God, but yet indirectly they denied him by denying some verity which hath a connexion with him. As for example, Novatianus, who said that there was no remedy against sin after baptism, directly only denied the Sacrament of penance, but yet indirectly and by a certain consequence he denied God, because it is not a true God which will not accept of penance after baptism, and therefore seeing that he confessed only such a god, he adored a false God, and so was an idolater. Nestorius also who said that in Christ beside the divine person, there was also an humane person, and consequently twoe persons, directly denied the unity of Christ's person, and affirmed twoe persons in Christ; but indirectly he denied Christ and consequently God, because Christ is God and man in one & the self same person, and therefore he adoring a Christ consisting of twoe persons, adored a false Christ, and consequently a false God, and so was an idolater. 
22. q. 2. a. 2. add 〈◊〉 l. 9 m●t.  S. Thomas gives the reason of this: because (sayeth he, and he allegeth Aristotle for more authority) God is a thing infinite in perfection, yet so simple and devoid of composition, that in him is no distinction but of persons, which also are one indivisible God, and therefore as an indivisible point is altogether touched, or not at all, because it hath no parts, so our understanding either rightly attaineth unto the knowledge of God, or not at all, and if it err in one perfection of God it erreth in all, because all is one. And so if an heretic denieth any thing of god, he denieth all. But although all heretics are in some fort idolaters, yet I will not deny but that there is a difference betwixt them, and pagans. For these men deny the true God in express terms and adore some creature for God, as jupiter, or the planets, or some such like, but heretics only affirm some thing of God, which implieth a denial of the true God, yet they profess in words, religion unto the true God. Now therefore if all heretics be in some fort idolaters; then certainly the heretics of this time are especially idolaters. For they (as is already proved) say that God is the author of sin, and their doctrine implieth that he is of a bad nature, unreasonable, & cruel, wherefore seeing that there is no such God, they confess and adore not a true God but an idol of their own conceit and fiction, and so are idolaters, who pull the true God, which is a good God, not cruel, nor unreasonable, nor no author of sin, out of his throne, and place therein a false God, and an idol of their imagination.    

THE sixth BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SVRuey of their doctrine concerning princes authority and their laws, in which it is proved, that the doctrine of the reformers despoileth princes of authority, and bringeth their laws in contempt.  

The first Chapter showeth how in that they say that no Prince can bind a man in conscience to obey his law and commandment, they despoil princes of authority and superiority and give the subjects good leave to rebel and revolt.  
WE see by experience, 
Eccl. 13.  and holy scripture teacheth, that like of nature do easily fort themselves together. Sheep do flock to one fold, dear meet together in one park, bees in one swarm, and fowls of one feather do fly together, and fishes of one squame, do swim together. And the reason may be, because like of nature are like in conditions, and so do more easily symbolise and agree together; and one alone hath no help but of himself, and therefore for mutual aid and comfort, they accompany themselves with others. But amongst all living creatures man especially is civil and compaignable, and therefore is called animal sociabile a sociable creature. For first man is apt to language, by which he desireth to express his mind to others, and therefore if he will have any use of his tongue and faculty of speaking, he must live in company. Secondly man especially is disciplinable, desirous to learn of others, and by discoursing and devising, to know what other men think and conceive. For as he is willing to impart his own conceits, so is he desirous to be partaker of the knowledge and cogitation of others, which his desire he can not satisfy unless he repair to company. Thirdly man only amongst all living creatures is apt to friendship, that is to love and to be beloved, and because love comes by sight, and sure friendship is not gotten but by much familiarity, and long experience, he can not attain to this also, but in company and society. Lastly man only is borne naked, where as other living creatures garments, do grow with them, destitute of all weapons of defence, where as the bull hath his horn, the buck his head, the horse his hoof, the bore his tusk, and every one hath one weapon or other to defend and offend. Wherefore seeing that man is so destitute, that being alone be wanteth many commodities, he must fly to society where one helpeth another, and because every country beareth not all things, one country must trasique with another & hence proceedeth society. Wherefore no soener were men created, but they assembled themselves together, first in families, then in towns and cities, and after wards as their number increased, in common weals and Kingdoms. And although the Poets feign that Orpheus was the first who with his melodious tunes called men together, yet certain it is that even from the beginning men lived in society, induced thereunto by no other Orpheus, than Nature, and God the author of nature. Now as the natural body of man as it is framed by God & nature of divers members united together, so it hath from God and Nature authority to defend itself against all that shall unjustly seek to molest or injury the same: so the civil body of a society of men be it a common wealth or King doom receiveth from God and nature authority and power to conserve itself in society, and to withstand all foreinets who shall injuriously invade it. For if nature did not give men authority to defend & present themselves in society, in vain, yea not in vain only, but also perniciously and to man's great prejudice, had God & nature inclined him to live in company. Wherefore all societies lawfully assembled, have from God and nature, power and authority to rule and defend themselves, and because the confused multitude is unfit to govern, because it is bellua multorum capitum, a beast of many heads, wavering, inconstaunte, and mutinous (yea hard it is for the multitude to meet always together to determine upon state-matters, & when they are met they can as hardly agree) i● was necessary that this multitude should have authority, to choose some head o● heads, by which this civil body might be directed, 
Rom. 13. Vic●relec de potest civili.  ruled, and defended. Henc● it is that divines yea scriptures affirm, that all lawful authority which Princes and superiors have over others, is o● God; because it proceedeth from the people's election, who as they were by God and nature inclined to live in society, so they received authority to rule, and defend themselves, which because they could not do by themselves, they received also authority from God and nature to appoint rulers and governors; & so all lawful governors are appointed by God, by means of election, and therefore they who resist them, resist gods ordinance. 
Rom 〈◊〉.  And although now for the most part Princes come to autohritie by succession, yet the origin also of this proceedeth from election, because the people, to avoided inconveniences which might happen, if after the death of their Prince, they should be to seek for another, were content when they did choose the first Prince, that all his lawful heirs, should after him succeed in the same authority. Now if the Prince have not authority to command, and bind his subjects also in conscience to obey his commandment, then in vain is he head and Prince of the people, because if he command and yet the subjects may choose whether they will obey or not, than no order can be established, and as good no head at all as such a head. Wherefore holy Scripture telleth us that Princes may command and subjects in conscience must obey, 
Mat. 22.  and give to Caesar what is dewoo Caesar. 
Rom 13.  Saint Paul sayeth that every soul must be subject to higher powers: & he gives the reason, because sayeth he there is no power but of God, and therefore they who resist power, resist God's ordinance and purchase to themselves damnation. 
Ibide●●.  Yea sayeth he: of necessity be you subject not only for displeasure, but also for conscience. And after wards he bids us to pay tributes, and subsidies unto Princes, because they are the ministers of God appointed by him. Saint Peter also bids us to be subject to every humane creature for God, 
●. Pet. 2.  that is to every magistrate and temporal superior; whom he callethhumaine creatures, because their authority is in temporal and human things. And therefore he addeth as it were to specify what he meaneth by the human creature: whether it be to the King, as excelling, or to Rulers sent from him etc. Yea he bids us obey not only gentle and courtesou masters, but even those also which are hard to please. And this obedience these Apostles command us to give to Princesalthough they be infidels, if otherwise they be lawful, for when the Apostles written, there were no Christian Princes, and faith is not necessary to jurisdiction, neither is authority lost by the only loss of faith. But yet this must be understood, when Princes command with in the limits and sphere of their jurisdiction; for otherwise, if they command us any thing against God or conscience, we must answer them as the Apostles answered the jew, 
Act. 4.  we must obey God before men. Because Princes are appointed by God, and so can command nothing, which is against God or if they do, we must obey the supreme Prince before the in●eriour, and the King before his viceroy. 
E● E●s●●.  Wherefore saint Policarpe although he refused to obey the Proconsul who commanded him to do that which was against God, religion, and conscience, yet he said: We are taught to give to principalities and Potestates ordained by God, that honour which is due to them, and not hurtful to us. This being so then that Princes have authority to command, and to bind also in conscience, to obedience, and that from God whose ministers they are and by whom (as the wiseman sayeth) Kings do reign and the la makers decern what is just; 
Pr●●. 〈◊〉:  it remaineth that we examine our adversaries doctrine in this point, that we may see what they give to superiority, authority, & higher powers. But peradventure some will think that this is a vain examination, because they are so far from suspicion of detracting from Prince's authority, that rather they seem to grant them to much. Luther affirmeth that Bishops and Prelates are subject to the Emperor even in Ecclesiastical causes, 
A●. 〈◊〉.  and that Ecclesiastical jurisdiction is derived from the temporal. And when Catholics in Ingland refuse to go to the Church, because profession is made there of a religion contrary to theirs, the reformers urge nothing so much as that we must obey Princes, and their injunctions. But this they do only when Ecclesiastical power calleth them to an account, or when the Prince's laws do favorize their doctrine: for than they flatter Princes, and prefer their authority before the Church: not because in hat they reverence their authority, but because by their power, they would establish their heresy. So Arius by the means of Eusebius bishop of Nicomedia, first in sinuated himself to Constantia the Sifter of Constantine the great: 
Ruff. l. 1. ●. 11.  and by him he getteth audience of Constantine himself, and by flattery and dissimulation be procureth a commandment from the Emperor to Athanasius, to receive him again into the Church. And afterwards he crept by this means into credit with Constantius the Ariane Emperor and son to Constantine, by whom he banished Catholic bishops, called many counsels, and propagated his heresy, in so much that saint Hierome sayeth Ari●● ut orbem deciperet, 
Ep. ad Ctesiph  forerem principis ante decepit Arius that he might deceive the world first deceived the sister of the Prince. They curried favour also with lulian th' Apostata and they offered their service, 
theod. l. 4. c. 3.  to jovinian the Emperor, but he would none of their proffered service, knowing that they used to ●latter Princes for promotion of their heresies. So that one Themistius a Philosopher was want to say, that heretics adore the Purple, not God, & are as mutable as Euripus. Luther backed also by the Duke of Saxony contemned the Pope's legate who sought to reclaim him, and preached confidently those heresies which otherwise he durst not have done, and persevered obstinately in them also which other wise peradventure he would not have done. 
Prafat. In●●. ad Reg. Ga●.  Caluin sought by a flattering epistle to procure favour and credit with the king of France, and our English Protestauntes by the favour of our late Prince whose gifts of nature they abused, got credit amongst the people, & graced heresy with her royal crown. And to win this favour they will not stick to flatter Princes, yea to adore them and to give them higher Titles and greater power, than ever God bestowed upon them. In king Edward's time when the state favoured them, they acknowledged him Supreme head not only in temporal but also in Ecclesiastical causes. In Queen Mary's time because that Princesl was not for them, then women could not govern; but in Queen Elizabeth's time because they had insinuated themselves into her Protection, than women might govern as well as men; and so they are the best temporizers in the world. But if you mark their proceed, or dect●●ne, you shall see that they honour not authority, but love their heresies, which if Prince's will not like, than they contemn and despise all authority, and will not let to make a mutiny, and stirie up the subjects to rebellion. 
to. ● p saint du● Edista Caesarea.  Luther exhorteth the Germans not to take arms against the Turk because the Turk for policy, counsel, integrity and moderation excelleth all 〈◊〉 Princes. And in the same place he called the Emperor Charles the fife, a ro●●● and frail carcase. And in his book against the king of Ingland he calleth him all mcnaught, 
l. count Reg. Angl. l de potesta●● seculari.  by the name of block head, s●●le, and so forth. In another book he not only inveigheth against Princely authority, but he also calleth them foole● knaves, tyrants. In another bookew he written against the twoe edicts of 〈◊〉 Emperor, he calls the Princes of th● Empire fools, madmen, furious, te●● times worse than the Turk. 
Sur. an. 1●2●.  Of wh●● doctrine and example Thomas Muns●● taking hold, with an hundred thousa● Rustics troubled all German, and one Franconie he destroyed twoe h●dred eighteen three monasteries. The l● therane Princes also armed with this 〈◊〉 ample of Luther, took arms against the Emperor, & thereby were the cause that the Turk surprised many holds, 
Sur 1530. & ●●66.  and strong forts of the Christians. And what stirs the calvinists and other sects have made in France, Scotland, and the low countries, all the world knoweth, and Flaunders to this day ●eeleth. And truly this contempt of lawful Princes, this disloyalty and rebellion, is altogether according to their doctrine. 
o. ●.  Luther in his comment upon the first Epistle of saint Peter sayeth plainly that he will not be copelled nor bound to obey any profane magistrate, because he will not lose his liberty, which is to be freed in conscience from all Prince's authority: yet he sayeth he will obey them freely and frankly, but not of any obligation. And afterwards explicating those words; honour the King: he sayeth that if the Pope as a temporal Prince should command any to wear a friars hood, to shave his crown, or to fast certain days (as Luther did before his apostasy) that he should obey him, but yet of free choice, as a temporal Prince (which yet I doubt whether Luther would do (but sayeth he) if he command the in the name of God, under pain of excommunication and mortal sin: Tum dicas, bona verba, sitis mihi propitius domine Papa, equidem quod mandatis nultus fecero. Then say, Be good in your office, be good unto us Sir Pope, what you command I will not do. And he gives you a reason in the next words: To higher powers it behoveth us to be subject so long as they bind not our consciences. So that Luther is of opinion that though we must for order sake obey Princes and magistrates, yet we are free in conscience, and can not in conscience under pain of sin be bound by any temporal or Ecclesiastical authority. 
l. 3. c. 19 § 14.  Caluin subscribeth to him in all points touching this matter, for he having made a long discourse about Christian liberty, concludeth in this manner: We conclude that they are exempted from all power of men. 
l. ● c. 10 § 5.  And lest that this saying might seem to have escaped him unadvisedly, in the next book he repeateth it again diverse times: Our consciences have not to do with men but God only. And again: 
§ ●.  Paul in no wise suffereth faithful consciences to be brought into bondage of men. Yet Caluin in the same places fearing to displease Princes, exhorteth us to do as they shall command us, not of any obligation, because Christ (sayeth he) hath freed us from all the laws of men, but of free choice and liberty, not for conscience, but for common peace. In which words he is clean opposite to saint Paul, 
Rom 1●.  who sayeth that of necessity we must be subject not only for fear of displeasure, but for conscience. Out of this doctrine I infer as a most evident conclusion, that in vain Princes have authority over their subjects, for if the subject may choose whether he will obey or no, than the prince may command and he may answer, that as he is not bound to obey because by Christian liberty he his freed from all men's laws, so he will not at this time obey, and so in vain shall the Prince command. Secondly I conclude out of Luther's and Caluins' premises, that there are no Princes nor Superiors over Christians, and consequently that all Christian Princes are usurpers, because they challenge Superiority & authority over Christians, which in deed they have not, and will needs be Princes and superiors, who are but private men. For if they can not so command us as to bind us to obedience, then are we not subject to them, and consequently they are no Superiors; and although we may obey them of free choice, yet that makes them not our Superiors, because so we may obey our equal and inferior if we will, yet because he cannot bind us in conscience to obey, he hath not authority over us, and we in that we are free are not subject unto him. Which that it may the more plainly appear, we must note that a Superior and a subject are correlatives, as are the father and the son, the master, and the servant, because as the father is the sons father, and the master the servants master, so a Superior is the subjects superior. And as no son no father, no servant, no master, so no subject no Superior, because correlatives are of that nature that one inferreth another, and one can not be without another. Wherefore if all Christians be set at such liberty that they are not bound in conscience to obey any Prince's laws than are they not subject unto them, but as free as he that hath no Master; and seeing that where is no subject, there can not be any Superior, it followeth, that if Princes can not bind us to obey them, we are no subjects, they no superiors. Is not this gentle reader to contemn and deny all authority and Superiority? And consequently, is not this to open the gap and gate unto all mutiny and rebellion? For when the subjects are taught that by Christ and Christian faith they are freed in conscience from men and men's authority, if the Prince command, they may deny obedience, if he exact tributes, taxes and subsidies, they may Choose whether they will pay a penny, and if they like not his government, they may by rebellion free themselves from him, to whom in conscience and before God they are not subject, because they are free men, who in that they are free can acknowledge no Master. Who will now blame the subjects in France, Flanders and Germany, for making rebellion? They did but according to their doctrine, and in refusing to obey men, they did but use that freedom which Christ hath given them, which is to be subject to none. Yea who now can do otherwise then to commend rebels for rebellion, and discommend all loyal subjects? Because in disobeying and rebelling they show them selves to be free men and acknowledge Christ their Redeemer, and in obeying, they make themselves subject to men, they use not their liberty, and they do injury to Christ, as though he had not redeemed them from all servitude of men. If Princes considered well this doctrine, they would be so far from favouring these new Christians, that they would banish them their countries. For what assurance hath a Prince of subjects so persuaded? or how can he but allvayes stand in fear of their rebellion; who by their religion are warranted that they can not sin in rebellion, because they are not bound in conscience to obey any humane authority.   

The second chapter showeth how by their precedent doctrine, judges and tribunal seats are brought in contempt.  
AS the Moral virtue justice was ever highly esteemed as the strength of all common wealths, so judges who are the ministers of justice (whose office is to condemn the nocent and absolve the innocent) were ever had in such reverence, that their sentence was counted an oracle, and their seat and tribunal where they used to pronounce sentence was respected as a sacred place. Wherefore in Scripture itself judges are called Gods because like little Gods, 
Psal. ●1.  under God they give sentence as his under judges, and if the sentence be just, than what they adjudge in earth, God ratifieth in heaven. This honourable conceit of judges and Tribunals the doctrine of our reformers alleged, diminisheth very much, yea it bringeth them into plain contempt and condemneth them all of Tyranny and open injustice. For if Princes have no authority as by the doctrine of these novellauntes I have proved that they have not, then can they give none unto their judges, and consequently neither the Prince nor the judge hath authority to give sentence or to punish any malefactors, because if they have no authority they are but private men. For although private men may vim vi repellere, repel force by force, and stand in their own defence, that is ward a blow when it is offered, and strike rather than be stricken, yea kill rather than be killed, because this is but to defend themselves, and to repel injury: yet after that the injury is received, and quite passed, they can not themselves requite the evil received, with a like evil, because that were not to defend, but to revenge themselves, which God hath reserved to himself, & to them to whom he hath given authority, and will not in any wise that private men be their own judges and revengers, because that were to open the gap to all outrages, much less will he permit them to punish them who have done injuries unto others: wherefore if Princes have no authority to command as in the last chapter by this new doctrine I have proved that they have not, them are they private men, & so can neither revenge their own nor others injuries, and consequently unjustly they condemn malefactors to prison, to death, and other pains and penalties. And truly if it be true which Luther and Caluin and their followers also affirm, that no man can bind us in conscience by law and commandment, yea if it be good doctrine, which is their doctrine, as in the next book shallbe related, 
Chap. ●.  that by Christ and Christian faith we are freed from all obligation of divine laws also, than the malefactor hath great scope given him to avoid the judges sentence although the offence be manifest. For suppose the judge condemn him for transgression of the Prince's law, he may confess the fault, and contemn the sentence. And first he may say that his sentence can not bind him in conscience to accept of it, because by Christ he is made a free man, subject in conscience neither to man, nor man's law nor sentence. Secondly he may confess that he hath done contrary to the kings law, and yet plead, not guilty; alleging that the Prince's law can not bind him in conscience, because he is exempted by Christ from all humane laws and commandments; And then he may say that where no law binds in conscience, there is no obligation, where no obligation, there is no sin, and so he may confess the fact and yet plead not guilty, because he sinned not; and he may also refuse the punishment by sentence decreed, because where no sin is, there no pain is due. Or if the judge condemn him for breaking God's law in stealing, murdering, or such like, he may confess like wise the fact, and yet deny the fault, because he is so free, that God his law also can not bind him, and seeing that where no obligation is, there can be no fault (because every sin is against some bond or obligation) he may claim absolution from the pain by the title of innocency, because where no sin is, there no pain can be dew. Yea although he confess that he have sinned (which yet he need not) in transgressing God's law, yet he may escape the sentence by appeal. For he may say I confess the fault for which I am condemned, but I refuse to stand to your sentence, I appeal to God, let him punish me if he will (which I know not how he can do justly if I be free from his laws in conscience) but of your sentence I will not accept, and if you urge me with conscience and allege that I am bound in conscience to stand to your arbitrement, because you are appointed to do justice, I challenge Christian freedom by which I am so free that in conscience I am not bound to man's law, nor sentence. And if this will not serve to free him from the sentence (as I see no reasou why it should not serve) than he may defend himself by other opinions of the new reformers. He may say that by Luther's and Caluins' opinions which are the patriarchs of the reformed Church, 
See the next book, chap. 6.  he is taught that he hath no free will, nor choice in any action which he doth whether it be good or bad, and that therefore the judge is unreasonable, cruel, and barbarous, in condemning him for theft, murder, or adoultrie, which was not in his power to avoided. And as justly might he condemn him for not flying at the kings commandment as for not abstaining from murder when either by anger or desire of money he was moved thereunto. He might allege also for his defence, that God moved him unto those offences which he committed and so forcibly also, that he could not resist him, 
In the fift book, chap. 1.  for this is Caluins' opinion as before is declared, yea he might say and have Caluin also for his author, that God was the author and principal agent of the theft or murder, for which he is condemned, and that therefore by good consequence he can not justly be condemned for that in which God hath more pat than he hath, and to which he moved him so forcibly that he could not resist. What is this then (gentle reader) but to condemn all judges and tribunal seats, to stop the judges mouth from pronounncing any sentence, and to lose the bridle unto all malefactors? who may commit what outrage they will because there is no tribunal which can justly condemn them, and no sentence can be pronounced against them which they may not avoid by Luther's and Caluins' doctrine.   

The third Chapter showeth how the former doctrine bringeth all Prince's lawet in contempt  
A Kingdom is commonly called a body, not natural but civil and political, whose head is the King, whose eyes are the kings counsellors, whose body and members are the people, and whose soul is the law. For as the natural body of man so soon as the soul hath left it, looseth all vital operation, becometh gast, ugly, and deformed, devoid of colour and beauty, and subject to dissolution of all the members by putrefaction: So the body of a Kingdom destitute of law hath no reasonable action or motion, because it wants the rule of the law, which squareth out all such operations, it loosethe all beauty, because it wanteth law to set down an uniform order, which is the beauty of all common wealths, and it tendeth to a dissolution of all the parts and members, because it is destitute of law which is the soul and sinew which uniteth and knitteth these diverse parts together. Wherefore Plato said that if men weet lawless and destitute of laws, 
l. 9 deleg.  they would little differ from brute beasts; and the reason is because as I have said, without laws there would be no reasonable operations nor order amongst men, by which especially a society of men differeth from a heard of beasts. And because the old and ancient sages knew well how much it imported to have laws in a common wealth, they devised means to move the people to a great and high conceit of laws, that they might the more willingly embrace them, and more diligently put them in execution. Zoroaster who prescribed laws to the Bactrianes and Persians, made Oromasis the author of them, Trismegistus who gave laws to the Egyptians, said that a God enacted them, Minos, of whon the people of Crete received their laws, told them that jupiter was the inventor of them, Charondas, to bring the Carthaginians to a reverent conceit of his laws, avouched that he was taught them by Saturnus, Lycurgus who ruled the Lacedæmonians fathered his laws where with he ruled them upon Apollo, Solon who devised laws for the Athenians affirmed that they proceeded from Minerva's brain, Plato who set down laws for the Sicilians and Magnesians protested that jupiter and Apollo had inspired him. Moses who promulgated the la unto the jew told them that God was the author of them, as in deed he was, and showed them a table in which an angels hand had written them. And christ jesus the author of the new law protested that he was sent by his father, and that the law and doctrine which he preaching was not his, but his father's who sent him. And truly good reason had they to imprint in their subjects minds a reverent conceit of laws, because nothing is more sovereign, nothing more necessary in a common wealth, than law. Laws are certain conclusions of the eternal law of God and nature, they are like sinews which bind & knit the subjects together, they are the life and soul of this civil body, they are rules & squares of humane actions, they are bridles and curbs of humane appetites, they are dumb Magistrates, which look to good orders, they teach the subjects their duty, keep them in awe and order, maintain peace, uphold justice, revenge injuries, defend the innocent, chastise the nocent, preserve good subjects from receiving evil, and hinder the bad from offering evil; without the which no discipline can be kept, no good order observed, no peace established, no justice maintained. Now let us see what esteem the reformers make of laws and what good counsel their doctrine affordeth us, to excite and stir us up to the observation of laws. 
l. 4 Inst 〈◊〉 §. 5.  Caluin pronounceth thus: the laws of men whether they be made by the Magistrate, or by the Church, although they be necessary to be kept, yet therefore do they not by themselves bind in conscience. 
§. 2●.  And for an example he affirmeth, that the Apostles neither did nor could make any law in their first Council, 
Act. 15.  but only promulgated the liberty that Christ had given: and added, not as a law that bynds but as an admonition, 
§. 27.  that of charity to their weak brethren they should abstain from things offered to Idols, from strangled and from blood. And after wards again he repeateth that although it be necessary for government to have laws human and Ecclesiastical in the Church, 
§. ●●.  yet they must not be thought to bind us in conscience. So that Caluin is of opinion that although the laws of the Church, and of Princes, and magistrates, aught to be kept for order sake, or for fear of offence and scandal, yet they bind us not in conscience. And he gives the reason: 
l. 5. c. ●●. 〈◊〉. 10.  because (sayeth he) If we once grant that men can bind our consciences by their will and la, Christ loseth the thank of his so great liberality, (to wit in redeeming us from the bondage of the law) and our consciences their profit: The same is Luther's opinion as is related before in the first Chapter of this book. I will not stand now to refute this paradox, partly because I have proved all ready in the place last mentioned, that we are bound in conscience to obey all lawful superiors, and consequently that their laws do bind our consciences partly because the absurd sequel of this doctrine which by and by shall appear, sufficiently confuteth it: neither will I repeat which I have already declared, to wit that obligation of laws is nothing repugnant to Christian liberty, because we are not therefore said to be freed from the yoke of the law because the law bindeth us not, but because we have received grace from Christ to fulfil the law and so it can no more tyrannize over us in commanding more than we are able to perform: I will therefore draw to wards my conclusion which is that the alleged doctrine of Caluin bringeth all laws in contempt and looseth the bridle to all malefactors. And first of all I must tell John Caluin that in denying laws to bind in conscience he taketh a way all laws, because it is the essence of a la to be able to bind the subject, and in this only it differeth from counsel exhortation and admonition. Secondly Caluin by this doctrine abrogateth all promises and contracts even of matrimony which are particular laws. And therefore if to say that laws bind in conscience be to despoil Christ of the honour of a redeemer, and man of Christian liberty, then is it also injurious to Christ and man's liberty, to be bound in conscience to keep promises, and to observe contracts, even with wives. Thirdly the commandment also of parents and masters are particular laws, and consequently we are not bound in conscience to obey our masters, or parentoes, and so one of the ten commandments must be blotted out, because if we be not bound to obey our parents, which is one of the cheefeste honours which we can give them, we are not bound to honour our parents. Yea by this doctrine it followeth that the ten commandments bind us not in conscience: which though our adversaries will not stick to grant, as we shall see in the next book, yet who seeth not with what absurdity? Lastly at the least, which yet is not the least absurdity, this doctrine bringeth all laws in contempt: for as the wild and unbroken colt little careth if you should tie him with hears or threads, because he knoweth that such bands are not of force to hold him, so when men are once persuaded that laws of Princes bind them not in conscience, they will make little scrouple to transgress them, and so laws are brought into contempt. And although fear of the penalty or punishment which the la layeth on them, may make them sometimes to keep them for fear of punishment, Yet when they can escape the ministers of justice eyes, or hands, or avoid by subtle shift or open force the pain of the law, they will make no scruple of transgressing the law; for why should they make conscience of that which toucheth not conscience. But Caluin will say that they ought not▪ withstanding to keep laws for order sake and for avoiding of offence. But then I ask Caluin what he meaneth when he sayeth that they ought to keep the law? either he meaneth by those words an obligation in conscience under pain of sin, and then it followeth (which Caluin will not grant) that laws bind in conscience: or else he meaneth only a congruity or decency, and then it followeth still that laws are brought in contempt. For if once a man be persuaded that it is only convenient but not necessary to keep the law, he needeth to make no scruple to transgress the law, because the transgression is no sin but only an incongruity. And so if this doctrine be true men will not care a straw for the Prince's laws. rebellious subjects, mutinous soldiers, stubborn children, crooked servants, may be disobedient by authority, because no law, nor commandment can bind them in conscience to loyal obedience. And then laws lose their force, authority is not to be esteemed, rebellion and mutiny are allowed, the gap is open to all malefactors, all outrages are lawful, because where no law bindeth, no sin can be committed, no man is subject, every man is lawless & as free as the king, subject to no law nor authority of God or man. What security hath a Prince amongst such lawless subjects? how can he choose but fear revolt and rebellion of those, who are persuaded by religion, that no law can bind them in conscience to order and obedience? Is this religion like to be of God which is so opposite to humane authority which is of God; yea which also despoileth God of all authority to command his creatures? If our noble Prince and grave counsellors in Ingland considered well this doctrine, than certes the first Parliament they called, should be to banish this lawless and licentious religion, which bringeth laws in contempt, Princes in danger, and openeth the gap to all outrages of malefactors.   

The fourth chapter showeth how according to their doctrine no Prince can rely on his subjects, no subjects on their Prince, nor on fellow-subiects, and consequently all Society, and civil conversation is taken away.  
MAn, as I have already upon another occasion declared, is of nature bent and inclined unto company and conversation in some Society or other; where if he be a Superior he ruleth, if he be an inferior he is ruled and learneth to comply with his fellow subjects. And of these three parts consisteth civil conversation. For if the Prince rule not as he should do, or the inferior obey not his superior or comply not with his fellow subject as he ought to do, government degenerateth into tyranny, obedience, turneth to rebellion, and conversation to civil dissension. These three parts are maintained by one thing, which is trust or confidence in one another. for seeing that the Prince can not do all alone because he must expect aid and assistance of his subjects, he shall never rule well unless he may rely upon the fidelity and correspondence of his subjects. And if the subject put not a confidence in his Superior as in one that tendereth the common good of all, and particular of every one, he will never obey willingly nor rely on him securely, but shall ever live in fear & distrust of him. And if one subject trust not another, every one shall live in suspicion of another, and so men's words will be taken but for wind, promises contracts, and bargains will not hold assuredly, friendship breaketh, familiarity decayeth, and conversation is ruined. For who will make bargains, or strike a league of friendship, or familiarity, with them, on whose secrecy, fidelity, & other correspondence he hath not any probable assurance, because he putteth no trust nor confidence in them; rather hath he cause to fly all company and like a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and hater of men, to live in woods & wilderness, then in towns, cities, and societies. Now if the reformers doctrine, which teacheth that laws bind not in conscience, may go for currant, the three parts of civil conversation are taken away, & so Societies must break up, and every one must live alone like an Anachorite or Eremite, because in company is no security, where according to this doctrine, neither the Prince can rely on his subjects, nor they on him, nor one subject on another. And to begin with the Prince what confidence can he put in his subjects who are persuaded in religion, that neither his laws can bind them to obedience, nor the law of God or nature hinder them from rebellion, mutiny, or other outrages? hath he not just cause thus to discourse wvith himself? This people is persuaded by religion that no la bindeth them in conscience, & consequently they make no scrouple nor conscience of Rebellion, for where no la bindeth in conscience, there no conscience is to be made: I must therefore stand continually on my guard & rely upon no subiets fidelity. And how shall I stand on my guard, when even my guard according to Caluins' opinion, is bound by no law, to be true and faithful unto me. And so he shall live always in fear of his subjects. And on the otherside, what confidence can the subjects have in their Prince? For if no la bind him in conscience, he having all in his own hands, may use what extorsion and tyranny he pleaseth. For what should withhold him from it? fear of god? God can not justly punish where no laws bind in conscience, and so he is not be feared? conscience? Where no law binds, conscience needs to make no scruple. Why then is not all lawful for the Prince which he liketh? And so the subject shall ever have his Superior in suspicion. And what good fellowship, amity, or conversation can there be amongst the subjects, who must needs by this doctrine live in a continual fear and distrust of one another, because no man is bound to keep touch and correspondence with another? For if laws bind not, promises and contracts, not only in lending and borrowing, buying and selling, but also in marrying, are not of force to bind our consciences, because they are but particular laws: or if they are more forcible in binding then laws, then according to Caluin, Christ is no perfect Redeemer, because he hath not freed us from the bondage of promises, and bargains, which not with standing are no laws of Princes, but particular laws of particular men, made betwixt man and man for more assured conversation. And so the wife may justly fear lest her husband when he is weary of her, or liketh better of another, may shake her of & divorce himself from her. For why may he not? If laws of Princes bind not in conscience, than the contract of matrimony, which is but a particular la, can take no hold of conscience, and so by the liberty which Caluin giveth him, which is to be free in conscience from all laws, he may leave his wife when, and as oft as he will, and as often may he take another. And if his wife complain that he keepeth not promise with her; he may answer her easily, that if he be not bound in conscience to keep God's law, he is not bound to keep the law of matrimony, which is but a particular law. And if she replve that god also commandeth us to keep this particular law and contract, he may tell her that he confesseth it to be true, but Caluin hath assured him that Christ hath freed him in conscience from all obligation of all laws, whether they be humane or divine, and so he is not bound to keep the law of matrimony, and therefore challenging his liberty, he may leave his wife as lawfully, and as freely, as if he had never made her promise, because no law, much more no promise, is able to bind in conscience. In like manner let merchants who use to lend money or to sell of trust and credit, look better about them, than hither to they have done. For if no laws bind in conscience, then contracts also bind not, and so their debtor may challenge the liberty which Caluin hath given them, which is not to be bound in conscience to pay them a penny. We must henceforth also take heed not only of known thieves and murderers, but of them also that go for honest men, yea even of our necrest and dearest friends, for what should withhold them from doing us a mischief, if no la neither of God, nor man, nor nature, bind them in conscience? And so the parents may distrust their children, and the children their parents, because according to Caluins' opinion, the one is not bound to the other neither by the law of God nor nature. The husband must live always in jealousy of his wife, and she of him, because the law of matrimony according to this opinion, bynds not one party in conscience, to keep touch with the other. And so by this doctrine no man in any thing can trust on rely or another, but all must live in fear jealousy and suspicion of others, and so they must forsake societies and fly to mountains, and trust rather to beasts whom nature withholdeth from injuries, then unto men whom according to Caluins' doctrine, no law and consequently no conscience stayeth or with holdeth from Mischief. By this let the reader take a scantling of this doctrine, and tell me whether it be like to be of God which is so opposite to all society which his of God.    

THE SEVENTH BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SVRuey of the new doctrine concerning manners, in which it is declared how by divers of their opinions they open the gap unto all vice.  

The first Chapter showeth how the reformers take away hope of heaven and fear of hell, and consequently open the gap to all vice.  
TWOE things there are which as firm and constant pillars do uphold and sustain all common wealths from falling, and preserve well ordered societies from dissolving; to wit, hope of reward, and fear of punishment. Hope like a spur pricketh forward, fear like a bridle restraineth, hope eggeth onward unto virtue, fear pulleth back from vice, hope incites us to observe the la, fear makes us fear to transgress the law. Wherefore Solon the grave lawgiver, was want to say, that pain and reward are the things, which keep all Societies in awe. And well in deed might he say, so, for take away hope of reward, and men will be slothful and sluggish in the excercise of virtue, and laudable actions, and take away fear of punishment, & the evil disposed will be as for ward in attempting of thefts, murders, treasons, treacheries, and whatsoever villainies. These twoe things so necessary in a common wealth, Christ would not have to be wanting in his Church, which is the best ordered common wealth that ever was on earth, and therefore he proposeth unto us a heaven to hope for, and an hell to fear; the one to stir us up to all virtuous actions, the other to deter us from all wicked attempts. For although virtue (as the Philosopher sayeth) be so amiable and so beseeming man's reasonable nature, that if there were no heaven nor no other reward of virtue, but virtue, yet we should embrace it for itself, and live chastened for the love of chastity, justly for the love of justice, and temperately for the love of temperancy; and although vice be a thing so detestable, filthy, 
Th. 1.2. ●. 〈◊〉 art. 2.  abominable, and repugnant to the reasonable part of man, that if there were no hell nor punishment for it, yet we should detest it for itself, and fly it for the dishonesty which it implieth: yet on the one side, because virtue is repugnant to sensuality and placed amid many difficulties, like a rose amongst thorns, man would never long live virtuously, if there were no other reward for virtuous actions, than virtues honesty; and on the other side vice is so pleasing to sensuality, and so suitable to our corrupt nature, that if there were no other punishment to deter men from it then the dishonesty, which is joined with it, few or none would fly and eschew it. Wherefore God hath proposed a heaven to allure us to virtue, and a hell to deter and scar us from vice: 
Mat. 2●.  Come (sayeth Christ to the good, whose reward is heaven) ye blessed of my father enjoy the Kingdom praepared for you from the beginning of the world. 
Ibidem.  And in terrible words he thundereth out the sentence against the reprobate whose punishment is the fire of hell: depart from me ye accursed into everlasting fire which is praepared for the devil and his angels. And that this heaven and the hope of it may the more forcibly move to good life and observation of the commandments, the holy Scripture sets it forth with all the glorious titles in the world, and even with the names of those things which men most desire: If you desire life, heaven is called aeternal life. 
Io. 6 & 1●. Apoc 4. Sap ●●. Apoc. 22.  If you covet rest, heaven is a repose after labour. If light be grateful, heaven is a perpetual light shining in the faces of the Saints. 
Luc. 12.  If marriage like you, 
Psal. 25.  heaven is a perpetual marriage. If pleasure please you, heaven is a river of pleasure. If banqueting be thy desire, heaven is a Supper and a great supper, 
Liic. 14.  where with Angels we shall by fruition and clear vision satiate ourselves in feeding upon the divinity: If home be grateful unto the, heaven is thy country, 
Psal. 13●.  from whence according to thy soul thou fetchest thy race & origin, and whether thou travelest so long as in this world thou livest, which is but a way or Inn, no home nor mansion place. If a Paradise uhose name importeth a place of all honest pleasure & felicity delighteth, heaven is called so, 
Lu●. 2●.  & was by christ himself promised to the good thief by no other name. Briefly if thou desire a reward of all thy pains and travels, 
Mat. 2●.  heaven is the common wage of all God's servants, a goal to run at, 
1. Cor. 9  & a crown to fight for. In like manner to make us to refrain from sin for fear of hell, 
Vide Bel. 〈◊〉 l. 4. de Christo. c. 10. & Auihorem resolute. Angl. l. 1. p. 1.  holy Scripture gives hell very terrible names, and paints it forth in terrible forms. It is called in Greek and Latin by names which signify a low & deep place under the ground, in Hebrew by a name which signifieth a great gulf. The Prophet Malachi calls it a furnace, 
c. 11 14.  for the kindling of which the wicked must be the straw and fuel. 
Apoc. 14.21.  S. John calls it the lake of God's ire, because the anger of God is as it were all gathered to that place, and there especially is manifested in those exceeding torments, yea he terms it also a standing pool replenished with fire and Brimston. Christ himself gives it the name of outward Darkeness where shallbe weeping and gnashing of teeth. 
Mat. 22.  job saith that in that place is no order but sempiternal horror. 
〈…〉  And why doth scripture so lively set forth these two things, heaven and hell, but because God the author of scripture, would have us hope for the one and fear the other, knowing that nothing beareth greater sway in the rule and good discipline of a common wealth, then hope of reward and fear of punishment. For if the hope of temporal honours, fame, & riches giveth such courage to the hearts of men, that they will run thorough fire and water for the attaining of the same; how shall the hope of heaven and the immortal crowns which there are laid up for us in store, incite us and egg us for ward unto all laudable actions. If Mutius could have the courage to hold his hand in the fire for hope of temporal renown and glory for such fortitude: what fires and waters, heat and cold, shall not a Christian armed with hope of heaven, be able to endure courageously? Shall the soldier run thorough the pikes and pass by the cannon mouth, for hope of a spoil or victory, and shall not Christians devour all difficulties for hope of heaven? And look how much hope eggeth for ward to laudable actions, so much and no less doth fear restrain us from evil, and is no less necessary to bridle the licentious, then hope to animate the virtuous. Wherhfore the ancients so esteemed fear that the city of Spartha made it a God and dedicated a Temple unto it, as to the preserver of their common wealth. But because there are divers kinds of fear it shallbe necessary to distinguish them, that we may see which is that fear which is so commendable. First therefore there is a worldly and human fear, which is conceived for some temporal evil, or humane respect. and this sometimes is good and sometimes also bad. As for example, if for fear of the prince's displeasure or torment, or death which he threatenethe we offend God in transgressing his la, or doing against our conscience, this fear is evil and no less evil than the sin of which it is the cause. 
Mat. 2●. c. ●0.  This fear made saint Peter to deny his master: which also our Saviour forbiddeth saying: fear not them who kill the body, that is offend not God for fear of them that can only kill the body, but rather fear God who can cast both body and soul into the fire of hell. But if for fear of the magistrate we abstain from sin, this fear is not evil, and therefore S. Paul bids us fear the magistrate, 
Rom. 15.  because (sayeth he) not without cause he carrieth the sword, because he is the minister of God. 
Th. 2. ●. q. 1●  The second fear is called a reverential fear which proceedeth from a high conceit of the divine majesty, 
Psal. 12.  and remaineth (as David sayeth) and that for ever also, even in the blessed. For although they be assured that they shall never suffer any evil and therefore fear no evil at God's hands; yet when they behold the sovereign Majesty of God, who punisheth the damned, and could annihilatethe blessed if he would, they conceve a great reverence, which is called reverential fear, much like as children who are assured that their father will not touch them, yet conceve a reverential fear at the very sight of him especially if they see him sharp and severe with his servants. The third fear is called filial or children's fear, which maketh us afraid to sin, not for fear of punishment, but for fear of offending, and this fear they have who though they were sure never to suffer punishment, neither in this life nor the next, yet would not commit a sin because it is an offence of God: which fear is called filial, because good children are afraid to do any thing which shall offend their parents, though they were sure they should not be punished. Of which fear saint Austin discoursing saith, 
in Psal. 113.  that otherwise doth the adulteress fear her husband, otherwise the chaste Spouse: she feareth lest he come and punish, but the other feareth lest he be offended and forsake her. The fourth is called servile fear which maketh us to abstain from sin for fear of hell and damnation: which is called servile, because it is proper to servants to do their duty for fear of punishment, and this fear in express terms the reformers condemn as I shall relate: the other fears their doctrine disalloweth. But lest I may seem to charge them with more than they say, I will make them speak in their own words their opinion of hope and fear. 
l. ● Inst. c. 15. § ●.  And first of Hope Caluin sayeth plainly, that God is not delighted with that obedience which the hope of reward in heaven beateth out of us: 
in Antid. sess. 6. Can. ●●.  for God sayeth he, loveth a cheerful giver and forbiddeth any thing to be given as it were of heaviness or necessity. So that according to Caluin, it is sin to give alms or to fulfil the commandments for hope of reward in heaven. But Caluins' reason is as bad as his doctrine. For he proveth it to be unlawful to be obedient to God for hope of reward, because that is to give God his dew with heaviness: and yet we see that hope is so far from making us to do things heavily, and with an evil will, that it encourageth us, and pricketh us forward with a willing mind, as is all ready proved & experience may witness. And as for fear of hell, 
●. ●. aepud Roff & ser. 3. p●●nitent.  Luther condemns it even unto hell, saying that it maketh a man an hypocrite and a greater sinner. And as concerning the other kinds of fear, their doctrine in a manner abolisheth them all. They affirm as is before mentioned that no laws bind in conscience: whence follow these conclusions. First that neither Princes nor judges have authority to condemn us to any pain, as is before proved, because where no law binds no prince can justly punish the transgression. And so humane fear is taken away. Secondly this doctrine abolisheth all filial fear: for where no law binds in conscience, no sin can be committed, and so we need not to fear thefts and murders for fear of offending God, because where no sin is, no offence is to be feared. Reverential fear also they abandon, because as is before proved, in denying laws to bind they take away all authority even from God, and where no authority is, no reverence is dew. As for servile fear, they condemn it in express terms. And Luther's words we have hard already: let us hear also Caluin speak. 
l. 3. Inct. c. 24 § 6.7.8.  He affirmeth that a sinner can not be just, unless he believe assuredly that he is elect, praedestinate and undoubtedly to be saved: whence followeth that no man must fear hell, yea that no man can fear hell, and retain his faith. For if he be by faith cocksure of Salvation, he can not fear hell and damnation, because he is as assured of escaping hell as of attaining heaven, and no man can fear that evil which he is assured to escape. As for example no man feareth least the heavens fall upon him. Or if Caluin fear hell, he looseth his faith, because he is not assured to escape hell and to attain to heaven. And because Caluin saw well enough that fear of hell is taken away by this his doctrine: 
§ 2.  he checketh saint Gregory the great, saying that he teacheth pestilently when he sayeth in a certain homely; that we know only our calling but are uncertain of our election: 
Hom. 38. in Mat. evang.  whereby (sayeth Caluin) he moveth all men to fear and trembling; because we know what we be to day, but what we shallbe we know not. Luther also as he holds the same opinion of assuredness of salvation, so he bids us to take heed lest we fear hell or judgement, because that were to lose our faith. These are his words: Wherefore if thou be a sinner as verily we all are, 
in to. 2. Col. ●d Gal.  do not propose unto thyself Christ as a judge in a raynbowe, for than thou wilt be afraid and despair, but apprehend the definition of Christ, that he is no exactor of the law, but a propitiaiour. So that Luther thinks that Christ will exact no law at the hands of a faithful man and therefore he needeth not to fear hell, in which transgressors of the law are punished. Wherefore as they take away all hope of reward, so they take away all fear and especially the fear of hell, which is the greatest bridle that is, to restrain men from sin. But first I will ask them why scripture setteth forth heaven and hell with suches names and titles if it be a sin to hope for the one, or to fear the other? Truly if it be sin, them hath God in setting forth heaven and hell so lively, laid baits to catch us, and to allure us to sin. And why then doth scripture in so many places command us to hope and to fear? And how are those twoe things unlawful, which are so necessary in all common wealths? Why may the plowghman travel all the day in hope of his wage, the husbandman sow his seed in hope of a harvest, the soldier follow the wars in hope of a spoil, and yet a Christian man may not fulfil the commandments in hope of a reward in heaven? For if it be lawful to hope for heaven, why it is not lawful also to give alms in hope of heaven, as David inclined his heart to keep the law for reward and retribution? 
Psal 118.  They answer that we must serve God purely for his love & glory, but not for reward. True, that must be the principal end, but yet thence it followeth not, but that we may also serve for reward, as for a secondary end and motive. But say they, he that serveth for reward, would not serve god if reward were not, which argueth an evil mind. I answer that almen are not so affectcted. And if hope of heaven be of that force as to move them to keep the law, why may it not also be sufficient to move them to lay aside that evil affection, which is also against the law? In like manner if I may lawfully fear death and other evils of the body, why may I not fear hell which is the greatest punishment that is both of soul and body? and if I may fearre hell why may I not abstain from sin or fulfil the law, for fearre of hell? They say, the reason is, because he that fulfileth the law for fear of hell, would sin with all his heart if hell were not. be it so: yet this arguethe fear to be good rather than evil, because it is a cause why we abstain at least from the out ward act of sin, and if the mind be evil disposed, that proceedeth not from the fear of hell, but from an evil disposition. Yea if fear of hell be sufficient to keep us from the act of sin, it is sufficient also to restrain us from the evil desire of the mind, because against that also hell is prepared. And in this is a plain difference betwixt fear of hell and temporal punishments: because Princes by temporal pains punish only the outward act, of which only they can judge; and therefore the thief may abstain from theft for fear of hanging, and yet have an inward desire to steal: but God punisheth in hell not only the outward act, but also the inward affection and desire of sin, and therefore, if fear of hell keep a man from theft, it will restrain him also from the desire. And consequently fear of hell can not be ill, but rather good, which is no cause of ill, but rather a cause why we abstain from evil. and although some peradventure yea and without peradventure would sin and neglegcte the commandments if hope of heaven and fear of hell were not, yet that is no argument that there in they sin, if they have no presentil affection or consent to sin; For so many would sin if they should live longer, or if they had this or that occasion, or if God gave them not this and that grace, and yet, that they would sin, is no sin, if they have no present affection or desire to sin. Yea this is an argument that hope of heaven and fear of hell are very laudable and good, because they are bridles to restrain men from sinning. Wherefore to draw near a conclusion, which is that our Reformers in taking away hope of heaven and fear of hell, open the gap to all vice: I report me unto the indifferent reader how the Church is like to flourish in virtue without hope of heaven, and fear of hell, seeing that as is proved, no common wealth can enjoy temporal and civil peace and discipline without them. Takeaway hope of heaven, and take away prayer, alms deeds, erecting of Churches, founding of Colleges and hospitals; then fasting and penance, works of justice, mercy and charity, will decay; in brief men will be negligent and slothful in all exercise of virtue and observation of the law. For who will run that sees no goal? who will fight that hopes for no victory? who will work that looks for no reward. I know that the very love of God, yea of virtue should move us to good, but yet so dull we are, and so backward, that these motives little move us, and so natural unto us, it is to be moved with hope of reward, that if men hoped not for heaven, few would strive to over come their passions, and the difficulty in exercise of virtue, and observation of the commandments. Like wise if fear be the keeper, praeseruer, and conserver of all common wealths, how shall we imagine that the Church of God can stand without it? I grant that sin is so fowl a thing that even for the hatred of sin, we should abandon sin, but seeing that sin is so agreeable to our corrupt nature, and never appeareth in the own likeness, but is always masked and disguised with a show of commodity, pleasure or profit; few there are who would abstain from sin for the turpitude thereof & dishonesty which it implyethe. For what should restrain a man from sin? shame of the world? I suppose he hath a secret place. Fear of temporal punishment, I suppose the fault be unknown? Fear of God? Who will fear God that fears not the hell, which he hath prepared? Wherefore if notwithstanding the hope of heaven and fear of hell (which for all Caluins heresy possesseth the hearts of most men) yet so few live uprightly and so many go awry, what would they do, if hope of heaven, and fear of hell were quite rooted out of their minds? Truly the narrow path of virtue would be overgrown with weeds, for want of treading, and the broad way of vice would become so smooth, that none would embrace virtue, all would tumble headlong into the depth of vice, and pleasure: and so the way to virtue would be hedged up, and the gate and way to vice would always lie open, heaven would be a place inaccessible, and hell our common home.   

The second Chapter showeth how in teaching that only faith justifieth they open the gap to all vice.  
SAtan the common enemy of mankind, knowing how easily he might entice and allure us to sin (to which thing his malliciouse mind is always bent and inclined) if he could persuade the world, that only faith sufficeth for man's justification, hath long since gone about to beat this doctrine into our heads, & to bewitch our understandings with it. And because he knoweth that when he speaketh in is own person and likeness he findeth little audience he hath gone about and that even in the Apostles time, by certain of his ministers who went under the name of Christians, to intrude upon us this his pestilent doctrine. 
2. Pet. 3.  For they not understanding (as saint Peter sayeth) what saint Paul said, would make him speak as fools make bells to sound, to wit as they imagined, and so avouched that only faith was sufficient to justification and salvation, and that saint Paul so warranted us. 
l. de fide & ●peribus.  Wherefore saint Austin affirmeth that saint Peter, saint John; and saint james, and saint Jude also, written their Epistles to refel & refute this heresy, and to expound saint Paul's meaning. After these companions, Simon Magus embraced the same opinion, and after him Eunomius, who bragged that the faith which they preached was sufficient to save their followers, what sins soever they committed. This damnable heresy long since dead in the minds of men, and buried also in hell, Luther not by miracle but mere madness, hath called to life again: 
ar. 10. 1●. l de Christiana libertate. come. in c. 2. Gal.  who in divers places affirmeth that only faith justifieth, before, & without charity and good works. And because he saw that in thus saying, he seemed to open the gap to all wickedness, he addeth another heresy, to wit, that true faith and good works can not be severed, & therefore (sayeth he) although only faith justify, yet that argueth not that good works are not necessary, because a true faith always bringeth with it good works. 
l. 3. c. 14. §. 1●. c. 1●. §. 8.  Caluin joineth with Luther in this opinion, affirming that faith only justifieth, and that good works are only signs and effects of this faith. Yea Luther & he both, avouch as shallbe afterwards declared, that good works are so far from justifying, that they are all mortal sins, and by faith only obtain this favour of God, as not to be reputed nor imputed to the faithful man. And this faith (saith Caluin) justifieth not as a work of ours, because whatsoever proceedeth from our corrupt nature he counteth sin, but as it is an instrument by which we apprehend Christ's justice, and so apply it to ourselves, & make it so our own, that no since is imputed unto us. 
§. ●.  These are his words: The power of justifying, which faith hath, consisteth not in the worthiness of the work: our justification standeth upon the only mercy of God, and the deserving or merit of Christ, which justification when faith taketh hold on, it is said to justify. So that faith also according to Caluin, is a sin, because it is a kind of work of ours, yet it justifieth, because it apprehendeth Christ's justice, and so by a sin as by an instrument which apprehendeth Christ's justice, we are made or rather reputed just. But before I come to infer my intended conclusion out of this doctrine, I wilbee so bold as to ask them, where they read in Scripture that only faith justifieth? 
Rom. ●.  Saint Paul (say they) affirmeth that a man is justified by faith; True, but he sayeth not by only faith, neither doth any place of Scripture avouch so mnch. Wherefore Luther seeing that this place was not plain enough to prove, that only faith justifieth; in his German translation, he foisted in (only) into the text, making saint Paul to say: we think a man to be justified by faith only. And being warned of this his corruption of scripture by a certain friend of his, 
In Resp ad duos art. ad amicum. Ex Bel to. ●. l. ●. de justif. 16.  he answered that that was the meaning: wherein yet he showed himself a false translator whose office is to translate faithfully as the words lie, and not as he would have them interpreted, for that is the office of an interpreter; and if this be lawful for Luther, hereriques' have scope enough to make scriptures speak as they will imagine that they should speak. But Luther will say that saint Paul sayeth that a man is justified by faith, and not by the works of the law, which is all one as if he had said, that a man is justified by faith only, and not by good works. But to this I answer that if saint Paul had said, that a man is just by faith and not by works, adding no more, than Luther had had some argument, but he sayeth not so, but only, that a man is just by faites and not by the works of the law, excluding only the judaical sacraments and ceremonies, which he calleth works of the law. and when in other places he excludeth works, he meaneth the self same works, 
Rom. 4. Gal. 2.3.  or else those works which proceed not from faith and grace, such as were the works of the gentiles. Nether is faith said to justify, because that only justifieth, but because it is the beginning, and ground work of justification, or because it concurreth to justification, or because by that faith which justifieth, is understood, not a naked faith, but a faith joined with charity and good works, such as saint Paul speaketh of, when writing to the Galathians, he excludeth the works of the law, 
Gal. ●.  saying that in Christ jesus neither Circumcision is of any worth, nor the Prepuce, but faith which worketh by charity. Wherefore saint Paul is so far from thinking that only faith justifieth, that he avoucheth that if he had all the faith in the world and so great a faith that he could move mountains, 
1. Cor. 33.  yet if he had not charity he were nothing. And if Luther and Caluin because scripture sometimes sayeth that faith justifieth, will therefore infer, that faith only justifieth; then because scripture sayeth that by hope we are saved and that blessed is the man that hopeth in God, 
Rom. ●. Psal. 83.  I will infer that only hope justifieth; and because scripture also affirmeth that the man is happy that feareth our lord, 
Psal 111.  I will conclude that fear only justifieth. Or if they will answer that hope and fear are said to justify and to make man happy, because they concur to justification and happiness, the same I will say of faith, to wit that it is said to justify, not because it only justifieth, but because with charity it concurs to our justification. For to charity also is attributed our justification, and more than unto faith. For as Christ told saint Marie Magdalen, that her faith had saved her, so he said that many sins were forgiven her because she loved much: 
Lue. ●.  and Scripture attributeth those effects to charity which are necessarily linked with justification. As for example, 
Mat. 22. Rom. 11. Col. ●. 1. Tim. ●.  charity is called the fullness of the la, the end of the law, the observation of the la, and the bond or knot of perfection. Charity also is said to make us children of God, 
●. 10 ●. Rom. 3.1. Pet. ●. 1. 10.4.  by it the holy ghost is said to be diffused in our hearts; charity is said to hide and cover our sins, and to make God to devil in our hearts. Saint John pronounceth boldly that who loveth his brother by charity is in the light, 
1. 10. ●.  and that we are translated from the darkness, that is of sin, to the light, that is of justification, because we love our brethren: 
Ibidem. c 3. c. 4.  yea he sayeth that whoesoever loveth not remaineth in death. And again every one that loveth is borne of God. By which it is plain that either charity is always joined with the grace of justification (as S. 
Th ●. 2. q. 210. ●. 1. & ●.  Thomas sayeth) or that it is all one with the said grace, 
S●●t. 2. d. 26. Our. ibidem.  as others say, and so is the formal cause of justification; and then faith only concurrethe as a disposition, as hope also and fear do. At least hence it followeth that only faith justifieth not, because he that hath not Charity as saint John sayeth remaineth in death, and if a man have all the faith in the world (as saint Paul sayeth) without charity he is so far from being just that he is nothing and no body. 
Supra.  Now whereas they say that faith only justifieth, but not without charity and good works, because it can not be without them, it is another absurd heresy. 
●. Cor. ●●.  For saint Paul when he sayeth, that if he had all the faith in the world, and yet have no charity, he is nothing, supposeth that faith may be separated from charity. 
〈◊〉. 2.  And S. james supposing that it may be without good works, sayeth that, faith without good works is dead, and divers parables as of the corn, 
Mat. 1●. ibidem. Mat. 22.25.  and cockle in the same barn, of good, and bad fishes in the same net, of good, and bad gests at the same supper, yea of the sheep, and goats also, argewe that men may be in the Church by faith, and yet be bad Christians for want of charity and good works which the good Christians have. Yea reason teacheth that it is one thing to believe and to know our duty by faith, and another thing to do our duty. Yea if there were no other argument, than the evil life of Lutherans and calvinists, who brag that they have true faith, and yet live most viciously, it would convince them that faith (if there be any in them) may be severed from good works, and joined with evil. But to come to a conclusion, if faith only justify than it followeth that the gap is opened unto all vice and villainy. For when they come to the definition of this faith which only justifieth, 
Supra.  they say that it is an assurance by which we are fully persuaded that Christ's justice is ours, by which faith, also they say, Christ's justice is so applied unto us, that it is ours and coverethe our sins, and maketh us appear just in the sight of God. Out of which doctrine I deduce this argument. If faith only justify then if we retain that faith, though we commit all the villainies in the world, they can not hurt us, because so long as we hold that faith we are just, and so the gap is opened to all vice. For if a man be once persuaded, that faith only justifieth, and that this faith is no other thing but an apprehension that Christ's justice is ours, if he persuade himself that Christ's justice is his (as he must, because Caluin and Luther affirm that every man must believe so if he will be a Christian) then needs he only care to retain that faith and apprehension. For if that only justify, then retaining that, he is assured that he is still just, though he commit all the sins in the world, and so by this doctrine he hath good leave to sin. And for more confirmation of this argument it must be noted, that Luther and Caluin affirm that Christ's justice is the justice of all men, and that if all men be not just by it, the reason is because by faith they do not apprehend it, if then the greatest sinner in the world do upon a sudden apprehend that Christ's justice is his then is, he justified without any other penance from all his former sins, and if he hold fast this apprehension he need not care for amendment of life, but he may lance into a Sea of sin and iniquity, and never fear drowning, because whilst he apprehendeth Christ's justice to be his, he is just in the sight of God even then when he is in the act of sin, 
Comment 2. 〈◊〉 c. 2. Gal.  and so as Luther sayeth, he need not respect what he himself hath done or doth, but what Christ hath done, because sayeth Luther, faith respecteth not what I have done, what I have sinned, what I have deserved, but what Christ hath done and deserved: which h is to lose the bridle to all vice. Because if we respect only what Christ hath done, we need not care what we ourselves do. Wherefore although Luther some times for very shame of the world, affirmeth that good works are necessary, and that true faith can not be without them, yet because he seeth that in thus saying he speaketh with no consequence; sometimes he granteth in plain words the conclusion which I have inferred, to wit that if faith only justifieth, good works are not necessary, and evil works are not to be feared: 
in c. 2. Cal.  These are his words which shallbe my conclusion: Sola fides Christi necessaria est ad salutem, cetera omnia liberrima, neque praecepta amplius neque prohibita: Only the faith of Christ (to wit that Christ's justice is ours) is necessary unto salvation, all other things are most free, neither commanded, any more, nor prohibited. So that if a man believe that Christ's justice is his, he needeth not to care for fulfilling the commandments, because nothing is commanded, neither need he to fear fornications, adulteries, murders, and such like treacheries, for none of all these villainies are forbidden him. But let the indifferent reader be judge wether this doctrine be of God or the devil, which so favourethe sin which God forbiddeth and the devil alloweth, and whether that this faith of theirs be like to be our justification, which loseth the bridle to all licentious living.   

The third Chapter showeth how Caluin and Luther in assuring men by an assured faith of election, remission of sins, justice, and perveraunce in the same, lose the bridle unto all iniquity.  
ALl is not gold that glisters as the common proverb will witness, and all is not true that seemeth true, as the Philosopher doth tell us, because (sayeth he) many falsities many times are more plausible and probable, than truths and verities. And not to go far for an example; to say with Luther and Caluin that by faith we are assured of our Salvation, & acertained that Christ's justice is ours, and that consequently what soever our own life be, we may boldly rely on him as Children on their father crying Abba Pater, because by his justice and not by our own, we must look for salvation; hath a goodly show and lustre, and seemeth a doctrine most pious and plausible, but who so well examineth the same shall find that this is the doctrine especially which lulleth men a sleep in all impiety, and like poppy-seed or cold poison, casteth them into such a deep and dead Lethargy, that they hear no clamours, and feel no remorses of conscience. Martin Luther in a certain book which he made of the works of the first commandment, preferreth faith as the principal worship of God, and defineth it to be an assured confidence, and confident assurance, by which we are assured that we are just. And in another place thus he pronounceth: 
Comment in c. 2. Gal.  Crede eum tibi fore salutem & misericordiam, & ita erit sine dubio: ●eleeue that Christ will be thy salvation and mercy, and so it shallbe undoubtedly. See what a compendious and near way to heaven Luther hath found out. If you be clogged with all the sins in the world, believe that you are just (which is easy to do) and that you shallbe saved, and then undoubtely, Luther's soul for yours, you shallbe saved; and because so long as you believe that you are just, you are in deed just, you can not be damned so long as you can believe, how ill soever you live in the meam tyme. 
l. de captivit. Babil.  Wherefore the same Luther avoucheth that a Christian man is so rich and on so sure a ground, that he can not damn himself though he would, unless he will not believe; and what must he believe? that he is just, or that he shall be saved. These are his words Tamburlaine dives est homo Christianus ut s● damnare non poterit quantumuis velit, nisi sola incredulita te. So rithe is a Christian man that he can not damn himself though he would, but only by incredulity. And what is the incredulity which only damneth him? Not incredulity of the Incarnation, Trinity, Passion, or Resurrection; but of his own Salvation. So that live he how ill soever he will, and be he never so incredulous in the articles of his belief, yet if he believe that he shallbe saved, it shallbe so▪ And believe he the mysteries of our faith never so firmly, live he never so regularly, yet if he fear his own Salvation he shallbe damned, because only this assured faith of salvation saveth, and only want of this faith damneth, if Luther may be believed. Caluin in this doctrine subscribeth to Luther and shaketh hands very friendly, these are his words We shall have a perfect definition of faither we say that it is a steadfast and assured knowledge of God's will towards us. 
l. 3. Inst. c. 2. §. 7.  And this only assured knowledge of Salvation and gods good will towards us, he calleth the i●stifying faith: 
§. 9  for (saith he) the ungodly may believe that there is a God, and th●● the History of the gospel or other parts of Scripture are true, 
§. 10.  But this is but an image or shadow of faith, not worthy the name of faith; 
§. 16.  but there is none truly faithful but he that being persuaded with a sound assuredness that God is his merciful and loving father, doth promise himself all things upon trust of God's goodness. 
§. 1●.  And although (sayeth Caluin) we see Gods good will towards us a far of, yet with so sure light, that we know we are not deceived. At length to make the matter yet more sure, he concludeth that we are not only sure of present justice and favour, but also of future, and so are sure that we shall not be damned. These are his words. 
Ibidem.  It is against order to limit the assuredness of faith to a moment of time, whose property is to pass beyond the spaces of this life, and to extend farther to immortality to come. So that according to Caluin, believe you the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, death and Resurrection of Christ never so firmly, yet if you believe not undoubtedly that you are just and shall remain just to the end, that God not only for the present time favoureth you, but also will favour you to the end, you can not be saved: and if you believe only that you are just, and shall remain just & at length shallbe also undoubtedly saved, Caluins' soul for yours, you can not be damned. And how can Caluin assure himself or us, that we are just and shallbe just? hath he had any special revelation? noe. but saith he I am warranted out of Scripture that Christ's justice is ours, and so if I will believe undoubtedly that it is mine, & will be mine, 
●. ●r.  then am I sure that I am just, and shallbe just, and can not fall so long as I keep this standing. Against this fantastical faith of theirs, I might bring many arguments, but that, as in other matters, so in this, I covet to be short. First if this faith of theirs be so necessary, how cometh it to pass that Christ never exacted it of them whom he cured? For it is an opinion of some fathers and divines, that whom soever Christ cured in body, he healed also and justified in soul. When he● cured the blind men that came unto him, 
Mat. 9  he exacted faith of them, and asked them whether they believed; what? not whether they believed that they were just or elect, but whether they believed, that he could restore them to sight. If this stedfest faith and assuredness of our own salvation be so necessary, how came the publican to be a just man, who was so far from assuring himself of God's favour, 
Lu●. 1●.  and his own justice, that he durst not look up to heaven. And yet he returned home just, and the pharisee who gloried like a Thrasonical Caluinist in his own justice, & assured himself that he was not a sinner as the Publican and other men are, was condemned and rejected. If this undoubted faith of our own salvation be so necessary to salvation, surely the Apostles were much over seen, who inculcated so often the faith of the Incarnation, Resurrection, 
Act. 1.2.3. ●. 8.10.13.17.  and such other mysteries, which is but an image and shadow (as Caluin sayeth) of the true faith, and make no mention of that which is the only justifying faith, and all in all; never exacting of their auditors to believe that they are just and elect, but only to believe that Christ is God & man, that he died, that he rose again, & such like. Truly either this faith is not necessary, or they were very negligent & incircumspecte, who never mentioned the same, & yet so often inculcate the faith of the mysteries of our faith, which is but a shadow of the true faith, and is not sufficient to salvation without Caluins assured faith. Like wise when they made a Creed as a brief abridgement, of all which was necessary to be believed, where was their mind and memory, who omitted Caluins' article of assuredness of our salvation, and election, which is so necessary to be believed, that the faith of other articles is but a shadow in comparison of this? If Caluin say that this his article is included in the article of remission of sins, he is much deceived: because in that article we only believe that in the Church is remission of sins, but that Caluins sins or any of our sins in particular are forgiven, is not there expressed. Now if scriptures and the Apostles had only omitted, this assured faith which Caluin sayeth is so necessary, it were sufficient to make us not so assured of Caluins' doctrine: for if it were necessary, it is not like that the Apostles, whose preachings, traveles, life and death, were ordained to the salvation of others, would have omitted that which only saveth, and without which no other faith or works can possibly save us. But scripture not only omitteth assured faith of our own justice and salvation, but also condemneth it, and exhorteth us to fear of our own state and salvation, & therefore assureth us as much that this faith of Caluin is false, as Caluin assureth it to be necessary. Caluin saith that by faith we are assured of God's good will towardsus, Scripture faith that a man can not tell whether he be worthy hatred or love: Caluin sayetht hat a just man is sure that he is just: 
job ●.  job sayeth although I be simple, that is just, yet this my soul shall not know & S. Paul sayeth that although his conscience accuse him not of any sin yet in that he is not justified, to wit before his own eyes, 
Psal. 1●.  because he knew he might have secret sins from which David desired to be cleansed. Caluin sayeth that a man may besure and consequently secure of the forgiveness of his sins; 
Eccl. ●.  and yet Scripture bids us not to be without fear of our sins forgiven. or as the Greek text hath, of the forgiveness or propitiation of our sins. Caluin saith that a man may be assured not only of present but also of future favour & justice; 
Eccl. ●.  and yet scripture sayeth that a man knows not what will be, his end, because all are reserved as uncertain for the time to come. Caluin saith that a faithful man must not fear to fall, but rather assure himself that he shall keep his ground and standing; 
Rom. 11.  and yet saint Paul speaking to a faithful man sayeth: thou standest by faith, think not highly but fear, 
Philipp. 2.  and thou that standest (sayeth he) take heed lest thou fall. And again, he bids us work our salvation with fear and trembling. So that either we must leave Caluin, or renounce scripture, because they are contrary, and stand in plain terms one against another. Nether is this doctrine opposite only to scripture, but also to reason. For first there are many corners in a man's conscience, which we seeldom or never look into: For as Hieremie sayeth, 
C. 17.  the heart of man is unsearchable, and lieth open only to God. how then can Caluin by faith be assured that his sins are forgiven, that he is just and elect? or if he know, god only is not the searcher of hearts. And if there be many corners in man's heart, to which the heart itself is not privy, peradventure after all our seeking, some sin may lurk in a corner which we know not of. Secondly by Caluins own confession, we must believe nothing but what we find in scripture, and where finds he, that Caluin is just, or that his sins are forgiven? If he find it not, he rashly believeth it. If he sayeth that Christ is our redemption and propitiation: I answer that so he is the redemption and propitiation of all, and yet pagans and infidels and many of the reprebate are not just, and therefore must not believe assuredly that they are just or elect, & if they should they should believe that which is not so. Christ therefore is our propitiation, because he hath paid by his passion a sufficient price for our justification and redemption, but yet if that price by faith in Christ, together with hope, charity, Sacraments, and observation of the law (for all these are commanded) be not applied to us, we are never a whit the better. Thirdly suppose only calvin's faith by which he believes Christ's justice to be his (which not with standing is already refuted) were sufficient to apply this propitiation; 
Supra.  yet for as much as Caluin sayeth that good works do necessarily follow a found faith, I demand of him whether that he and his have not just cause to doubt, or at least to fear their own justice, and faith also, whose evil deeds are so many, and so manifest. Fourthly every one of them sayeth he is assured that he is just and shallbe saved, & yet some of them are deceived, because some of them have contrary faiths, and some of the same faith are damned, why then may not Caluin also fear lest he be deceived, seeing that Christ's died for all, and yet all are not just nor elect, though they assure then selves of the same. Lastly this doctrine openeth the gap to all manner of vice and wickedness. For if it be sufficient to justification to believe undoubtedly that I am just, or that Christ's justice, is mine, then doth it follow that as after I have sinned I may apprehend Christ's justice to be mine, and myself to be justified by the same, so when I am moved to sin by the devil or my own concupiscence, yea even then when I am in the act of sin, I may apprehend that though there is no goodness in me of mine own, yet Christ's justice is mine, of which, if even in the act of sin, I assure myself, I may assure myself also, that no sin can hurt me, because that assurance justifieth me. And so the fornicator may thus discourse with himself. I confess (o Lord) that there is no goodness in me, and that this act to which I am now tempted is a sin, but Christ's justice is mine if I will apprehend it so, am I am just if I will believe so, and from this faith, I will never be dissuaded, but will hold it fast even in the act of sin, and so I need not fear this sin, because if I hold fast by this faith, no sin can hurt me, because by this faith I me justified. And so the way is open to all vice and wickedness, because if a man will believe that he is just, and hold fast by this faith, no sin can hurt him, because that assurance of justice doth justify him.   

The fourth chapter showeth how in saying that faith maketh no sin to be imputed to a faithful man, they give good leave to all faithful men, to commit all sin and wickedness.  
THe reformers are of opinion as anon I shall relate in the next chapter, that all our works are sins, in which least they may seem to contradict themselves (for they say also that true faith can not be separated from good works which seemeth to allow of all the works of a faithful man) they have found out this way to escape a contradiction. True, say they, all the works even of faithful men are sins, and yet true it is that faith can not be separated from good works, because faith makes God to impute nothing as sin, but rather to esteem of all the actions of a faithful man as good & laudable. Wherefore Luther in a certain sermon uttered these words, Vbi fides est, 
Ser. super Si● Deus dilexit  nullum peccatum nocere potest: Where faith is, no sin can hurt. And so (sayeth he) a Christian man is so ri●ch that he can not damn himself but only by incredulity. 
Sup. l. de captain.  
l. 3. Inst. c. 14. sect. 17 etc. 1●. sect. 8.  Caluin also sayeth plainly that all just and faithful men's works are of themselves sins, but are by faith reputed as good. Which doctrine if it be true then needeth not a faithful man fear any sin be it never so great, because God will never impute it unto him, and consequently it shall never be brought to examination at the later day, nor punished in hell, because God imputes it not as sin, and consequently makes no reckoning of it. 
Psal. 50.  Wherefore David who was a faithful man, in vain cried God mercy for his adoultrie and murder, because if he was faithful (as certes he was) those sins could not be imputed as sins unto him. And so if Christians will hold fast by Caluins' faith and believe that Christ's justice is theirs, they shall not need to fear either thefts or adulteries, because Luther and Caluin have given them a warrant sealed and signed with their own hands, that if they hold their faith, no sin can hurt them because it is not imputed unto them. And why then make we scrouple any longer of sin? let every man if this doctrine be true, follow his hconcupiscences; For although he commit all the sins which either the devil puts into his mind, or the fles he and world suggestethe, he is assured that they can not hurt him, biause they are not imputed.   

The fift Chapter showeth how the reformers avouch that all our actions are of themselves mortal sins, and how this doctrine looseth the bridle to all vice.  
Woe be to them (sayeth God) who affirm bad, to be good, and good to be evib: 
Isai. 5.  which curse must needs light upon our ghospellers, who condemn the just man's good deeds as mortal sins, and account the faithful man's evil deeds as good & honest, or at least as such, that are not reputed evil, but rather good. 
in c vlt. ad Gal.  Luther sayeth that the best works which infidels do, are sins, these are his words: Whosoever out of Christ worketh, prayeth, suffereth; doth work, pray and suffer in vain: because what soever is not of faith, is sin. And in his confutation of Latomus reason, thus he speaketh: Omne opus bonum peccatum est nisi ignoscat Dei misericordea: every good work is a sin, unless God's mercy forgive it. And in the same place, he sayeth that God pardons it, in that he imputeth it not to the faithful. And a little before that, he sayeth that saint Paul never did good work in his life, & that the best which ever he did, was a sin, though God imputed it not to him, because he was faithful. And yet again before that, he sayeth that even our justice is uncleanness, and all our good works are sins. Likewise in one of his propositions collected and condemned by the famous university of Paris, he hath these very words: Omnes virtutes morales, & scientiae speculativae, non sunt verae virtutes & scientiae, sed peccata & errores: all moral virtues and speculative sciences, are not true virtues and sciences, but sins and errors. John Caluin although he will seem to make a difference betwixt the moral virtues, 
l. 3. c. 14. §. 2.  and vices of the heathens, (for otherwise (sayeth he) if these be confounded, there shall remain no order in the common wealth) and although he calleth the pagans moral works the gifts of God, yet presently after, either forgetting or correcting his former speeches, he sayeth plainly that they are no more to be counted virtues then those vices which are want to deceive by reason of nearness and likeness to virtue. 
Sect. ●.  And he pronounceth this sentence against Scipio, Cato, and other moral men amongst the Romans'; to wit, that all their moral virtues were vices. Then he setteth down this general conclusion as a final sentence from which no man must appeal; 
Sect. 4.  whatsoever man thinketh, purposethe, or doth before he be reconciled unto God by faith, is accursed, and not only of no value to rightuousues, but of certain deserving to damnation. And he gives this reason: because forsooth, our nature by original sin is so corrupted and soaked in the poison of sin, 
Sect. 5. & l. 3. c. ● in fine.  that it can breathe out nothing but corruption and therefore (sayeth he) oil shall sooner be wrounge out of a stone, than any good work from us. 
l 3 c 14 sect. 7.9.11.  Yea the same sentence he pronounceth not only against the sinful, but also the just and faithful Christian; to wit, that no good proceedeth from either of them, but that the best work which the justest man doth, deserveth shame & damnation. The reason and ground of this their doctrine is because they think that original sin hath so defaced our nature, that it hath blotted out the image of God, bereaved us of free will, inclined our nature wholly to sin, unabled it to virtue, in so much that what soever proceedeth from this infected nature, is filthy, abominable, and odious in the sight of God. But thus they first of all do mighty injury unto man's nature, which by this doctrine is rather brutis he then reasonable. For if man's understanding be so metamorphized, that all his science and knowledge either speculative or practical is error and deceit, as Luther sayeth, I see not why man should be counted reasonable, more than a brute beast. And if he be wholly bent to sensuality and sin, and hath no inclination to virtue, no powver nor faculty to do the least act of virtue, or to resist the least tentation, then is his nature no more noble than the nature of a beast, because he is altogether sensual as a beast is, and no more inclined to virtue or able to do a virtuous action than an ox or an ass. And so the old definition by which philosophers use to define man must be corrected, because they define a man to be animal rationale a reasonable creature: which definition by this doctrine aggregeth no more to a man then to a beast, because man is as unable to the works and operations of reason as a beast is, and so is no more man but a beast by Caluins' definition. Secondly this doctrine condemneth all Philosophers and Philosophy, which teach us, that in the most vicious man that is, there are some inclinations & seeds of virtue, which is the cause that the most wicked man that is, loveth virtue at least in others, hath a remorse of conscience when he hath done evil, blusheth at his evil deeds as not beseeming his nature, and some times doth some good work or other: for you shall hardly find a man given to all vice, and inclined to no virtue. from hence proceeded the moral works of the Romans', for which saint Austin sayeth almighty God bestowed on them, 
l. 5 cin. c. 15.  so ample en empire, and honoured them with so many victories, hence proceeded also the laws of Lycurgus, Solon, Plato, and the rest, and all the motall precepts and virtues, of the ancients. from hence also proceed the speculative sciences of natural Philosophy, Metaphysike, Mathematique, Astrology, and such like: which to condemn of error, as Luther doth, is mere madness: against whom I will use the same argument, which Philosophers used against the Academikes who denied all science: either Luther knoweth that all speculative and practical sciences are errors, or he knoweth not: if he know not, he is rash to deny sciences, if he know, them in denying science he granteth science. And although I will not deny but that the virtues of pagans are many times vice, because their end or scope is often times vain glory, or else some other evil circumstance is annexed. Yet to say that all their actions are of necessity sins, is to make man no man, as I have proved. I will grant also that sinners good works, as prayer, alms deeds, and such like, are opera mortua dead works, as divines say, because in that they proceed not from ye life of grace, they are not condignly meritorious, yet they may be morally good, and if they proceed from a good intention, and motion of God which is called grace prevenient, and which is never wanting, they dispose a man to penance & penance disposeth to justification. Wherefore although Nabuchodonosor was in mortal sin, 
Dan 4.  yet Daniel counseled him to redeem his sins by alms deeds, which counsel he would never have given, if to give alms, had been a mortal sin. Thirdly this is to condemn Scripture yea and God himself, who forbidden certain actions as evil, and counsel and command others as good: which is absurdly done if all be sins and evil actions. Fourthly, hence it followeth that all sins are equal: because if our actions be evil because they proceed from an evil and corrupted nature, they must be (at least in this respect) equally evil, even as the fruits of a crab tree are of like sowernes, because they proceed from the same tree, and take their sowernes from the same sap. Lastly thus the gap is open unto all vice. For if what soever man doth is sin, then if he be tempted to fornication, to what purpose should he refrain? For if he resist the temptation, he must do it either by chastising his body, or by prayer, or by a contrary resolution of the mind and will, which if it be sin also, he avoideth one sin by another, and so might as well have yielded to the temptation: And if he he have another man's wife in keeping, or his lands, or goods in possession, he can not get out of this sin but by restoring, because the sin is not forgiven unless the thing which is wrongfully holden be restored, and yet to what purpose should he restore, if restoring also be a sin, as it must be, if all our actions be sins? truly he hath little reason, because in restoring he avoideth not sin, but changeth one sin for another. Yea if this doctrine may take place, the Prince may as well use oppression of his subjects as bounty and magnificence; subjects may as well rebel as obey; soldiers need not to fear murder, pillage, Luxury; courtiers need not to make scrouple of vanity, flattery, dissimulation, ambition; merchaunres need not to forbear usury, nor vn●uste selling and buying? judges may take bribe's, and pronounce partial sentences; and the jury may as well give wrong, as right informations; the rich may as well bestow blows, as alms on the poor, and beggars may as well steal, as ●egge: because as these are sins so are the contrary virtues, 
Supra.  which are no more virtues (as Caluin saith) then are those vice which for their likeness and show of virtue d●g● for virtues; And so no man shall need to make bones of any sin, because some thing he must do, & whatsoever he do the, is sin, and when he thinketh that he doth best, his doings deserve no less than eternal damnation. But they will say that although all actions be sins, yet God imputes not all as sins, and therefore we must do almsdeeds and abstain from injuries, because God imputes these as sins, but not the other. Thus they say, but yet thus they take not a way the absurdity. For yet it followeth that an infidel may do what he will, and make no more scrouple of one action then of another, because God imputes all his actions as they are, that is sins, and vices. And if the faithful and just man's actions be all sins, either God must impute all as sins, or none at all, because all are a like, neither hath God any reason to repute his alms deeds as good works, rather than his thefts, if those be sins and deserve damnation as well as these. whence it followeth that we must put no difference betwixt our actions, but may a● freely and as boldly, adventure upon thefts and murders, as any works o● charity, justice, mercy, or any other virtue.   

The sixth Chapter showeth how they deny free will and so also open the gap to sin.  
SAint Austin sayeth that it is a thing so commonly received that man hath free will, 
Ep. 11. l. de duabus animabus c. 1.  and that he is not to be blamed for that which is not in his power, that the Shepherds sing it on the mountains, poets in theatres, the unlearned in Circles, the learned in libraries, masters in Schools, Bishops in sacred places, and mankind throughout the world. 
Aug. l 〈◊〉. ciu. c. 19  And Cicero thought it would be counted such a paradox to deny free will, that he chose rather to deny God's prescience which seemed repugnant to it, then to deny free will which was so commonly received. And so sayeth saint Austin, he was injurious to God, lest he should be injurious to the common wealth, which could not stand without free will. And yet the stoics denied free will as witnesseth saint Austin, 
l. 5. ciu 〈…〉. Aug ser ●●.  and after them Simon Magus, Manicheus, and Wiclephe, and last of all our late Reformers, a bad brood of as bad breeders; Luther therefore writing against Erasmus and against free will also which Erasmus had proved both learnedly and eloquently entitleth his book, 
Lut. l de ser●o arbitrio.  of Servile Arbitrement, in which book he disputeth with all might and main against free will, and to set before our eyes more plainly our servile condition, he calleth man's will a Hackney, upon which if god's spirit chance to sit and settle itself, it goeth necessarily that way to which the spirit spurreth it, but if the devil bestride this hackney, it runneth whether Satan urgeth it, and hath no power either to resist the one, or the other. And a little after he sayeth that frewill is a divine name which aggregeth only to God, but not to man; yea in another place he sayeth that free-will in man is a title only and name without the thing itself. 
c. 8.  Caluin in this point aggregeth with Luther. For he in his first book of institutions, 
c. 15. sect. 8.  grants that Adam had free will before his fall (which I see not how he can grant, 
l. 3. c. 34.  because he sayeth that God's providence and predestination taketh away frewill, yea that Adam's first sin was committed by the inevitable decree of God) but after his fall, he in himself, and we in him, jost free-will: and therefore Caluin rebuketh the Philosophers, who aver that man hath free will, and that else all difference betwixt vice & virtue is taken a way, for (sayeth he) they say true if they take man before his fall. 
c. 2.  And in his second book having given a sharp censure and sentence against both Philosophers and fathers, because they absolutely affirm that man hath free-will, these give free-will his part together with the grace of God; he wisbeth that this name free-will should no more bespoken of, 
c. 2. sect. 〈◊〉.  and he would wish others if they would ask his counsel to forbear it also, lest that thereby they take occasion of pride, and of a proud conceit of their own force? And so if wishers might be woulders, we should neither have free-will nor the name of free-will. By which it is plain that Caluin absolutely denieth free-will, as Luther and melancthon once did, although after ward they granted it in external and civil actions, as buying and selling, talking and walking, and such like; but in moral actions of vice and virtue, yea in supernatural actions, to which the grace of God is necessary, as the love of God, connersion, and repentance of a sinner, they grant no free-will nor choice at all. The which opinion is so absurd, that by this a man may see what credit is to be given them in greater matters, and higher mysteries, who have erred so grossly in a matter so evident, that not only reason, but also experience proveth it. For first we deliberate and consult concerning some actions and not others; as whether we shall take Physic or Noah, and yet we consult not whether we shall die or Noah, fly or Noah, and suck like; which is a sign that the former actions are in our power, else as well might we consult whether we should fly or Noah in the a ire, when by running or riding we can not escape our enemy. And why have Princes their counsellors to consult & deliberate, if all things follow the Sway of necessity? We command also our servants or subjects to run or go, but not to fly, or to stay the course of the son, because those actions are in their power, not these. We exhort men also to leave this vice, to follow that virtue, & we counsel the sick to take this not that medicine, because all these things are in his power & free choice, & yet we exhort him not to put a way his agewe, to be sick no more, and if we would, he would count us but fools for our labours, because these things are not in his choice. We are also wary in our actions and heedful, lest we err or banger, which argueth that we may do ill or well, and consequently are not enforced by necessity either to the one or the other. We are angry also with our subjects for doing certain things, and they marvel not; and yet if we would be angry with them for not moving a mountain, or not carrying a greater burden they a man is able to bear, they would think us mad if we be but angry. We are angry with ourselves also, & blame and repent ourselves, for over shooting ourselves in words, for making an evil bargain, for eating or drinking to much, for stealing, or such like actions, which is a sign that we might have done other wise, else I demand a reason why we repent not ourselves that we did not soar up into the air when our enemy pursued us, or the thief rob us? we praise and dispraise men for virtuous or vicious actions, as for liberality, and nigardness, and yet we praise them not for growing and waxing tall and big, neither do we dispraise them for little stature, or for not putting forth their limbs. And why, but because those things are in their power, these are not, and therefore worthy neither praise nor dispraise? we ask also and inquire of men, why they did this, why they did not that? As God asked Cain why his countenance was fallen? 
Gen. 〈◊〉  Which argueth that they might have done other wise. Or if Caluin will say that we make inquiry of necessary things; then let him demand of the Lion why he roareth, of the ass why he brayeth, of the sheep why he bleateth, and of ye sick man why he will be sick, and the blind man why he seethe not? But to leave experience (which commonly is called the mistress of fools, because it teacheth even fools to be wiser, and might persuade Luther & Caluin also that man hath free-will, were they not worse than fools, and as witless in this point as mad men) I will demonstrate the same by reason also. And first of all I demand, why rewards are proposed not only by Princes, but by God also for them that embrace virtuous and heroical actions? Certes, no God a mercy to him that doth well, if he could not do otherwise. And why do they prescribe punishments against transgressors of their laws, if there be no free will? Certainly he that necessarily is evil, is rather worthy compassion than pain or punishment. Or why do God and Princes set down laws and precepts, for their subjects to observe? If they have no free will, they may as well prescribe laws to sheep that they graze not upon other men's grounds, or to horses that they break not their master's Hedges to run into their neighbour's corn, or wolves that they worrye not the innocent lambs, or to foxes that they live not upon the spoil of the Poulterer's hens and capons? Why are not mad men punished for the evil words, which they speak, or evil deeds which they do in their madness, seeing that thy have as much free will as men have, when their wits are freshest? Secondly man is endued which reason to understand not only what the end is, but also what are the means to attain unto the same; he seethe, that there are many particular ends to which he may apply himself: he seethe also many means to attain unto the end which he proposeth unto himself; as if he propose health he perceues, that this he may attain either by purging, or letting blood, or exercise, or diet. And seeing that the will followeth the understanding which is her eye, & without which she is blind, and can neither love nor hate, neither desire nor fear, it must needs follow, that as the understanding proposeth many means, and apprehendeth none of them in particular necessary, (because if one be not used another will serve) so the will hath freedom to use which means she will, because the understanding judgeth none in particular necessary, and therefore by prejudicate opinion enforceth her to none. And in this may be seen a difference betwixt men and brute beasts, because though they change their imaginations and imagine one while water to be convenient, another while meat, yet that which they first apprehend carrieth a way their appetites by a sway of necessity. Lastly there was never yet any nation so barbarous which confessed not virtue to be in some of our actions, vice in others; and therefore they praise the one and dispraise the other; and yet if we have no free will it must needs follow, that there is no more vice & virtue in our actions, then in operations of beasts, as I shall in another chapter prove most manisestly. But they will say (as commonly they say when they know. not what to say) that in reasons may be sophistry and deceit, and that therefore against all the experience and reason alleged for free will, we must believe the holy word of Scripture, which rejecteth free will. Is it so? and are scriptures contrary to reason? I will not deny but scripture teacheth many things above reason, but that it teacheth any thing against reason, is most untrue. For as grace perfiteth nature in elevating it to a higher being, and to more heroical actions then of itself it can attain unto, and in no wise destroyeth it; so scripture which is the book of faith, leadeth reason farther than of herself she could go, but induceth her not to any thing which is against reason, for so God which is the author of reason and faith, in ruinating reason by faith and scripture, should deny himself, because he should be contrary to himself. Yea if Scripture should deny free-will, it should be contrary to itself, because it giveth as plain testimony for it, as for any thing. 
Eccl. 6. 1●.  doth not Ecclesiasticus affirm that God from the beginning created man and left him in the hand of his own counsel? doth he not say in the same place, if thou wilt keep the commandments they shall keep thee? doth he not again inculcate free will unto us saying: God hath set before thee water and fire, to which thou wilt put thy hand? To what end doth God say to man if thou wilt, if man have no free-will? were it not ridiculous if one should say to a blind má that can not see; if thou wilt, look and thou shalt find; or to a lame man, if thou wilt follow me, thou shalt not lose thy pains? 
Is. c. 1. ●. 30.  The like words to the former hath Esaie the Prophet: If you will and shall hear me, you shall eat the goods of the earth. Ang again: this sayeth our Lord God of Israel, if you return and cease from sin you shall be saved. The like speeches useth almighty God by his Prophet Hieremie: 
c. 15.  If thou wilt be converted, I will convert thee, And how often doth scripture exhort and command us to convert ourselves to God? 
Ezech. 18.33.  Which were ridiculously spoken, if it were not in our free-will by the assistance of God's grace to turn unto God. 
Mat. 19  And in the new Testament sayeth Christ: if thou wilt enter into life Keep the commandments. And again he complaineth with tears of Hierusalems' ingratitude saying: 
Mat. 23.  Jerusalem, Jerusalem how often would I have gathered thee as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and thou wouldst not? What man in his wits would speak thus unless he thought that Jerusalem had free will? else might Jerusalem have answered Christ in this manner. Why complainest thou so pitifully of my sloth and ingratitude? Knowest not thou that I can not? why sayest thou to me, and thou wouldst not, knowing that I have no will, & that thine only is the will, mine is servile necessity? So that it is manifest by experience, reason, and scripture, that man hath free will. And seeing that there is no page of scripture, but it conteinethe either commandment, or counsel, or exhortation, or some one or other of the signs of free will, which are before alleged, I may be bold to say that there is no page in holy Scripture out of which may not evidently be deduced a pregnaunte proof and argument for free will. Wherefore although some few places are in Scripture, which, till they be well understood, may seem to disprove free will, yet rather should the heretic confess his want of skill to interpret those places, then to deny free will which all scripture almost, so evidently avoucheth. 
l. Cor. 12.  Let them not therefore object that God worketh all in us, that man's way is not in man: 
jer. 10.  that it is not of the willer nor of the ronner but of God that taketh mercy on us: 
Rom 9  that God calleth and knocketh at the door of our soul: 
Ephes. 5.  that God the father draweth us; For I can easily answer and have all the sfathers and divines to back me in it, 
Io. 6.  that God only operateth in us by his antecedent grace, but we also by virtue of it cooperate unto his motion: that man's way, that is the way of Salvation is not in man's power in respect of the beginning, because God only puts us in the way by his vocation and precedent grace, but yet by virtue of this grace it is in our power to walk in this way; that it is God only that beginneth all good wills and courses, but supposing his precedent grace, we also will and run, but not we only but his grace with us & we with it: That God only calleth and knocketh by his praevenient grace, but we also by consent do open the door unto him; that God the father draweth by his motions, but sweetly without violence, by persuasion and allurement, not by compulsion. But to labour no farther in so evident and plain a matter; by a great absurdity which followeth this doctrine, I will demonstrate it to be absurd, because one absurdity followeth another. If man have no free-will all vice and wickedness must go for currant, and no man must endeavour to avoid sin, because he hath no power to avoid it. Be it then that Master Minister dehort me from vice with all the Rhetoric which he hath, let him lay before mine eyes the filthiness of sin, the dishonesty which it implieth, the offence of God the scandal of my neighbour which followeth it, thereby to dissuade me from it; yet if I have no free-will nor power to avoid sin, I may answer him that his persuasions are but lippe-labour which he might as well use to a beast as to a man; For, what I shall do, that of neceffitie I shall do; and as he disuadeth me from vice, so the pleasure or temporal profit which vice bringeth, doth so allure me, and the devil so urgeth me, that I can not resist, because I have no free will, but must behave myself passively, permitting concupiscence and the devil to work in me what they will, because I have no power to resist them. For as a man that is persuaded that he hath no force to resist his enemy, or the Ministers of justice, layeth down his arms and weapons, and permitteth them to do their pleasure, knowing that resistance is vain, when will he nill he, their pleasure must be done; so when a man is persuaded that he hath no free-will nor power to avoid sin, he must yield himself as a slave to all vice, and when he feeleth the temptation he must yield presently, and acknowledge his own impotency. And if any man rebuke him for his sins, or if God hereafter at the day of judgement accuse him or condemn him, he hath an excuse ready for such an accusation, and a trick in store to avoid such a condemnation, to wit, that he could do no otherwise, because he had no free will. And so he may commit what sins he will and no man, yea not God himself can justly find fault with him, unless they first find a fault in Luther's and Caluins' doctrine, which teacheth him that he can not do otherwise.   

The seventh Chapter proveth that the reformers in avouching the laws and commandments of God to be impossible, give occasion also of all impiety.  
I Shall not need to devil long on this point, nor to use any long discourse to come unto my intended conclusion, because I have already in the fift book set down Luther's and Caluins' words in which they affirm the commandments to be impossible, where also I have disproved this doctrine and proved the contrary, to wit that man hath power with the grace of God to fulfil his commandments, only now out of those premises as in that book I inferred God to be unreasonable by Luther's and Caluins' doctrine, so now out of the same I will conclude, that the gap is opened to all vice and wickedness. For if a man be once persuaded, that he can not fulfil the commandment of keeping the Sabboth-daye, if desire of gain, or lacre move him to servile works & labours, he will easily be persuaded to labour, who is already persuaded that he can not keep the Sabothe, as he should do. And if he once give credit to Caluin that he can not observe the law, which forbiddeth him to covet his neighbour's wife or goods, if he be tempted or moved with such objects, he will never urge himself to withstand such temptations, because he is persuaded that he can not fulfil this law, but must needs transgress it, and not only covet and desire, but also inordinate use his neighbour's wife and usurp his goods also, when soever they cross the way of his desire. Briefly seeing that there is no sin, but it is a transgression of one law or other, he that is persuaded that he can not fulfil any law of God (as all Lutherans and calvinists are) is persuaded also that he can avoid no sin, and consequently if any sin move or allure him either by profit or pleasure which it implieth, he can not, being so persuaded, endeavour to withstand the temptation, because that were to show himself able to resist sin and to fulfil the command mentes, and consequently to condemn John Caluins' doctrine. And although in so doing he openeth the gap to all manner of iniquity, yet therein he showeth himself a true Caluiniste, who being persuaded by religion and conscience that he hath neither force nor will to resist any sin, or to fulfil any commandment, must not, yea can not without offence of conscience and hazard of faith, go about to fulfil any law, for so though not in words, yet in fact and deed, he should deny his religion.   

The eight Chapter showeth how in affirming that Christ hath freed us from all laws, they lose the bridle to all vice.  
THe reformers, as is recounted partly in the third book and second chapter, partly in the fift chapter of the same book, are of opinion that Christ was no lawgiver, but rather that he came to free us from all laws: which doctrine although I have in the former places alleged, yet to ease the reader, it shall not be amiss here also to set down the samedoctrine in other their own words. 
in cap. 4. Gal.  Luther in a comment of his on holy scripture, often times inculcateth that by Christ we are so freed from all laws that none of them can bind us, or touch us in conscience. These are his words: Discat igitur pius legem & Christum duo contraria esse prorsus incompatibilia: present Christo lex mullo modo dominari debet sed cedere debet è conscientia & relinquere cubile (quòd angustius est, quam ut duos capere possit) soli Christo: Let therefore the godly man learn to know that Christ and the la are twoe contraries altogether incompatible: Christ being present, the la must in no wise rule, but must departed from conscience, and leave the bed (which is to narrow for twoe) to Christ alone. Where you see that he makes Christ and all laws even his own laws so contrary, that if Christ stand, no la can stand, nor have any force over conscience. 
in c. 2. Gal.  And in another place of the same comment, thus he defineth: quatenus est Christianus, est supra omnem legem: as he is a Christian, or in that he is a Christian, he is above all law. And yet again in another work of his, 
l. de liberta●● Christiana.  he speaketh more boldly and plainly: nullo opere, nulla lege homini Christiano opus est, cum per fidem sit liber ab omnilege: for a Christian no la nor work is needful, seeing that by faith he is free from all law. 
Supra, & l. 2. Inst. c. 2. §. ●. 14.  The same opinion holdeth John Caluin as in the former and many other places is plainly to be seen. By which doctrine although they will seem to make Christ a more perfect redeemer as before is noted, yet in deed they make him a favourer and patron of all vice and wickedness. For if we be freed from all obligation of laws, then do they no more bind us then laws abrogated: if they bind not in conscience, than no man is bound in conscience to observe them: If he be not bound in conscience to observe them, than he sinneth not in transgressing them no more than in doing contrary to a la which is abrogated, because every sin is against the obligation of one law or other, yea then he transgresseth not, because where is no obligation there can be no transgression. If it be no sin to transgress laws (as Luther and Caluin say that to a Christian such transgressions are not imputed as sins) then need not any Christian make any scrouple of any action by what la soever it be forbidden, and so he may as freely steal as give alms, and as boldly he may follow his lust and sensuality, as live chastened, and moderate his appetites; for where no la bindeth in conscience all is lawful that liketh, and so the gap is open to all manner of vice.   

The ninth Chapter proveth that in affirming God to be the author of sin, the Reformers open the gap to all vice.  
I Have already related the blasphemies of our new Christians against the goodness of God, and I have demonstrated that they are senseless, absurd, and impious, in making God the author of our sins, whose mercy pardoneth, and whose justice punishethe sins, but can not work, or commit the least sin without prejudice of his goodness and deity also, which is goodness itself. So that now I will suppose for my premises that they are of that opinion, and I will deducefor my intended conclusion, that this doctrine looseth the bridle unto all iniquity. For if a man be once persuaded as all calvinists are, that God is the author and worker of his sins, what is there remaining to restrain and withhold him from sin? he may and will easily discourse thus with himself, when soever the devil urgeth, or the flesh allurethe, or the world enticeth him to sin. This act to which I am tempted and which commonly is called a sin, is the work of God as well as mine, and more his then mine, because as my oracle, (that is John Caluin) telleth me, he worketh it in me, and urgeth me unto it. Why then should I either be afraid or ashamed to do that which God not only doth with me, but also so forcibly moveth me unto it, that (as M. Caluin telleth me) I can not possibly resist him? Am I better than he? or can any sin be so ugly, as not to beseem me which beseemeth him, who is goodness itself? But peradventure God dispenseth with himself but not with me, and therefore will not have me to sin. Will he not? Why then doth he urge and egg me to sin? where I am urged, certes I am willed, and willed by him by whom I am urged. Yea if sin be the work of God (as it is unless Caluin lie) then is it the effect of his will (for as David sayeth he doth all by his will, and as divines say his power is his will) and so I in sinning shall do his pleasure and conform myself to his will. Let us sin then freely, we do but Gods will, and let us not make scruple of that, of which he is the willer and worker, let us not blush at the turpitude of sin of which God himself is not ashamed, neither let us fear offence where we do our masters will and pleasure, rather let us persuade ourselves that all sins are lawful and pleasing to God, because they are the works of his will, and consequently according to his will. But fie rather upon this impious and licentious doctrine, God forbiddeth sin by his law, and therefore would not have it done, and he punisheth sin most severily, and therefore is no author of it, and he is goodness itself and devoid of a●● malice, and therefore can not work sin, which is devoid of all goodness, and nothing but malice.   

The tenth Chapter by many points of their doctrine proveth that they take away all vice and virtue from men's actions, and so give them leave to sin, and to do what they will.  
IT is a thing so manifest that virtue and vice, honesty & dishonesty, is to be found in the actions of man, that there was never any people so barbarous or vicious, which hath not commended many of men's actions, and hath not dispraised many others, and blushed at them even in themselves, as not beseeming man's nature, which as it is reasonable, so it should be ruled by reason. Wherefore to certain actions, honours and rewards have been proposed, and to others severe punishments and chastisements. The wisest of the Gentiles whose reason by sin & superstition was least obscured, were of opinion that some actions were sins, and offences of God, & that others were grateful and pleasing unto him. For they knew that God the author of nature, as he had ordained all things to their end, and given them faculties to exercise those actions, which should bring them to their end; so he hath ordained man unto his end, which is to live virtuously, and by virtuous life so to serve God here, that he may enjoy him hereafter: and therefore he hath endued him with reason by which he may know virtue from vice, and good from evil, and a will also to execute that which reason shall command; so that when he liveth according to reason he followeth his nature, and God's ordinance, and exercise the those actions which beseem his reasonable nature, and are pleasing unto God, and when he solloweth sensuality and leaveth reason, them doth he that which is not beseeming his nature, then doth he break God's ordinance, and swerver from the end to which he is ordained, and consequently sinneth & offendeth God. 
l. 1. Eth. c. 8.  Wherefore Aristotle sayeth that wise and virtuous men which live according to reason are most dear unto God. 
Ex Clement. Alex orat. hortator ad gentes. in Phaedone.  Plato affirmeth that God is the revenger of sin and dishonesty, and in another place he distinguisheth three kinds & states of men: The first of those that live virtuously, and they sayeth he, are sent to the happy Ilancls, which we would call heaven: the second state is of them who commit lesser faults, which we would call venial sins, & such sayeth he are purged for a time, (the same do Catholics say of them that die out of mortal sin yet are defiled so with venial sins that they need some purging in Purgatory) and then with the first sort, are admitted to the happy islands. The last are they which commit enormous and heinous crimes, and such sayeth Plato are tormented perpetually, because their pains do them no good, which is as much to say, as Catholics say of them, who for greater offences of which they repent not before death, are condemned to a praemunire and perpetual imprisonment in hell. By which it may appear that not only Christianes' but also pagans and those that want the light of faith, have yet by light of reason espied vice in some of our actions, and virtue in other some, and have deemed those worthy punishment, these worthy some reward. And yet if we give credit to our new Christianes', we must acknowledge no more virtue or vice in the actions, of men them in the operations of brutish and unreasonable creatures. For first if it be true which Luther and Caluin teach us, that no laws can bind a Christian, then doth it follow that a Christian can not sin and consequently, that there can be no vice in any of his actions. For where no law bindeth there is no law, where no law is, there is no transgression of law, where is no transgression, no sin can be, because every sin is a transgression of one law or other. 
Rom. 7.  Wherefore S. Paul sayeth that without law sin is dead and of noemallice. 
8. 10. s.  And S. John sayeth that whosoever sinneth committeth iniquity, and that sin is iniquity, that is transgression, for so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he useth, importeth, & therefore the grecians commonly call sin by the self same name. And although some actions which are of themselves evil, are not sins because the laweforbiddeth them, but therefore are by the law forbidden because of themselves they are sins, yet certain it is that there is no sin but it is forbidden, either by the la of God, or of nature, or of man, and therefore well might saint Austin say, 
l. 2. the pee. mer. c. 16.  that no sin should be, if no law did forbid it. 
Rom. 2.  And although saint Paul sayeth that the gentiles sinned without a law, and therefore shallbe punished without a law, yet he excludeth only a written law such as the jew had, and without that (sayeth he) the gentiles do sin, but yet not without all law, for at least they transgressed the law of nature, otherwise they could not have sinned, because every sin is against one law or other; and so if no la bind us in conscience, no sin at all can be found in our actions, be they never so crossing and contrary to reason. Secondly they deny free-will and consequently they take away all vice and virtue. For if when I do that action which is counted a sin I have no free-will, than I can do no otherwise, if I can do no otherwise, I am not to be blamed for that, which I could not avoided, but rather to be pitied that I am so constrained. And if when I pray to God or give alms to the poor I can do no otherwise, (as I can not if I have no free-will) I am not prause worth, because no God a mercy to him that doth well unawares, or wether he will or Noah. Wherefore we commend those moste which do well freely and of their own choice, & where we see men by fear or compulsion are driven to well doing, we commend them the less, by how much greater was the constraint; which is a sign that free choice, more or less, is necessary to the making of a virtuous action. Thirdly they say that God imputeth no sin unto a faithful man, whence it followeth that there is no sin in their actions, or that God is deceived, or is no right esteemer of things; but this they will not say and therefore must avouch that there is no sin in Christians actions. Fourthly although herein they speak not with that consequence which might have been expected of men of reason, they affirm that all our actions even those that go for best, are of themselves mortal sins, which deserve no better reward than eternal damnation; which if it be true, thence must needs follow, that there is not any virtue in our actions, because where vice is, virtue can not be: and so virtue which proceedeth not but ex integra causa, from an entire cause, is clean taken away. fifthly they affirm that God is the author of all our sins, and seeing that his will is his power, by which he causeth all things, sin is according to his will: yea they affirm that he moveth us & eggeth us to sin, which is a sign that he will have us sin. If sin than he according to God his will, it can not offend him, but rather please him, because the we are pleased when things do fall out according to our will and desire; and seeing that where no offence is there can be no sin, it followeth, that if God be the author of sin, than sin is no sin at all. Out of these opinions I gather that neither sin nor virtue is remaining in men's actions, and consequently if this doctrine be true, no man needeth to fear sin or to care for virtue, because this word, virtue, is but a word which hath no thing answerable unto it, and this name, sin, is but a bullibagge or bugbear, devised and invented to scar fools with all, because according to the new religion, there is no more sin in the actions of men, then of brutish beasts.   

The eleventh Chapter showeth how they take away all conscience and so also open the gap to all vice.  
SO careful is our heavenly father, lest we should commit any sin, that he hath provided, not one, or twoe, but many and sundry means to restayne us from it, as being the only thing which displeaseth him, and preiudiceth us. He hath engraven in our hearts a law of nature and reason, which dictateth unto us what is good and what is evil, and commandeth us to embrace the one, and to avoid the other; 
Rom. 2.  by reason of which la the Gentiles (as saint Paul sayeth) could not plead ignorance for an excuse for their sins, because they had a law written in their hearts, by which they might have squared their actions and directed their lives according unto reason, and with in the bounds of nature. To this law before Christ's coming, he added a written la for our better direction in the way of virtue, not only natural, but also supernatural. And when the fullness of time, that is the time of Christ and the new la, was come, he gave us another law more perfect, than the old, which therefore leadeth us to greater perfection. And because laws are mute, which can not speak nor interpret themselves, and if they be not put in execution they are easily contemned; he hath appointed interpreters, such as are our Pastors and Doctors, to expound this law unto us, and Magistrates also to see it put in exceution, and to punish the transgressors. But least that we should take our liberty in sinning, when we can avoid the rigour of the law, and the eye of the Magistrate; he hath lodged in our bosoms, a severe judge and monitour, called conscience, which keepeth us in awe, and makes us fear to sin, even then, when secrecy promiseth security. 
●. 2. in c. 2. Ro.  Wherefore Origen calleth conscience a corrector and correcting spirit, because it punisheth and amendeth our faults and disorders, yea he calls it also a Pedagogue and Schoolmaster, because it instructeth us and teacheth us our duties, and keeps us in no less awe than doth the Schoolmaster his Scholars. 
ex Th. ●. p. q. 71.4.18.  S. Damascen calls conscience the eye of the soul, because it lays all our actions open unto the view of the soul, & ruleth our whole life, as the eye doth the body. This conscience like a law telleth us what in every particular circumstance is lawful, what unlawful; like a witness it accuseth us, and brings in evidence against us; like a judge it condemneth us as guilty when we have committed a fault, and declareth us innocent of the fact, when we have not done it; and like an executioner or minister of justice, it tormenteth us, and layeth upon us our due pain and punishment. That conscience is a law we easily perceive and daily experience in ourselves. For when natural reason and our Synderesis tells us, that vice is to be eschewed, & that fornication is a vice, conscience concludeth ergo thou mayst not commit it: and if not withstanding consciences prohibition, we do commit the same, we do against conscience, and transgress the law of conscience, which always in particular doth dictate unto us, what is to be embraced, and what is to be eschewed. When the lascivious man is moved unto lust, conscience like a law forbiddeth him, and when the thief is tempted unto theft, conscience sayeth he must not commit it, because he must not do that to another, which he would not have done to himself. And if a friend leave a jewel with his friend, to which none but they twoe are privy, conscience will urge him to restitution, and command him to restore that, to which the Prince's law can not compelle him because it meddles nor with secrers. And so conscience is a law, and so rigorous a law, that it admitteth no excuse, no cloak, nor dispensation. It is a witness also, which accuseth us even of our secret sins, and works of darkness, and proves us guilty before the divine tribunal. And whether thou be in bed or at board, at home or abroad, in company or alone, it still crieth against thee, guilty And if thou seekest by silence to put this witness to silence, or by stopping the ears of thy soul, not to give ear unto him, he will always buss in thy ears, that which thou wouldst not hear, and will so plainly convict thee, that thou canst not deny the fault. 
Gen. 3.  When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, before God accused them or took notice of the matter, their own conscience accused them, and so plainly convicted them, that they went and hid their heads in a bush for shame. 
Gen. 4.  Cain also their untoward son, had no soener made oblation of his niggardly sacrifice, but conscience accused him, and brought in such evidence against him, that he changed countenance like a guilty person, and hounge down his head like a sheep-biter. And he had no soener butchered his innocent brother Abel, 
Gen. 4.  but Abells' blood cried vengeance against him; And think you that conscience held his peace? noe Noah, this witness cried out so shrilly against him, that he cried peccavi and acknowledge his fault to be so great, that God's mercy was not able to forgive it. Likewise the brethren of joseph after that they had most traitorously sold him, and with a bloody coat had covered all the matter, and cleared themselves also before their father; yet still, (especially when any adversity crossed them) their conscience accused them, 
Gen. 42.44.  and made them to confess, that justly their disignements were crossed for the unkind part which they had played with their brother. So that the old proverb herein is verified; conscientia mill testes, conscience is a thousand witnesses. Nether is conscience a la and witness only, it is a judge also, which condemneth us if we be guilty, and absolveth us also, if we be innocent and guiltless. Cain you see hangeth down his head like a condemned man and confesseth the sentence just, only his error was that he appealed not from the tribunal of conscience, to the high judge God himself who would have showed mercy if he had not despaired of mercy. Conscience condemned Manas●es David Marie Magdalen and all those penitent sinners which scripture hath recorded, 
Psal. 50. Luc. 7.  and that with such evidence, that they confessed themselves guilty and the sentence just. And we see by experience, that when we seek to excuse and flatter out selves, conscience will not be flattered, but like an incorrupt judge pronounceth sentence against us, even they when before Prince's tribunals we be freed and absolved. Conscience having pronounced sentence like a judge, executeth the sentence and punisheth us like an executioner, and minister of justice, causing in our minds, where the sin was contrived and conceived, a certain remorse and worm of conscience, whose gnawing tormenteth us. So that when the soul hath conceived sin and borne it also, and brought it to light by external action, far otherwise doth this impious imp torment her, then doth the little infant the woman great with child. For the woman conceveth with pleasure, and though she bear with pain, yet after that she is delivered & brought to bed, she rejoiceth, and with so joyful a heart, that she forgetteth her pains in bearing. But the soul, though in conceiving sin, she find some pleasure, yet not without some murmuring and grudging of conscience, and when she is delivered of this bastardly Imp, then begins her torment. 
Mat. 27.  judas was so inwardly vexed and tormented after he had conceived and contrived his treason against his loving and Innocent Master, that for an ease he went and hounge himself, counting that a less punishment than the torment of conscience. And true it is which the scripture sayeth: Semper praesumit saeva, 
Sap. 17.  perturbata conscientia: a troubled conscience always imagineth cruel and terrible things. True it is also which Saint Austin affirmeth, 
l. 1. conf. c. 12.  that every incordinate mind is a pain unto itself. And true it is which Juvenal the Poet saith, 
Prima est haec ultio, quod se  
judice, nemo nocens, absoluitur.  
The guiltless first torment, is this  
That never he absolved is 
satire. 13.   
If he himself pronounce sentence  
Which is decreed by conscience.  But to go no farther, experience will witness that conscience will never let a sinner be quiet, till by penance he hath rid himself of his sin, but waking it tormenteth him with remorse, sleeping with fearful dreams; and wheresoever he goeth, it putteth hell before his eyes, and the severe judgement of God, the abomination of the sin, and the greatness of the offence. For as the drunken man, drinks at the first with pleasure, but when he is drunk, his head aches, his stomach is oppressed, and all his body is distempered, so although in the committing of the sin we take some pleasure, yet when the sin is committed, we feel the smart. And as the adulterer, thief, or murderer, after that the fact is committed, hath always the severe laws and punishments before his eyes, and feareth the rumour of the people, and censure of the judge, thinketh every man that looketh on him, ready to arrest him, and where men are not, is afraid of trees, bushes and shadows, so a man whose conscience condemns him of sin, fears his own shadow & the darkness of the night, imagineth that in every thunder clap God leveleth at him, that every old house by which he passeth, or into which he entereth, stayeth to make a fall on him, & surmiseth that in every bush, one lieth in wait to kill him. 
Sir Thom. More in his life.  King Richard the third may bear witness of the torments where with conscience useth to afflict all transgressors, for he after that he had most unkindly and traiterouhy butchered his innocent Nephews, whom, he should have protected, was always so troubled in mind, that after that fact, he looked like a madman, some times laying his hand on his dagger, some times starting, some times soodainly looking back, as if he would ward some deadly blow, which always seemed prepared for him. Besides all this, sin always breedeth a worm in conscience, which is fed by sin, and never leaveth griping and gnawing, till sin which is this worms food, by penance is taken away, that so the gnawing worm may die for want of food, and conscience receive ease, and be freed from such a torment. Now contrariwise if conscience find us guiltless, she absolveth us like a judge by sentence, and cleareth us even then, when men condemn us, and declaring inwardly our innocency before God and our own soul, recreateth the mind and feasteth it with a banquet of contentment, according unto that saying: Securamen judge conuivium: 
Prou. 15.  a mind without care is a continual banquet. This Peace followeth a good conscience, which like a good judge declareth us before God not guilty. 
●. Io. ●.  So saint John sayeth that if our heart) that is our conscience) reprehend us not, 
2. Cor. 1.  we have a great confidence in God. And saint Paul sayeth that our glory is the testimony of our conscience. For although men think evil of us and condemn us as guilty, yet if conscience clear us, that is our contentment of mind, and glory before God. 
l. come. Secund. Man c. 1.  Wherefore saint Austin biddeth the to think what thou wilt of Austin, only (sayeth he) let not my conscience accuse me before God. By which good offices of conscience it appeareth most manifestly, what a sway conscience beareth in the rule and ordering of man's life, and actions. The Prince and magistrate ruleth only the outward man, punisheth only our external actions, because of them only he is able ro judge, but conscience governeth both the outward and in ward man, iudgethe of our inward actions, condemneth them and correcteth them most severely as is allaeady declared. So that he that take the away conscience out of the world, openeth a wider gap to all vice and disorder, then if he should put all Princes and magistrates out of office, and take the sword from them, because these being taken away, yet conscience being left, we should have some guide & stay of our moral life, but if conscience be abandoned then have we no ruler nor governor of our inward man, yea nor of the outward man, when either secrecy promiseth security, or power dares warrant us to go harmless. And this the heathen Philosophers could see, yea could not but see: in so much that Cicero sayeth: 
Orat. pr● Milon●.  magna vis est conscientiae in utramque partem ut neque timeant qui nihil commiserunt, & panam semper ante oculos versari putent qui peccaverunt: great force hath conscience in both parts (that is in good and evil life) in so much that they fear not who have committed no fault, and they who have offended, have always the punishment before their eyes. 
l. 2. the leg●●.  And in an other place he proveth by experience how necessary conscience is to restrain us from sin. For (sayeth he) take away conscience and what will he do in the dark that feareth nothing but the witness or judge? What will he do in the desert, when he meeteth with a man laden with gold, and weaker than himself? Truly if conscience be taken away, we will never make scruple of secret sins, no nor of public transgressions, if either by power or bribe we can escape the penalties of the law. If conscience be once banished the world, bargains will seeldom hold, and promises will as seeldom be kept, chastity will always be in danger, rich, and treasures will not be secure, Princes lives will be sub●et to hazard, false dealing will be rife in buying and selling, thiefs, cooseners, cutpurses and conicatches have good leave and liberty to exercise their arts, and the gap will lie open unto all vice. How pernicious then unto virtue and how favourable unto vice is our Reformers doctrine which (as I shall evidently prove, and therefore briefly, because evidently) despoilethe the world of conscience more necessary to man's life then the son itself. They say as is already related, that to a faithful man and true Christian, God imputeth no sin: why then should a Christian make conscience of sin which if it be not imputed either is no sin at all or else not to be ca●ed for? They avouch that since Adam's fall man never had free will and liberty, and seeing that where no liberty is no sin can be (for no man deserveth evil for that which he could not avoid) it followeth that whosoever is persuaded (as all must be by their opinion) that he hath no free-will, must make neither conscience, nor scruple of any sin. They affirm also that by Christ we are freed from all obligation of laws, in so much that no law can bind or touch our conscience; we need not then make scrouple of any transgression or sin, which in that it is sin is against the obligation of one law or other, because where no law bindeth there is no obligation, where no obligation, is no breach or transgression can be found, and where no transgression, there is no sin, & where no sin is, no conscience of sin is to be made. It is an article also of faith the amongst them or at least a thing necessary to be believed, that the commandments are ampossible. who then wilbee so mad as to make conscience for not full filling the law which is impossible to be fullfilled? as well truly may the prisonner make a conscience that he goeth not to the Church or sernson on an holy day when he is fast, chained to a block in prison, and the doors are fast locked & bolted. Because it is as impossible (if Caluin lie not) to keep the commandments, as for that prisonner to go to the Church. They are of opinion that God is the author of all our sins as well, yea more than we or selves, because he is the principal cause we are only his instruments; which if it be true, no man needeth to be so scrupulous as to make bones of that, of which God him self maketh no conscience? And if conscience be taken a way, the law, witness, judge and Executioner is taken a way; & so good leave is given to play what evil parts we will, if either we can by secrecy avoid the magistrates eye, or by violence and force resist his power, for then, conscience being taken a way, nothing is remaining to keep us in awe.   

The twelfth Chapter showeth how they open the gap to pride.  
I Have already declared how the Reformers by many points of their doctrine open the gap to all vice in general, now it shall not be amiss to show, how they favourize some vices especially and in particular. And first I will begin with pride, because that was the first sin and the first cause of all sins, 
●●●li. 10.  because the devil sinned before man, and his first sin was swelling pride, by which he coveted to be as great, and as high in perfection as the highest. Yea many are of opinion that Adam's first sin also was pride, which moved him to eat of the forbidden fruit maugre the commandment of God, imagining that so, (for so the devil had promised) he should become like unto God in knowing good and evil. And this is the cause why proud men especially are called the children of the devil, because by pride they especially ressemble him. Wherefore that doctrine which stirreth up a proud conceit in us, can not be of God, because it moveth to pride which is of the devil; and therefore if I shall prove that our reformers doctrine puffeth up with pride all those which follow it, I shall prove it not to be of God but of the devil. For although pride be a common disease of all heretics (for who so preferreth his own judgement before the whole Church as all heretics do in that they are heretics, must needs condemn himself of an extraordinary pride) yet some heretics by some points of their doctrine, have given more especial cause of this sin of pride. The Gnostikes were of opinion that as gold though cast into the mire, never looseth his native colour and perfection, so a just man, such as they counted themselves, 
Ex Iren. l. 10 c. 1.  can never be soiled, never lose his perfection in what actions soever he intermeddleth himself, though in adulteries and fornications. Which doctrine moved them to such a conceit of themselves, that they thought themselves to know all things and to be so perfect, that no sin could contaminate them. 
Ex Anth l. c. de poenit. c. ●.  The like was the pride of the Novatians who therefore called themselves, pure, and clean. And to omit the pride of Arius, Nestorius, 
chap. 5.  Luther, and Caluin which in the first book I have set down, let us see how their doctrine puffeth men up with pride. They are of opinion, as is already related, that we are just by no other justice than Christ's own justice; which doctrine who soever embraceth, he must needs be persuaded that he is as just as Christ himself, because in his opinion they have both one and the same justice; which persuasion is enough to stir us up to Luciferiam pride as is already in another place demonstrated. 
See the third book.  They assure their Scholars also that the justifying faith is a full assurance of justice, salvation, and election, as may appear by their own words which I have in this seventh book already set down, which also gives great occasion of an insolent pride. For if when we persuade ourselves (as Catholics do) that we are neither sure what now we are before God, nor what shall become of us hereafter, we have occasion to humiliate ourselves, 
Phil. 2.  and to work our salvation in fear: then certes he that persuadethe himself, that he is cocksure of his salvation, hath great occasion to become careless, arrogaunte, haughty, and high-mynded. 
Greg l. 6. Reg c. 186.  We have an example of a noble woman called Gregoria maid of honour to the Empress, w●oe having conceived highly of saint Gregory's sanctity, written unto him to impart unto her a secret, to wit whether her sins were forgiven or no; but saint Gregory answered her that she demanded of him a hard and unprofitable question; hard, because his sanct tie was not such as to deserve a revelation from God of so secret a matter; unprofitable, because (sayeth he) such a revelation unto you were not expedient: better it is that you should be ignorant of that till the last day, which must always be feared & suspected, that in the mean time you may wash away your sins by tears of contrition. 
See the first book, ●hap. ●.  They affirm also that every man hath a private spirit by which he is sure which is true scripture, and what is the true meaning thereof: who therefore, be he man or woman, clerk or cobbler, is supreme judge of religion, and is to rely neither on Pope, nor Church, nor Council, for faith and religion. Which doctrine how high it is able to enhance the spirits of men that are so persuaded, a blind man may see; and this is the very cause why Luther will judge both of Churches and councils and prefer his own judgement before them all. 
See the first book, chap. 3.  For although he sayeth only that by scripture he will judge Fathers, Churches, Apostles, & Angels also, yet seeing that the controversy is not whether fathers or scriptures are to believed, because they were never contrary, but rather whether Luther or they better understood the scriptures, he maketh him self, in effect, judge of Church, Pope, Councils, Fathers and Angels; wherein how bravely he playeth the part of Lucifer, it is as evident as that Luther, and Lucifer begin with a letter.   

The thirteenth Chapter showeth how their doctrine induceth men to idleness, yea how idleness according their doctrine is the perfection of a Christian life.  
ALl creatures are created to work & labour, and so they must attain unto their end and perfection, because God and nature hath so ordained it. The angelical spirits like birds in the spring-tyme (for heaven is a continual springtide) sing praises unto their Creator and attend continually upon the divine majesty on high, yet so, that they have also an eye unto our affairs and necessities in this lower world. For the suprem Angels receive illuminations from God, which they impart unto the inferior, which are always occupied in guarding and defending us and managing our affairs: and so either mediately or immediately they are administratorij Spiritus, 
Heb. ●.  administering spirits. The heavens move continually, for the better and more equal bestowing of their light and influences upon this inferior world. The Son leaves our hemisphere at night, not to sleep or to rest himself, but to run another course in the other Hemisphere for the illuminating of those that are Antipodes unto us, which course being run, he returns to us in the morning & so is never idle. The moon every month ends her course, & every star and planet hath his task appointed him, which in a certain time he must accomplish. The earth when he is out of his place moveth down ward to the Centre, and when by force he is detained, he showeth by his wait what an inclination he hath unto his proper motion: The fire mounteth above all towards the concavity of the Moon which is his natural place: the water and air take up the middle rooms where and whether they move continually. Trees, plants, and herbs seem in winter to take their rest after their former labours, and in the spring time they fall to work again, and first they bring forth leaves, than blooms and blossoms, and lastly the sweet fruits of their labours. Brute beasts besides the labours to which by man they are appointed, have their own proper exercises in which they occupy themselves. The Bee is not so big in body as busy in operation, in so much that when we will describe a laborious man, we say that he is as busy as a Bee. These little creatures what pains take they in gathering their honey, in making their combs, in disposing and working their honey, and whilst some are working abroad to bring home the matter of honey, some stay at home to order it, some watch for the security of them that labour, and all are incensed against the idle drones, and do not only expelle them out of their company, but punish them also severely even unto death itself. 
Prou 6.  The Ant also of whom the scripture biddeth the idle parson to learn his lesson, laboureth in the summer to make provision for that on which he is to live in winter. So laborious are these little creatures, that many times they carry burdens bigger than themselves, 
Plin l. ●●. c. 1. Horat. l. 1. satire. 1.  and that with such diligence, that with passing often times one way, their little feet do make a path to appear even in the flint. And when amongst other provision they have brought home their corn to their barns, they are not idle after harvest is done, but sometimes they are occupied in nibbling upon the ends of the corn, and grains, lest they should grow a fresh; and lest that the moisture of the earth corrupt their corn, they bring it forth in a sunny day to drying, and afterwards they carry it again into their granaries. Birds build their own nests and fly far and often for the timber and mortar which is belonging unto the making of such a palace. conies work their burrows out of the ground, and there is no creature which is not deputed to work in one kind or other. And shall we think that man's felicity consisteth in idleness? No, Noah, as the bird is bread to fly so man is borne to work and labour: 
job. ●.  in so much that God appointed Adam his task in Paradise, which was to labour & till the ground, which labour notwithstanding should have been no pain but rather a pleasure and recreation unto him. For if Cirus king of the Persians took such delight in gardening, in so much that he cast the beds and knots of his own gardens, set his own herbs and planted, and pruned also his trees with his own hands; if the Roman dictators taken from tillage and husbandry, returned again to the same exercise after, the time of bearing office was expired, much more might Adame in the state of innocency and the garden of pleasure have laboured, 
Perier l. 4. in Gin.  and worked for his recreation and pleasure, th●● God dealt with Adam to signify by this corporal exercise which he appointed him, the task and labour which is necessary for the soul in the exercise of moral and supernatural virtue, whose operations are called works. And truly who so considereth the end of man and his felicity, 
Th. c. 2. q. 3 a. 2. & 4.  which consisteth in the perpetual vision and contemplation of God, which is the most noble operation which man hath, will not marvel that the means to attain to this end should be good works and operations. Wherefore scripture all most in every place exhorteth us to the observation of the commandments, to works of charity, justice, mercy, temperance, fortitude, patience and such other works of virtue. And for this cause our life is some times compared to a warfare in which we must always be fight, or arming, or fortifying our selves, or observing the enemy, as soldiers do; somety mes we are compared to labourers in the vineyard who work for wages, some times to runners & wrestlers, who run and strive for a goal, crown, or reward. So that our perfection also consisteth in action, labour and operation. And truly who considereth how unworthy a man idleness is, will never dream that in it should consist a Christians perfection. For idleness is the mother of all vice, & the very bane of virtue, and no less pernicious to man's soul and body also, than it is to the ground of the gardener or husband man. For as the earth not tilled nor laboured, brings forth nothing but weeds, as the tree not pruned bears nought but leaves, and at the length not so much as leaves; so if by continual exercise of virtue, and good works, the seed-plotte of our soul be not continually manured and tilled, the seed of God's inspirations & inclinations to virtue, which are never wanting in our soul, bring for the no fruit of good works and virtuous actions, but only the briars, brambles and weeds of vices do overgrow the soul. And as the pool that standeth and moveth with no stream, stinketh, and engendrethe nothing else but frogs, snakes & serpents, so the soul of man which is always idle and unoccupied and never moved with the exercise of virtue, putrefieth in her own corruption, and bringeth forth nothing but monstrous vices. Truly when man is idle he is unarmed and exposed to all danger. Then the devil takers his time, the flesh aslaultes him, the world molestes him, and he becomes slave & captive to them all because by operation he makes no resistance. And whereas much hurt hath proceeded from idleness, never yet any exploit or enterprise worthy a man. Hence proceed fornications, adulteries, robberies, for when the mind is not occupied in good cogitations it is occupied in evil, because it can not be altogether idle but either it is well or ill occupied. Wherefore the Poet demaundethe why Aegistus became an adulterer, & he answereth thus. In promptu causa est, desidiosus erat: The cause is easily to be told: he was an idle person. When a man is idle and not exercised in virtuous actions, which produce good habits by which our sensuality is boidled, and our passions are moderated; then the flesh waxeth wanton, sensuality becomes effeminate, the passions are unruly, and the man impotent to all virtue. Wherefore Scipio in one thing, was wiser than Cato, because Cato would have had Carthage destroyed, that Rome might enjoy a freer peace and liberty; but Scipio counted it more profitable for Rome to have Cathage stand, that Rome might have an enemy to exercise her: which opinion of Scipio, time proved truest, for when Carthage was afterwards ruined, Rome thinking herself secure, became careless and idle, and the Romans', by idleness lost their former force & prows, and became altogether effeminate and impotent, slaves to sensuality, who before hand been Lords of the world. And yet according to our new reformers doctrine, idleness is the accomplishment and perfection of moral, and Christian life. For they first of all will make us to believe that a naked farthe, by which we apprehended Christ's justice to be ours, is that which justifieth, and which is sufficient to salvation, without good works, or observation of the law. Which if it be true, Christian perfection shall consist in an abstracted and idle apprehension of Christ's justice, but in no practice nor exercise of virtue, in no labour or good work at all: and so whereas all other creatures attain to their end by action, motion, and labour, man only by idleness, that is by apprehending only, and doing nothing, shall purchase his felicity. The artificer shall come to perfection in his art by labour, exercise, and operation, not of one or twoe, but many days, yea of his whole life, because by continual practice he augmenteth his skill; but the art of a Christian shall require no practice at all, no labour, no working, because according to this opinion, on only act of faith before a man dieth, is sufficient to justify him from all his former sins, and to make him as just & as holy as Christ himself, who is the holy of holies, and so eternal felicity which is an operation, by which we see God face to face & enjoy our summum bonum, shall be gotten without operation, and we shall win our goal without running, atcheve our victory without fight, and gain our wages without working; that is by an idle faith, which apprehendeth only, but doth nothing. They teach us also that since Adames fall our nature is so corrupt, that all our actions even those that go for best, are mortal, and damnable sins, in so much that you may as well and as soon, get oil out of a marble stone, as wring one good work from the nature of man; which if it be true, then certes sleeping and idleness is our greatest perfection. For if in every act we sin mortally, better were it to sleep, then to watch and pray, better to sit idle & to do nothing, than something, because in doing nothing we do no harm, in doing some thing whatsoever it be, (be it prayer and alms deeds) we sin mortally, & so idleness is our perfection, because better it is to be idle than ill occupied. Whence followeth my intended conclusion, to wit, that according to the reformers doctrine idleness is the perfection of a Christian man's life, and the best and surest means to attain unto his felicity and to purchase his Salvation.   

The fourteenth Chapter showeth what an enemy the reformers doctrine is to Chastitic even that which is required betwixt man and wife.  
Chastity is a virtue which always hath been priced at an high rate, & valued as one of the most precious jewels of moral virtues: in so much that even the heathens, though destitute of the light of faith, beholding the beauty of this virtue, fell into admiration of it, and from admiration came to be in love with the same. Lucretia a noble matron of Rome is famous for this virtue, who being violently oppressed by Tarqvinius Superbus son, took the matter for such a disgrace, that with her own hands she killed herself, counting less of death than of life joined with such a disgrace. And the pagan Poets were so blinded with the splendour of this her virtue, that they could not see the fowl fault which she committed in killing herself. 
〈◊〉 c. 19  For as Saint Austin sayeth if it was no dishonesty to be oppressed unwillingly, it was no justice to punish herself with death, who had not been dishonest. The vestal virgins also were much admired for this virtue, or at least for a show of the same, and severely were they punished when professing chastity, they lived loosely, 
Liu dec. 1 ● 8. Dec. 3. ● 3.  which yet they did so seldom, that when such a fault happened, the year was counted unnluckie, and the city of Rome was purged, and the Gods appeased with extraordinary sacrifices. 
Ex Gorg in 〈◊〉 pro Hel.  The law of Ariopaguses punished no less him, that by importunity enticed, then him that enforced, because the first abused both soul and body, the second the bedy only. By which it may well appear of what value this virtue is, because the devil as by pagans he desired to be honoured as a God in their Sacrifices, 〈◊〉 would he be served of them by his vestals, as God is by his virgins. But not only pagans have esteemed of Chastity, for brute beasts also, although they be not capable of true virtue, 
Epiph. her. 7  have affected an image of this virtue. The Lioness permitteth the Lion but once, and once to propagate her Kind, and once only to keep Chastity so much as may be without injury to her Kind. 
Aelian l 14. ● c. 35. Plin. l. 10. c. ●0.  The bird called Porphyrion will sort herself with no more mates than one, and so abhorreth womanish dishonesty, that if she see the wife commit adultery, 
Cirilles.  she will bewray it to the husband by hanging herself. Yea if this bird perceive any maid to play the naughtiepacke or harlot, she will pine herself away to death. The like is the nature of the Turtle, who when her mate is dead, mourneth in solitary places, and never will admit any other to her company, much less will she play any false play whilst her mate liveth, 
Carm. 〈◊〉 Visg.  & foe (sayeth saint Gregory Nazianzene) she giveth us to understand, at what a price virginity is to be valued. 
l. ● c. 1●  The Stork is such a lover of chastity, that (as Aelian reporteth) when on a time a certain woman of the city Ceres in Thessalia was false to her husband in being to familiar with her man, this bird so abhorred the fact that she pulled out the adulterer's eyes. 
Georg. Picto rius villinganus med. & Palladius.  Bees also are so delighted with chastity that beside that they conceve without carnal copulation, they will not stay in their hives, if their keeper be blasphemous, slovenlyke, greasy, unchaste, or impur of body. And in ourselves be we never so given to Luxury, we experience how nature reverenceth as it were this virtue of chastity. 
Aug l. 14. ●iu. c. 1●.  For who is so impudent, that is not ashamed of his own lusts, and therefore every one desireth darkness, or obscurity and secrecy to hide them, even then when he taketh but his lawful pleasure with his wife. 
c. 19 Th. 2.2. q. 〈◊〉. a. 1.  And why sayeth S. Austin are we more ashamed of our lusts, than other vices or passions? The reason is (sayeth he) because the rebellion of the flesh, is far different from other vices and passions, because these we can when we will especially if we add force to our will, repress and moderate, but the flesh hath gotten, (since Adam's fall) such an hand over the spirit, and will, that though we may deny consent unto her lusts and desires, yet we can not quite repress them, be we as holy and perfect as saint Paul was; And this makes the spirit ashamed, to take so fowl a foil of the flesh, which as she is inferior to the spirit, so should she be at the spirits beck and commandment. 
l. 1 Offi●.  Out of these premises Cicero gathereth this conclusion, to wit, that seeing man is ashamed of pleasure, it is an argument, that it is unworthy the excellency of man's nature, and I will add another conclusion, which is this, that if lust and corporal pleasure be a thing to blush at, than chastity which is an abstinence from pleasure, is a virtue most honourable, gracing, and beseeming man's nature. And although in the beginning of the world, when mankind was not yet fully propagated, and again after noah's flood when it was all most ruinated, God commanded matrimony, yet did he even then by many signs and tokens, but after ward, more especially, commend also chastity as a virtue most commendable. 
Gen. 2.  For although he himself made the marriage betwixt Adam and Eve, and bad them increase and multiply, yet he created them of virgin's earth, which as yet had not lost her integrity, and he preserved them virgins so long as they Kept their innocency; and so virginity, and innocency, were companions in paradise, and the use of matrimony began with misery. And if antiquity may procure credit, virginity must take the precedence of matrimony, because the woman is a virgin before a wife, & a maid before a mother. Yea although both in the law of nature, and in the law written, the greatest part embraced matrimony, and few than did settle their cogitations upon virginity, partly because men were as yet carnal and imperfect, partly because mankind was not fully propagated, partly because the Messias was not yet borne, and therefore every one desired to mary, hoping that the Messias might chance to descend from their race (which was the cause why barrenness was then so ignominious) yet even then virginity had her followers, and well willers. Abel, the first Priest we read of after Adam, and the first martyr, was a virgin, Helias, Helizeus, Hieremie, and saint John Baptist, as the scripture insinuateth, and saint Hierom affirmeth, 
l. 1. cont. jou.  were all chaste and vndesiled virgins. The high priest of Moses' law, although he might marry (because that people was carnal and their sacrifices were carnal and so required no virgin-preests) yet he was commanded to marry a virgin, and to abstain from her also when he was to sacrifice. But in the new law, which brought more grace and greater perfection with it, and therefore is called the fullness of time, virgins were more frequent. For after that the author of this law Christ jesus was borne a virgin of a virgin mother, than all the world seemed to be enamoured with virginity. The Apostles which were Christ's first Priests, and Bishops, were either virgins, or lived chaste like virgins, after preesthood. Saint Philip had four daughters, which lived and died virgins. 
Act. 2●.  S. Mathewe the Apostle in Aethiopia instituted an angelical college of virgins, 
Euseb l. 3. ●o 30.  to which he appointed Iphegenia the Kings danghter for the Abbess, 
In vita cius.  which after wards cost him his life, but got him the crown of martydome. 
I de vit. contempt.  Philo the lewe makes mention of divers societies, which in the primitive Church lived chastened. 
Apol 2.  justinus martyr affirmeth, that no people was so given unto chastity, as were the Christians of his time, when (as he saith) both men and women kept virginity to the end, and carried it with them to their grave, yea to heaven, for a iewell. The like report giveth Tertullian of the Christians of his time, S. Ignatius, 
Apol. c. 9  
Ep. ad●hilad.  saint Paul's scholar in one of his epi●●les, Saluteth a College of virgins, and a society of widows, 
Ep ad Haron●  and when he was going to marturdome, the cogitation of his death, and the lions which were to devour him, could not put them out of his mind, but even then he commended them to his Deacon and successors, as the precious jewels of Christ. 
Ruff. l. 1 c. 8. Theod. l. 1. ●. 1●.  Ruffinus also and other Historiographers in commendation of Queen Helena Constantine's mother, and our country woman, telleth how when she came to Jerusalem, she that was the Empress of the world, vouchsaffed to serve the virgins at table, as a waiting maid. 
l. 4. vitae Const ●. 28.  And Eusebius puts it amongst the praises of Constintine her son, that he carried always a great respect to virgins, persuading himself, that God himself, dwelled in such chaste minds. Nether can our Reformers answer with any probability, that this was the abuse and corruption of that time, because it was the use and custom of the prime Christians, in whose memories the life, works, words, and examples of Christ, and his Apostles, were freeshe, and in whose hearts, the blood of Christ as yet was warm. And if this were an abuse, holy scripture is the cause of it, which in many places commendeth Chastity, and virginity. 
〈…〉  The prophet isaiah or rather God by his mouth, bids eunuchs that is, chaste virgins, not to complain that they have no posterity in which their name may continue, for sayeth he, I will give them a place in my house and a better name, than they could have in sons and daughters, for I will give them an aeternal name which shall never perish. Where he can not mean eunuchs by nature, because he hath no reason to promise more to them then to others, because their chastity is forced, but he must needs be understood of those eunuchs, of which Christ spoke, 
Mat. ●●.  when he said, that there are some, that have gelded themselves, that is have deprived them ●elues of corporal pleasures by free election. Saint Paul also avoucheth, 
Cor. 7●.  that it is good not to touch a woman, And again he counseleth them that are free from a wife not to seek a wrfe. 
Ibidem.  Yea sayeth he I would have all like myself, that is chaste and continent, as all the Interpreters expound. And although (sayeth he) I have no law, yet I counsel all to be virgins: 
Ibidem.  Yea reason also giveth chastity the preccdence of matrimony: For first as I have said already, in that we are ashamed of all carnal copulation, even of that which by marriage is made lawful, it is an argument that Chastity is more beseeming the nature of man. Secondly, man is reasonable and sensual, spiritual, and carnal, by reason of his compound nature, and by the reasonable part, he aggregeth with angels, by the sensual part with beasts; and seeing that the reasonable part, is the best and noblest portion in him, abstinence from corporal pleasures makes him most like to himself, yea to Angels, because by that he liveth a reasonable life, yea and Angelical, and more than Angelical, who in flesh, and blood, liveth chastened like an Angel. Thirdly our goods are divided into three parts, to wit the goods of fortune, which are riches, honours, offices, and such like; the goods of the body, which are health, and pleasure; the goods of the mind, which are virtues, and our own wills, and desires: if then it be a thing highly pleasing God, when by voluntary poverty, or almsdeeds, we despoil ourselves of our goods of fortune, for his sake, or his members the poor; if it pleaseth him also, when by obedience we resign our wills and desires, which are the goods of our mind, into the hands of our Superiors, and consequently into the hands of God, from whom they have their authority; why shall it not be laudable to wean ourselves, even in the flower of our years, from those goods of the body, which are called pleasures, but yet so are goods and pleasures of the body, that commonly they do the soul the greatest damages and displeasures. Lastly if to use moderation in eating and drinking, be a virtue called temperance, why shall not a moderation in pleasures of the flesh and sensuality, (which we call chastity) be esteemed also as a virtue? But our Epicurs will say, that a moderation in pleasures is good, but yet as it is unlawful to abstain altogether from mere, so is it a sin to renounce all pleasures of the body. To this we have an easy answer, to wit, that the first abstinence is unlawful, because it killeth the body which can not live without meat, but the second is lawful and laudable, because corporal pleasures are not necessary for the bodies maintenance, and commonly are prejudicial to the soul, and sometimes to the body also. But yet they have not done, it is against nature as they say, & prejudicial to mankind to live chastened. I answer that chastity is against the nature of the flesh and sensuality, by which we aggree with beasts, but it is most beseeming our reasonable nature, which is the principal part of man, and so is absolutely agreeable unto man, because the reasonable portion is that, which maketh him a man. And although if all men should live chaste it would be prejudicial to mankind, yet for some to be chaste, it is not any wise derogating; and we need not fear lest all men be chaste, because it is not a thing so easy, but is an hard and heroical virtue, whose difficulty deterreth the most part of men. Such an objection Vigilantius once made, 
Higher l. ●. contra Vigil.  If all be virgins (said he) marriages shall not be, children shall not cry in cradles, and mankind shall perish. But saint Hierom a●swereshe him: rara est virtus, nec à pluribus appetitur: virtue is rare, and not desired of many, and so it is not be feared lest all be virgins. Now therefore it being proved, that virginity and chastity is laudable, and more beseeming man, than matrimony, because it is agreeable to man as he is reasonable, it remaineth that we declare how our adversaries by their doctrine, do misprice this virtue. But first it shall not be a miss to distinguish three kinds of chastity, that so it may appear the better what enemies, they are unto all the three kinds. The first chastity is never to have experienced carnal pleasures, which is called virginity. The second, is to have experienced them in matrimony, but never after, and this is widows chastity. The third is a moderate use of these pleasures in matrimony, betwixt man and wife. The last is lawful and honest, because as matrimony is lawful so is the use of it, and consequently, lawful also is the delight v. hich followeth this use. The second is more perfect, because it absteynes at least from future pleasures. The first is perfectest of all, because it is an abstinence, from all carnal pleasure. To come therefore more near our purpose, let us see what is the conceit of our reformers concerning this goodly virtue. Luther seems to be of Rabbi salomon's opinion, 
in c. 9 Gen.  who condemned all those as guilty of homicide, who endeavoured not to beget children: because he laboureth by all means for multiplication; and to make matrimony more frequent, and to give sensuality a greater scope, he taketh away all impediments, and obstacles, which the Church had laid in the way of sensuality, partly for the love she hath of chastity, partly for the greater honour and decency of matrimony. And first to begin with consan guinitie, 
to. ●. ser. de Mat Wistenh. 1●22. l de cap Bab. c. ae matrim.  he permitteth and admitteth matrimony betwixt Sisters and brothers children, betwixt the son and Mother in law, yea (sayeth he) if the wife can do it secretly, she may lie with her husband's brother, if she experience, that she can have no issue by him. In brief he taketh away all impediments of consanguinity, which are not set down in the old law. In affinity, he maketh very few impediments: for (sayeth he) a man may marry with his wife's sister, with his wife's mother's daughter, with the daughter of his wife's uncle, with any cousin germans of his wife's cousins. In spiritual cognation, which is contracted by baptism, he acknowledgeth no impediment at all, but alloweth of marriage even betwixt the Godfather, and God-daughter. In adoption also he findeth as few impediments, permitting the father to mary with his adopted daughter. Infidelity, with this man of faith, is no obstacle, for (sayeth he) it is as lawful to marry with a Turk, or jew, as to eat and drink with them. Vow of virginity is no hindrance with him, and therefore he being a Friar married a Nun. The like is his opinion of preesthood. And thus he makes the way broader to all sensuality and consequently to hell itself. 
l. 4. Inst. c. 1 ●●.  Caluin in part subscribeth to Luther in this point, for he misliketh much that the Church hath made spiritual cognation an impediment, and hath made more restraints from marriage then either Moses or the Policy of many countries have ever dreamt on. And thus they give greater liberty to marriage, & endeavour by all means to bring virginity, which is the noblest and worthiest kind of chastity into disgrace. And this no doubt is the cause, why Luther & all the pack of the reformers so highly esteem, and praise matrimony, coldly commending, yea by odious comparisons injuriously despising virginity. Luther sayeth that virginity only in this, 
S●rm. cit. de matrins to. ●● in 1. Cor. ●.  excelleth matrimony, that it is not cumbered with cares, and troubles, which are incident unto marriage, and thersore is a less hindrance to preaching and prayer, but as for merit before God he sayeth, that matrimony is as good as virginity: yea so was this man's mind sotted upon marriage, that he was not ashamed to say, that matrimonium est velut aurum, 
Ibidem.  status verò spiritualis veluti stercus: matrimony is like gold but the spiritual state of life is like an homely thing. See how carnal this man of God is, how sensual he is and beastly, that taketh upon him to reform the world, and avoucheth himself the only man that hath the spirit of God. See how opposite Luther is to S. Paul, he counsels virginity as better, than Matrimony, Luther sayeth it is no better than an homely thing, where with it had been better that his mouth had been filled, then that he should have uttered such beastly doctrine. But he will say that it is not virginity, which with so fowl a mouth he thus mispriceth, but the vow of virginity, which is estate of life, but if virginity be good, lawful, & commendable, why may not a man vow that life which he may laudably lead, 
Ps. 75. Ecc. ●.  especially seeing that Scriptures allow of vows, and command them to keep them that make them. 
In propositio nibus de bigamia 62, 6●. ●●.  Secondly Luther avoucheth that if one wife will not content our sensuality, we may have more than one, at once, for (say the he) this was permitted in the old la, and in the new I find it left indifferent, neither forbidden nor commanded. And seeing the woman's sensuality is as hardly satisfied as the man's, she also by the same reason may have many husbands at once (which was never permitted to the jew) and seeing that no just number can be set down (for if twoe wives content one man, three will not satisfy another) it followeth that a man have a tot quot of wives and so may contend with Solomon in the number of concubines. Thirdly this spiritual father permitteth divorsemenor in many cases, not only in bed or cohabitation, but also even in the bond of marriage, and alloweth of them who not only separate themselves from the company of their wives or husbands, 
Luth l. de captiu Bab c. de matrim.  but who also take others in their places. In which poit Caluine and all the new confreerie aggreethe. 
Call l 4. Inst. c 19 §. 37.  And first in case of fornication they all affirm that the party innocent may marry another, not withstanding that Christ sayeth, What God hath conjoined let not man separate, and again: 
Mat. 17. Mar 10. 1. Cor. 7.  whosoever shall dimisse his wife and shall marry another, committeth adultery upon her. And saint Paul not in his own, but in God's name commandeth, that the wife leave not her husband, and if ●he leave him he bids her remain unmarried, or to be reconciled to her husband. And therefore seeing that Scripture can not be contrary to scripture, when Christ said: Vhosoever dimisseth his wife, but for fornication, 
Mat. 1●.  and shall marry another doth commit adultery: the sense is not, that in case of fornication a man may take an other wife, but only that he may leave his wife, and therefore (saith our Saviour) if he leave her (which he may not do but in case of fornication) and marry another, he committeth adultery, whence it followeth not that for fornication he may both leave and marry an other, for saint Paul sayeth plainly that if the wife leave her husband she must remain unmarried. Luther yet addeth another case in which the husband may take another wife, 
l. cap. Bab. c. 6. de Matr●.  that is when the first wife will be gadding, and will not stay with her husband, in which case (sayeth he) I see no reason why the man may not take another. So that if the wife of stubbornness, or the man, for some long journey which he hath to make, will leave home for a time, the other party according to Luther, is not bound to stay the others coming, but may take another. To this he addeth yet another case, for he sayeth that wives are some times so crabbed, 
Co. ●. ser. 5. Matr.  that although they see there husbands fall into advouteries, yet they will not seek to give them satisfaction; And in this case (sayeth he) the husband may say: Si tu nolueras, alia volet, Si domina nolit adveniat ancilla: If thou wilt not, another will: if the mistress will not, let the maid come. Fourthly he yet findethe out another case in which the man may leave the old wife, and marry a new; to wit, if the wife solicit him to sin, 
Luth. come. in ●. Cor. 7.  or be litigious, and so he may upon such occasions take ten new wives one after another. And lest he may seem to speak without reason, he yieldeth this reason: neminem enim vult Deus in incontinentiae discrimen esse coniectum. For God will not have any man to be cast into danger of incontinency. So that because according to this man's doctrine, a man can not live chaste without a wife, if one wife will leave her husband or be stubborn, or litigious, or give not satisfaction, the husband may take another, as often as he will, least for want of a wife he should be incontinent. 
in c. 19 Mat.  Wherefore Bucer speaking conformably to this doctrine avoucheth, that as often as the wife seemeth nor fit for the man's purpose, he may take another, and she so often as she is weary of one husband, may take another. And good reason also if Luther's and Caluins' doctrine be true: for if man hath no free will, he hath no force to resist the assaults of the flesh if he be tempted, and seeing that he is not sure how long he shallbe without a temptation, to make all sure, if one wife satisfy not his lust, he must take another, lest he cast himself into danger of incontinency. 
Ser. cit. de Matr.  Lastly Luther affirmeth that man is so bend and prone unto lust, that he can no more be without a woman, than it is in his power not to be a man: these are his words:  non est in meis viribus situm, ut vir non sim, tam non est etiam mei juris ut absque muliere sim. Rursum ut in tua potestate non est ut foemina non sis, sic neque in te est ut absque viro degas: As it is not in my power, not to be a man, so is it not in my power to be without a woman: again as it is not in thy power not to be a woman, so is it not in thy power to live without a man. Which doctrine if it be true, than every one must marry, & so virginity and widows chastity is exiled the world, crelse he must take a quean, and so honesty is gone. For if it be as impossible for a man to live without a woman, or for a woman to be without a man, as for a man not to be a man, or a woman not to be a woman, them must the case often times happen, that the man must needs take a quean, or that the woman must needs, have a man besides her husband. For first if the man or wife be long from home, seeing that neither party can live any time without a mate, it followeth that the woman must use the help of her man or some other, and the man must use his maid as Luther sayeth, or some other man's wife, maid, or daughter; else Luther's and Caluins' doctrine is false, which teacheth that aman can not live without a woman nor a woman without a man. If they answer that he may live some time without a woman, then say I, that it is not as impossible to be without a woman, as not to be a man, because in no time is it possible for a man not to be a man. And I suppose that a temptation may happen as well in an hour as in a year: what then shall the party tempted do? if he resist, Luther and Caluins' doctrine is false, if he can not resist, then if he can not marry (as many times there is some time required to get a wife) he must needs have a Quean. Whence it followeth, that not only merchant ventures, must take heed how they go from home, but noblemen also must not adventure to go so much as a hunting, unless they lock up their wives, or take them with them. Hence it followeth also that when the wife is sick, especially any time, or when she lieth in, the man may take a new wife, if he be tempted to lust. For if he be tempted he can not absolutely overcome that temptation, ergo he must have a woman, but in these cases his wife will not serve his turn, ergo he must have another wife; and if he can not get a wife, he must have a quean: And this also in this case of such a great necessity, must be lawful for him, because no man sinneth in that which he can not avoid, neither is he to be blamed but rather pitied for doing that, to which necessity compelled him. And seeing the woman in this point is as frail yea frailer than the man, being the weaker sex, she may as often take a new husband, as the man a wife. Which doctrine what a wide gate it openeth to all dishonesty I leave it to the gentle reader's judgement. Wherefore very well do the a certain frenchman in a book of his, 
Las Acts du Synod de a saint Reformation.  that treateth of the Synod holden by the reformers at Monpeliar, bring in a woman deputed for the female sex of the Reformed, complaining of this doctrine of Luther & Caluin, which holdeth that we have no power to live chaste, nor no force nor free-will to resist the violence of the flesh: for (sayeth she) if we have no force nor free-will to resist our own flesh's temptations, it followeth that we and our daugthers are all Queans, and our husbands cuckolds, and not only cuckolds but horemasters. For if the flesh assault us (sayeth she) when our husbands are abroad, or if when they are at home we take a greater liking of another man, either we can resist the temptation, or we can not? If we can, then have we force and free-will, which is contrary to that which Luther and Caluin teach us: if we can not resist, then are we all Queans, and our husbands cuckolds, which is the greatest disgrace to our sex that can be. Wherefore she demandeth that this doctrine may be changed; else the womanis he sex is defamed. For either the woman to show herself a Caluiniste or Lutheran, must yield to the temptation acknowledging her weakness, or if she resist, she doth not like a Caluinist, and so either she must deny herself to be a Caluiniste, or confess herself a Quean. But I am ashamed to deduce any more of these beastly consequences out of these fowl premises of Lutheranisme and Caluinisme, & peradventure I have offended the reader, in raking in these dunghills and have injured my pen, and paper, in fowling that, and blurring this, with so filthy ordures; yet as it is good to set forth virtue, to allure men unto it, so is it not amiss to lay open the filth of vice and heresy, to make men detest it. This I am sure was my intention and proiecte, and I hope, yea I persuade myself, that I have brought to pass my intended purpose. For what man of a chaste and honest mind, can herarter allow of this doctrine as the pure, immaculate, and chaste word of God, from which proceed and follow so beastly consequences, or who can think the tree good that bears so bad fruits? Yea what wise man can be persuaded, that the authors of this doctrine were men of God, endued with his spirit, that have no taste of things belonging to the spirit, such as Chastity, & virginity are, in which we follow the spirit, not the flesh, and resemble Angels, not carnal men; But apply themselves wholly to the flesh's desires, and therefore have taken a way all impediments, wherewith the Church in favour of virginity, and for the decency of matrimony, had crossed the way of sensuality, and have given liberty to have many wives at once, and to take a new, as aften as the old displeaseth, or is not present, and when a wife can not be gotten, by their doctrine they permit every one that will to take a Quean. Wherefore I marvel not that their clergy is so dissolute, that wiving and rewiving, and chopping and changing of wives, is so rife amongst them; neither is it staung unto me, where as amongst Catholics we have ever seen many thousaundes of societies that have professed virginity, that amongst the reformers you shall find no such, but in am of them, Colleges of married ministers filled with their brats, because such flowers as virginity and Chastity are, grow not upon such dunghills, and such precious margarites are not to be cast before such filthy hogs.   

The fifteenth Chapter proveth that the reformers doctrine holdeth a sinner so fast in sin that after that he is once fallen, he can not rise again.  
We have seen in the former Chapters of this book, how easily the reformers doctrine leadeth unto all vice in general, and divers also in particular; now if it did show as easy a way unto penance and justification, as unto sin and iniquity, and did as speedily help us out of the mire, as it thrusts us in, it should make some recompense, but I intent to prove that as their doctrine tumblethe men headlong into the depth of sin, so it holds them captives with an impossibility of rising up again, and so is worthy double detestation. And how shall I prove this conclusion, which seemeth such a paradox? Truly very easily and that without running far for an argument. If you remember they are of opinion that the only way for a sinner to arise up again after he is fallen by sin, is to believe assuredly without all doubt or staggering, that he is just, & elect, and that Christ's justice is his; which if I ptove to be impossible for a sinner to believe, shall prove also that by their doctrine, it is impossible for a sinner to be justified or to arise from the low fall of sin to the high and eminent state of grace. To prove this I will only suppose one principle and Maxim of Philosophy, to wit that truth and verity, or at least some probable appearance thereof is, the object at which our understanding aimeth, & that therefore, as the will, can not embrace any object unless it be good, or at least have some appearance of good (for no man can like of evil as evil) so the understanding can not yield her assent to any thing, unless it be a verity or have at least some probable shew● of verity. And this is the cause why we can not believe & say with heart, that black is white, or that a known falsity is a verity, as I have declared in my Epistle to the reader more at large. Out of these premises I gather this conclusion: that it is impossible for a sinner, to frame on a sudden this assent, that he is just, and consequently, if this be the only way for a sinner to rise unto justification, it is impossible for him after he is fallen by sin, to rise again by justification, and so where the tree falleth, there it must lie. For as it is impossible for a sick man (if he be in his wits) to believe verily that he is whole, unless he see some alteration in himself, and find some ease of his disease, so is it as impossible for a sinner who is spiritually sick, yea dead, upon a sudden to believe (especially so assuredly as Caluin will have him) that he is just, whole, and sound, and fully recovered of his spiritual disease, unless he see some alteration in himself before he frame so firm an assent. For I will ask of Caluin when he cometh fresh from this villainy, what moveth him to this assent and belief that he is just, and elect? hath he a revelation? or have every one of his followers whom he will have to believe the same, any illumination from God by which they are acertained? he must needs say no, because they experience in themselves that they have no such evidence: find they any contrition, or love of God, or have they any inherent grace in them, which hath altered them and made them of sinners, just, and holy? They will say no, for then faith should not justify, but that which goeth before this faith. And this they must needs say, because faith is the first goodness in us, and with them it is the first and only thing which justifieth; yea in their opinion, contrition which is inherrent in us, can not be our justification, because they say that there is no inherent grace nor justice. And if before this faith of theirs, God should by infusion of grace justify them, yet unless they had a revelation, they could not, especially with such assurance believe it, because the understanding can not give assent without some appearance of truth. They will say that Christ's justice is theirs, so that they will apprehend it by faith, and so they are just by that justice if they will believe so. but neither will this shift serve their turn. For before they believe this, Christ's justice must be theirs, and by it they must be just, because that is the object of their belief, and the understanding must see it to be so, before she believe so; wherefore seeing that before this faith of theirs, Christ's justice is not theirs, and they also are not yet just, it followeth that they can not, so long as they are in their wits believe that they are just, because this verity must appear to the understanding before she can believe it; and therefore if before faith they be not just, they can never believe so. For as the sick man must be whole and sound before he can believe that he is so, because it is not in his power to believe that which is not, or which at lest appeareth not, so a sinner can not on a sudden (unless he have some reason for it) believe assurdly that he is just. And therefore if this assured faith be necessary to arise after our fall taken by sin, it is impossible to rise again, after that we are fallen. And to make the matter yet more plain; as if the only remedy for a sick man to recover his health, were to believe that he is well, it were impossible for him to recover, because whilst his disease remaineth, he can not believe that he is recovered, having no reason to think so, but rather the contrary; so if the only means for a sinner to recover, be to believe in the midst of his sins, that he is just, it is impossible for him to recover, because he can not with heart think so, having no reason for it, but rather to the contrary. Hence I gather twoe things to be noted. First that if a sinner be justified by believing that he is just, then is he justified by a lying faith, because he believeth that which is not; and if you say that so soon as he hath believed so, he shallbe so; that is not sufficient, for yet it followeth that he believeth that he is just before he is just, because justice followeth faith, & so he is justified by a false, and lying faith. The second thing which I note, is how maliciously and yet how covertly the devil by his members seeketh our damnation. For not content, by their doctrine to have induced us to all sin, he taketh a way the means of rising again from the state of sin, denying penance to be necessary, yea affirming in Luther that contrition is a mortal sin, and avouching in Luther and Caluin both, 
Supra.  yea and in all their Scholars, that the only means for a sinner to be justified, is to believe without all staggering, and with all possible assurance, that his sins are forgiven; which belief being impossible, as is already proved (because it is not in the understandings power to believe white to be black, or that a man is just when no probability of it appeareth) it followeth that when a sinner is fallen, it is impossible for him to rise again, because it is as impossible for him to believe that he is just before he see some appearance of the same, as for a sick man to believe that he is recovered and well at ease, when he is in the midst of the fit of an hot ageve, or in the pangs of death. And so our reformers do not only tumble us headlong into the very depth of sin, but hold us there in perpetual durance, without hope of liberty, because they require at our hands an impossibility, which is in the midst of our sins to believe that we are just, and elect, having no probability of the same, but rather great evidence to the contrary; which is as impossible for us to believe with heart, as it is for the sick man to assure himself that he is well, when he is in the midst of his fit.    

THE EIGHT BOOK  
CONTAINETH A SVRuey of their doctrine which leadeth unto Atheism and contempt of religion.  

A SHORT PREFACE.  
IRELAND is famous for that it breeds no toads, nor venomous serpents, and Ingland hath been of long time esteemed happy, because it hath no wolves: but in steed of wolves, it hath been of late years unfortunate for engendering of a certain monster called Atheists begotten by heresy, which hath more wasted and depopulated the country, than all the bears and wolves of the desert, or monsters of Africa could have done, if they had been all turned lose into the land. For they could only have made their prey upon the bodies of men & beasts, but these monsters called Atheists have made havoc of men's souls. They could only have disturbed the temporal state and civil peace, these have ruined Christi● anitie, and brought religion into contempt, which is the principal bliss of the soul in this life. Of these monsters there are twoe kinds both fierce & cruel, but the one more savage than the other. The first denieth flatly the divinity, and therefore most properly is called an Atheist, that is without a God. The second confesseth God and God head, but yet is of opinion, that it little skilleth what honour you give him, or with what worship of religion you serve him: of this kind are our Machevellians, who square out religion according to state, and make no more account of Scripture than of Aesop's tables, and so that they may live and establish a temporal state, care not what religion florishethe; because they count it but a piece of policy to keep men in awe and order. Against these monsters I must arm myself, and change my weapons as I channge my adversary, and by reason only I will confound these, as I have by scriptures, reason authority, and all manner of arguments refuted heretics. And for as much as my general drift & proiecte in all these books is, to make heresy odious, I will show also in this last book, how Atheism is engendered of heresy, that by this viperous and monstrous brood we may have a greater guess of the breeder.   

The first Chapter declareth how certain points of the Reformers doctrine, open the gap to a denial of the divine maiestre and his Godhead.  
What God is, it is so hard to Know▪ that neither the light of reason, nor faith, nor both lights joined together, are able to discover this verity. Wherefore Trimegisthus being once demanded this obscure question, gave as obscure an answer; to wit that God is a thing whose centre is every where, and his circle or circumference no where: signifying thereby, that the least thing in God (if a man may say so of God in whem all things are so great that they are no less than God) is so great that it far surpasseth the sphere of our capacity, much more doth the circumference of his infinite perfection, exceed the compass, and reach of human wit. Simomdes being asked the same question, required time to consider, after which time he being demanded to give his censure, he required longer time: At the length being urged to make no more delays, he answered only this, that God was such a thing that the more we consider him, the less we conceve of him, & the more we conceve of him the less we can say of him. Aristotle the Prince of Philosophers could only say of God that he is Ensentium, a thing of things, that is a thing, from which all things proceed, as from the fountain and first cause of all things, and a thing which is all things, because eminently (as Divines say) and compendiously, he containeth in himself all things. Not that in God, they be living, and not living, corruptible, and incorruptible, great and small, different, and divers, perfect, and imperfect, as they are in themselves; because all in God is living, all incorruptible, all great, increat, and infinite, all one, all perfect without imperfection; to be brief in God, all is God. For as the cause containeth diverse effects without division and imperfection of the cause, and as the artificers piece of work, hath a more noble being in the artificers Idea and mental platform, then in itself; so all things are in God, in more eminent manner, then in themselves; because in him, they are as in their cause, and fountain, yea as in their idea; & therefore thou ghe in themselves, these creatures, some be corporal, some be spiritual, yet in God all are spiritual, though in them selves some be living creatures, some devoid of life, 
Io. ●.  yet in God all are living and life itself, though in themselves they be create, yet in God they be increat, though in themselves they be imperfect, yet in God they be perfect, though in them selves, they be diverse, yet in God they are all one, though in themselves they be creatures, yet in God they are God. This the learned scholar of saint Paul Dionysius Areopagita, 
c. 5. de diuin● nominib●.  explicateth by a fit similitude. As the lines (saith he) which are drawn from the Centre, are divided from themselves, and diverse in them selves, but in the Centre, they are united in one, without any distinction: so all creatures, as they proceed from God, who is the Centre and resting place of all things, are divers and different, but as they are in god, they are all one. And as the foresaid lines in the Centre, are nothing else but the Centre; so all creatures which are but so many lines drawn from God's indivisible nature, in God are God, without all division, and imperfection. But as what God is we know not, so that there is a God, it is so manifest, that though the tongue may deny him, the heart can not, if it be not carried a way with passion, and inconsideration. True it is that Protagoras and Diagoras, were so godless, as to doubt, yea to deny that there was a God; yet these men were long since Hissed out of the Schools of all Philosophers, and could not have denied God in heart, where the light of reason discovereth him, had not some blinding passion over ruled them. And therefore if it were not, that heresy had countenanced Atheism, and given it authority to pass amongst Christians without blushing, yea with honour and credit; I would have contented myself to have hissed also at these companions, and would never have gone about to overthrow that by reason, which standeth with no reason. But least that the authority and sway, which atheism now a days beareth in the world, may over rule the wiser, and seem reason enough to the simple, I will by certain pregnant reasons, convince these godless Atheists, that there is a god, & a divine power? And first of all this world seemeth to me to be a book, in which we may read this verity. For, as the book which we read (if we understand the words) teacheth us the verity or science which it containeth, so if we read with diligence the book of this world, in which every creature is a word, we shall by it learn, that there is a God. 
Ro. 1.  For as S. Paul sayeth, the invisible things of God (that is his divine attributes and perfections) are known by those things that are created. Wherefore that courageous mother in the Maccabees, 
●. Ma●. 7.  which was as forward to prefer her sons to Martyrdom, as others would be to detain them, biddeth her son to read this book of creatures, and to look upon heaven and earth and all which is in them contained, and thereby to learn, that God it was that made them all of nothing. This book saint Antony studied, and profited therein so much, that he could confute Philosophers, and convince a godhead and divinity. Yea these creatures are not only so many words in which we may read this verity, but they are also so many preachers which cry out with a voice most loud, and shrill, 
Psal. 9●.  and in a language intelligible of all men that God it was that made them and not they themselves. And so a Godhead is taught us not only by the university of Athens, Paris, or Louvain, but also of all the creatures in the world. For first I demand of whom this world (which Philosophers do call (Awl) because it containeth all) received his beginning, being, and existence? If thou say with Epicure or Democritus, that it was made Fortuito causarum, vel atomorum concursu, by a chancing concourse of causes, motes, or indivisible bodies; Task who made these causes and indivisible bodies? If thou answer that a creature made them, I ask again who made that creature, & so at lengtht I will bring thee to a thing exempt from creation, which created all things, and this I call God. If thou sayest that the world framed itself, I must needs tell thee that that is impossible: because nothing can operate or work, before it hath a being because as the Philosopher sayeth prius est esse, quam agere: And so if the world made itself, it was before itself, which implieth, a contradiction. If thou say that it was neither framed by itself, nor by any other cause, but was ever of itself, without any making, than thou makest the world a God, and so whilst thou seekest to deny a God, thou grantest a God. For if it be of itself, it is independent of any other, and so hath a necessary being which ever was and ever shallbe; because if it be of itself, it can not by any cause be brought from nothing to some thing, and so ever was of necessity, neither can it be brought from some thing to nothing, and so ever shallbe, and that of necessity. If it have a necessary & independent being, it hath an infinite essence, because it is not limited by any, and so exceedeth the bounds of a creature; & therefore if the world was of itself, it is a God: which perfection not withstanding it can not have, because the world's material substance, mutability, visibility, and determinate quantity, arguethe a creature, not a God, who is immaterial, invisible, and infinite in his immensity. Who them was it that created this goodly palace & so huge a building as is this world? Not itself, as is proved, not any Angel, or other creature, because creation of nothing, argueth infinite power, and where is infinite power, there is an infinite essence, and so God only was he that could create it. And if thou wilt obstinately defend, that an Angel, or some other creature created it; I will thus argewe against thee. either that creature which thou imaginest to have created the world, was of itself, or it was created of another? If it was of itself, it was God, and so thou grantest, which I endeavour to wrist from thee by force of argument; if it was created of another creature, I ask who created that other, and so at the length I will lead thee to the first cause, which created all, and was created of none, which is the God whom we seek for.  
Secondly not only the whole world but also every part of it, will make a plain remonstraunce of a Godhead. And to begin with man, who though he be a little world, yet is but a part of the great world; who I pray you was it, that gave the first man his being? We see by experience that men breed not as flies and worms do of the corruption of other living creatures, neither do they spring out of the earth like herbs or toadstooles, as julius Caesar said of the first inhabitants of England, neither are they begotten of beasts of another kind, as mules, and chickens are, but rather as we see by experience, man only begetteth man, and of no other living creature, no not of an Angel, can he be begotten. Who then was it that gave the first man his being? of himself, man could not be, because then had he been a God; of another man he could not be begotten, because no man could be before the first man, no other creature could beget him, as is already proved, ergô some thing that was no creature created him. And what is that but God?  
Another part of the world, & that the most noble, is an angel: And who I pray you created those spirits and immaterial substances? One Angel could not beget another, because that would argewe than to be material substances, & corruptible creatures, and so no spirits: To say that men can produce Angels, or that any other creature extant could do the same, is far less probable, because they are the highest creatures in perfection, and so could not be produced of their inferiors. It followeth therefore that some cause not included within the rank of creatures, created them: and what can that be but the Creator. 
l. 12. met. c. 9 s. l. 1. de cas● c. 9  To deny all Angels and spirits, is against Philosophy, and all the best Philosophers. For Aristotle the Prince of Philosophers, affirmeth, that the heavens are not moved by their own proper forms, and faculties, but by Angels, which he calleth intelligences. 
In Plyt. ad Tyrannum, & in Sympo. sio Zenoc l. de morte Mercur, in Pyman. dro.  Plato and the Platonists make often mention both of good an evil Angels. So doth plutarch also, and divers others, and who hath not read of Socrates' familiar, which was called demonium, that is a good or evil spirit. Yea experience proveth that there are devils, which are spirits and differ only from the good Angels, in malice. For if we behold the strange effects which are to be seen in those which we call possessed persons, we can not with any probability ascribe all to a melancholic humour: for those pullinges, and convulsions, strange motions, and operations, can not proceed from any humour or natural and material cause. Because we see them some times lifted up from the ground, some times they howl like dogs, some times they yell like wolves, some times they tell secrets, and speak in strange languages. The manifold and strange operations of witches, their meetings and voyages which they make in the air, the strange apparitions, which all the world talketh of, and therefore can not lie (because the voice of the people is the voice of God) demonstrateth that there are angels and immaterial spirits. And seeing that these creatures can neither produce one another, nor be produced of any create cause, we must needs confess a God and an increated spirit, who created them. The like proof for a divine power the heavens do also yield us, for seeing that no creature, nor second cause, could create those huge and incorruptible bodies, we must needs confess a God and first cause, who extended and framed them. Thirdly the goodly order and disposition of things which we see, argueth a nature of intelligence not contained within the rank of creatures, which ruleth, guidethe & directeth all, and appointeth every creature his task, and place. We see how the Elements are disposed of, and appointed every one to his natural place. The fire as most noble and of a most light and aspiring nature, taketh the highest place, the air and water take the middle room, because they participate of twoe extremes, the one aggreeing with the fire in heat and ligthness, the other with the earth in cold and heaviness: And the earth being of a heavy and lumpish nature, is worthily thrust down to the lowest place. We see how the heavens and planets move in order, and distinguish the times and seasons, never altering their course since they were created, in so much that by their uniform motion the Astrologers can tell most certainly, the time, yea minute of the change of the moon, of the sons setting, and rising, and of the sons and moons Eclipses. We see the order and diversity of parts and members in plants, beasts, and men, which are so furnished of all parts and faculties belonging unto nature, that there is no part wanting, none superfluous not so much as a vein, sinew, or little bone, as we see by experience when we want the least of them. The eyes are placed in the head, which is also made to turn about, that we may look about us, and therefore are called the guides of the body. The ears are the organs of discipline, because by them we hear what others say, without the which man's life were no life at all, because it should be devoid of conversation. The nose smelleth a far of, all odours which are good or bad for the bodies health, and besides it is the trumpet of the voice. The sense of feeling is dispersed through out all parts of the body, whose office is to feel whatsoever approacheth or toucheth the body, thereby to fly it, if it be hurtful as fire is, or to take commodity of it, if it be convenient. The mouth receiveth the sustenance and mere, which is necessary for the body, the tongue besides that it is the instrument of speaking, and the interpreter of the mind, is to taste this meat and to judge of it before it pass any farther, which judgement being given, the throat swalloweth it down; The sto make boileth and disgesteth it, the liver makes blood of it, the veins conveighe this blood to all parts of the body, and nothing there is not necessary or expedient, not so much as the guts whose office as it is base, because they are as it were the sinks of the Kitchen to pass the filth and excrements, so is it so necessary, that otherwise the body would be poisoned and infected. Tell me now, o godless Atheist, who it is that hath set down this order? who is he that so ruleth the motion of the heavens, that they move at the same time from East to west and backward again, and one within another, and one more slowly than another, and yet so, that they hinder not one another? Who hath established a perpetual peace amongst the four elements, which yet by reason of their contrary qualities, are of a jarring nature. And who hath so placed them as they may best agree? for the air aggreethe with the fire in heat, and therefore is placed next unto him: the water in moisture aggregeth with the air, and in cold with the earth, and therefore is lodged betwixt them, whereas if the water were placed next the fire, and the air next unto the earth, they would make war continually one upon another, and never would be satisfied without the ruin of one another, because they disagree in both qualities, the fire being hot and dry, the water cold and most, the air hot and moist, and the earth cold and dry. Who hath so ordered the parts of the bodies of living and moving creatures, as they may best serve their turns, and by their proportion and disposition be the greatest ornament. Who sorteth all beasts with their kind, and placeth them in rooms fittest for their nature; some in the water, as fishes, some in the air, as birds, some on the earth as beasts and plants, some in the fire, as the Crekit and Salamandre. Who setteth the plants and herbs, and gives them a root as a mouth, to receive their convenient nouriture, and veins to convey it even from the root, to the highest bows yea leaves and fruits; and gives to every one of them a seed, or some other thing in steed of seed, by which they propagate themselves and retain a posterity? Who I pray thee, o ungodly Imp) considering this goodly order and disposition, who I pray thee beholding this goodly Palace of God and men, I mean the world, in which is all this furniture, provision, order, and disposition, will not think of an artificer of intelligence, who builded it, and of a howskeper most wise and provident, who ruleth and disposeth of all in the same? Thou wilt say with Epicure, and such graceless, godless, and witless companions, that all this goodly order happened by a chance, and that by the like chance, this goodly palace with all the parts and workmanship thereof, was framed and effectuated. By chance, sayest thou (o man) or rather no man, but some monster of mankind? Considerest thou well what it is, which thou averrest to have been effectuated by chance? The printer, shall never be able to set his print by casting his letters together at all adventures; the painter by a careless casting of his colours upon a cloth or table, shall never draw his intended picture; The mason by throwing of stones one at another, shall never build his goodly palace; And canst thou think that all this goodly order, which is set down in the world, that this curious piece of work of the world, at which men and Angels stand astonished, was framed and established by chance medley? If thou shouldst enter into a westminster-Halle, a nonesuch, or Royal exchange in Ingland, into a Louver in Paris, or a Scurial in Spain, where thou shouldst see stately building, aspiring turrets, lofty roofs, witty conveighaunce of Rooms, and chambers, and orderly disposition of windows, pillars, chimneys; wouldst thou, or couldst thou imagine these artificial works and buildings, to have been wrought by a chancing flight of stones from the Quarry; and not rather by the art and skill of some ingenious Artificer? And canst thou entering into the sumptuous building and palace of the world, whose pavement, is the earth, paved with so rich stones, and metals, and rushed with the greene's of all herbs and plants; whose foundation is the centre, which stayeth all; whose roof are the heavens, siled so ritchely, with so many bright and glittering stars; whose walls are the same heavens, which do not only cover but also compass all aboat; whose divers rooms and lodgings, are the four elements, in which divers creatures according to their divers natures, are diversly lodged; whole indweller and inhabitant is man, who under God also is Lord over all; whose provisions and movables, are the goods and fruits of the sea and land, laid up in store for man's provision: Who I say entering into this Princely palace, so well ordered and governed, can imagine all this to proceed from chance, and not rather from an intelligent Artificer, who works these wonders and miracles of nature, and a provident prince who governeth and ruleth all so wisely, and like a pilot sitteth at the stern, guiding and directing the course of this world, and of every creatures actions. 
l. 2. de natura de●rum.  For as Cicero that famous Orator, and Philosopher avoucheth, nothing is so open and so evident, when we look upon the heavens, and the celestial bodies, as that there is some divine power of most excellent understanding, by whom these things, as they were first framed, so are they still conserved and governed.  
Fourthly against these witless Atheists, the very brute beasts shall argue for their creature, whose operations are so witty and agreeable to the end, which is to them by God and nature prescribed, as if thy had discourse, and were endued with reason. They fear those things which are contrary to their good, and distinguish the good from bad, as if they had the science, of good and bad. The sheep, yea the young lamb, even at the first, discerneth the wolf from the dog, and quaketh at the very sight of him, although he differeth little from the dog which he ferreth not. The chicken can put a difference betwixe the kite and the Peacock, and feareth that, little caring for this, although in body bigger; The birds fear the sparaw hawk, the duck the falcon, and do tremble at the very noise of their bell, and yet they care not for the swan, nor Crane, though in body many times bigger. who teacheth them thus to discern their enemies, who putteth in them such a fear of that, which in deed is to be feared? Thou wilt say, the instinct of nature, but who put such an instinct in them, by which they fly their foes, as if they had reason, but he that is the author of nature & reason? Who teacheth brute beasts, in a meadow or garden, where there are so many herbs one like another, to choose the good, and to refuse the bad, and so coningly, as if they were Physicians, or herbistes, & knew the natures of simples? in so much that where as men, many times are poisoned in taking one drug, or herb, for another; such an errournever happeneth amongst them. We see how artificially birds do build their nests, wherein they make such a defence against the weather, that no mason can correct their work. The spider spinneth the thread out of his own substance, which afterwards he weaveth so artificially, that he maketh a formal net, which also he placeth in those places, where flies are likest to pass. And he like a byrd-catcher, lieth lurking in a corner of the same, without any motion; but no sooner doth the fly touch his net, but he perceueth, and no soene● is the pray taken, but he with all spee● maketh haste unto it. I have already described the traveles of the Ants in making their harvest, 
In the seuent● book.  and carrying in their corn, and how they eat the end of it, lest it grow in the earth, and bring it forth to drying in a sounye day, lest moisture corrupt it. And I have in part described the common wealth of bees, which is so well ordered, that a statist & common welth-man, may learn policy and government, of them. The Hare what slight useth she to escape the hounds, how many leaps makes she, how many bi-wayes takes she, and if she come near a water she will pass it, if near a heard of Cattles, she entereth amongst them, to deceive the hounds, and to make then lose the sent. How subtle and crafty the Fox is, I report me to Huntsmen; and what devices he useth to attain to his pray, few there are which know not. On a time (as a man of credit told me who was an eye witness) the Fox espying ducks in a river, devised this stratagem to deceive them. he taketh a bush of fern, which he carrieth in his mouth to the water, and putteth it in to the water, far above them, lest he should be espied, and above the stream also, that it might descend down unto them, and pass also thorough them; and this he did twice, or thrice. The ducks suspecting nothing, let the fern pass by them; at the length the fox himself come the swimming down the stream, with a ferne-bushe in his mouth, and that so covertly, that nothing appeared above the water, but the bush; the ducks suspercting no more deceit, than was before, & imaging that it was but aferne-bushe which came down the stream, never fled for the matter, because they feared nothing; but when the Fox came a 'mongst them, he showed himself to be a fox, for leaving the bush, he snatch▪ the at a duck, and changeth his bush for the same. Hence I deduce this argugument: These creatures are witless and devoid of reason, and yet do they proceed in their actions most wittily and reasonably, as if they had discourse and reason, & some times they show more wit in their actions, then do men them selves, who are reasonable and discoursing creatures. And seeing that so orderly and so reasonable actions, can not proceed from any reason, which is in them, because they are unreasonable, I do infer that there is some one of reason above all these creatures, who thus directeth and governeth their actions. Nether will i● suffice to say, that they do all this by th● instinct of nature, which is nothing else but a natural inclination; because seeing that this natural instinct is no reason, & yet directeth them so reasonably, it must needs preceded from one of reason, who could imprint in them such an inclinatition, which being no reason, doth direct them notwithstanding, and govern them in their actions, as if they had reason. Wherefore as when thou seest the arrow fly directly to the mark, thou strait ways imaginest an Archer, though thou seest him not, because so direct a motion, could not proceed from the arrow, had not the Archer, who is endued with reason, given it his direction, and imprinted in it a force also, which carrieth it directly to the white, at which he aimed: So when thou seest unreasonable creatures to proceed in their actions so wittily, and so orderly, thou must think of some one of intelligence, who hath imprinted in them a natural instinct, which directeth them in their actions, as if they had reason.  
Fiftly, what soever is in this world, either it is of itself, or of another. If of itself, then is it God, because, as before is proved, to be independent, is to have a necessary & infinite essence, which is no other thing than God. If it be of another, I ask of whom is that other? If of another, I ask again of whom dependeth that other; & so at length I will bring thee to a thing, of a which all things are depending & that is depending of none; which is the God we seek for. To this argument may be reduced that argument of Aristotle by which he proveth the first Mover, 
2. p. q. 2. a 3.  which S. Thomas also useth. what soever (sayeth Aristotle) is moved, is moved by another. The inferior creatures are moved by the heavens, and their influences, which reach even to the bowels of the earth, where by virtue of them, gold and silver are engendered, the inferior heavens are moved by the first heaven, which is called primum mobile, because all the other heavens follow the sway of that. The first heaven then, either it moveth itself, or it is moved of another? it can not move itself, because it is a creature, & so as in essence and being, so in motion and operation, it dependeth of another; If it be moved of an other, than I demand, whether that moveth of itself, or by the motion of another? if you say of another, I ask again whether that is moved by itself, 
2. Met.  or by another? And so either we must ascend in infinitum (which is impossible) because an infinite distance can never be passed, and so the inferior cause which receiveth virtue from the Superior, should never be able to move, because it should expect an infinite time, to receive motion from a Superior cause, whose motion must pass through infinite inferior causes, before it come to the lowest; or else at leng the we must stay in a supreme cause, which moveth all, and itself is moved of none. And what is that, but God?  
Sixtly I will bring a moral argument, which also convinceth this verity. It is the opinion even of the Pagans, to which the light of reason hath induced them, that there is vice and virtue in our actions, and that the one deserveth punishment the other reward, as in the last book is related; and seeing that in this life, neither vice hath his dew punishment (because the vicious live in prosperity and enjoy most commonly the felicity of this life in more ample manner than the virtuous) nor virtue her reward, because the virtuous are misprised; it followeth that there is another life, in which God, who hath an equal providence over all, shall give to every action his just & dew reward.  
Seventhly (as Cicero sayeth) never any nation, was so barbarous, 
Supra.  whom the light of reason, endued not with an opinion of God, or Gods; yea even the A theistes, themselves, if they fall into any extremity, are forced by nature to cry, and call upon a God. For if a man by shipwreck were in danger of drowning, then so long as he seethe humane means to save him, he will snatch at a cord which is cast unto him, or he will reach for a board, or seek to get hold of a boat, rock, or tree, to help himself by; & if he be an Atheist, than so long as these means fail not, he seeketh for no other, but if he perceive, that by no creatures help, he can be helped, then be he Christian or pagan, jew or Atheist, he thinketh upon some higher power, and when all creatures forsake him, and his own force will no more serve him, nature bids him to seek farther, & to demand that help of the Creator, which no creature can yield him.  
Lastly the greatest sinners that are, who would with all their hearts that there w●r no God, that they might sin the more freely, in the midst of their vices, & pleasures, have many times remorses of conscience, and fear even naturally, by natures instinct and instruction, some divine power, that will call them to an account. hence proceed their melanch olike moods, by day, & fearful dreams, by night, as in the former book, & in the Chapter of conscience, may appear. And truly we see that nothing hath so much force in the rule of men's actions, and direction of their life, as the cogitation of a divine majesty, to whom they must yield and render a strict and strait account. For thus some times the greatest sinners are enforced to discourse. I let the bridle lose to all vice and pleasure, I bridle no passions, I refrain from no injustice, when by injuring others, I can profit myself: I live according as I will, and as freely as he that hath no master, and if there were no divinity, to whom I am to yield an account for every action, I might take my hearts ease amidst all my pleasures: but if there be a God, as I fear there is, and as me think there is (for else why doth this cogitation of a divinity so often cross the ways of my pleasures?) then have I cause to look to my actions, and to make my account, before hand, lest I be taken in the Lurch. But what if there be no God? then had I less cause to care. But because peradventure there is a God, in the midst of my pleasure, I have not my hearts desire, and full repose. Many other arguments I could allege for a divine power; but these are sufficient, and these are the principal. Who desireth more, let him read saint Thomas in his first part of his Theological Somme, and in his work which he wroteagainst the gentiles, as also Granado in the beginning of his Catechism, and the English resolution; and he shall find that we all say the same almost insubstaunce, yet vary in the manner, and in some reasons also & additions. Now let us draw nearer to our conclusion, and intended purpose, which is to show how our reformers doctrine leadeth us unto the denial of a Godhead. Which I will do briefly and yet so plainly, as the reader shall confess, that to have used more words in a matter so plain, had been prolixity, and superfluity. 
See the fift book.  If you remember they are not afraid to avouch that God is the author of all sin and wick ednesse, that he hath ordained us to sin from all eternity, that we sin not only by his permission, but also by his will and commandment, yea that he urgeth us and compelleth us to sin; whence it followeth that he is of a malicious nature, bend to all evil, because so bad fruits can not proceed from a good tree; he commands us also under pain of damnation to refrain from all sin and vice, which notwithstanding by the reformers doctrine we can not do, because we have no free will; & if we sin and die in sin, be punisheth us with a perpetual and hellish fire, for that fault which we could not avoid, and in which he him self, had as much part as we ourselves: whence it followeth that he is not only malicious, but cruel also & tyrannical, as upon another occasion, is before demonstrated. If a Christian be once persuaded that this doctrine is true, he will easily be induced, to think as Atheists do, that there is no God at all. For seeing that the common conceit of God hitherto, hath been very honourable, every one deeming that which is most perfect, best, and most amiable, to be God; men will more easily be persuaded with Diagoras and Protagoras, that there is no God at all, then that he is of so bad, cruel, and malicious a nature.   

The second Chapter showeth how the new religion by the same doctrine ruineth all religion and worship of God.  
REligion is a moral virtue, and one of the principal virtues of that kind, whose office is to offer unto God suprem honour, homage, and worship, as unto the highest: which although she have not the divinity for her immediate object, as the Theological virtues have, yet cometh she as near as may be, because she hath the worship of this divinity, for her object & attendeth upon the divinity so faithfully, that no sooner is a God acknowledged, but religion adoreth him, and yieldeth him his homage for a tribute. Wherefore ever since there was a reasonable creature, able to know God, the world was never without religion. In paradise our first parents worshipped a God for the time, and if that state had conrinued, there should have been a public practice of religion, and that by sacrifice also, as some divines do imagine. 
Suarez. 3. p. de sacrificio Missae.  And what worship of God by sacrifices, and sacraments was used in the law of nature, and of Moses I have already declared. Yea never as yet was there any nation, 
Supra.  who acknowledged a divinity, but it also worshipped the same with some kind of religion. For men easily perceived, that to majesty, power, and excellency, honour was a dew tribute, and by good consequence, that to supreme majesty, power and excellency, was dew also supreme homage and religion. Which is the cause as Livy reporteth, 
l. 〈◊〉  that Rome was no sooner built, but a religion also was established, and temples dedicated unto the Gods. 
l. 1. c. 1.  For which devotion, Valerius Maximus commendeth the Romans', saying, that they thought nothing was to be preferred before religion, but that rather as the Gods were esteemed above their Senators, dictators, and Emperors, so religion should take place before their civil laws & customs. Of which opinion Plato also showeth himself to have been, who in his work which he made of laws, decreed some for government and policy, 
l. 4.  others for religion, and these he counted the principal and fundamental laws: well knowing that to be true, 
l. 1. de nature deorum.  which Cicero after him observed, that if once piety and religion to wards God, be taken a way, fidelity and justice amongst men, can not long continue. And Plutarch affirmeth that you shall sooner find a city without coin, walls, laws, & learning, them without temples and worship of Gods. And although this religion of the pagans, was no religion but superstition, yet this superstition proceeded, by abuse, from a natural inclination, which man hath to worship and honour a God. Because superstition and religion do only differ in this, that superstition either worshippeth a false God, or at least gives not a right honour unto the true God, but religion worshippethe the true God, and not with a vain and fantastical, but with a true, sincere, and reasonable worship. So that man by nature is inclined to religion, only he faileth either in the thing which is to be worshipped, or in the manner of worship; and therefore if a man be of any discourse able to know, that there is a God, you shall not need to persuade him that God is to be worshipped, only in this he shall need your help, what is this God, and with what worship and religion he is to be served. And herein consisteth the principal point of the controversy which to this day even from the beginning, hath troubled the world, & the greatest wits of the world, to wit, with uhat worship and religion God is to be served, for although all almost aggree in this that God, is religiously to be honoured and respected, as the diversity of religions which possess the world, will testify; yet in the other point, to wit with what religion he is to be reverenced, men are as diverse, as there are divers religions in the world. Wherefore here might I take occasion to refure the religion of the jew, pagans, and heretics by many arguments, and by as many arguments I could demonstrate the Catholic and Roman, faith and worship of God, to be the only true religion, which I have done in my commentaries upon Secunda Secundae, but this were a thing to long and beside my purpose, which was only to make general a survey and examination of the new religion, wherefore that I leave to others, and peradventure to some other book, which, if this be well accepted, I may hereafter set forth: only here, in a word or twoe, I will direct the reader to certain places of this Survey, in which upon occasion I have disproved the new religion, and established the old, by pregnaunte reason. For first of all my first book demonstrateth that we can not admit neither them nor their religion, for good and lawful, unless we bind ourselves by the same reason to receive all heretics and heresies that ever were heretofore, or shallbe hereafter; yea in the fift chapter of the said book I have proved the Catholic religion to be the only religion, because it is conformable to that which was so strangely planted by the Apostles, and in the same place I have proved manifestly that the reformers have no probable means or motives to induce a reasonable man to be of their profession. In the second book I have declared how the marks of heretics aggree unto them, and that therefore they must be taken for heretics, & their doctrine for heresy, if Arianisme or any other such like doctrine be justly so to be censured. In the third book I declare how their doctrine disgracethe Christ, and so can not be Christian religion, & in the books following I show how it repugneth to civil state and policy, how injurious it is to God, how it openeth the gap unto all vice and Atheism, and so can not be of God. Yea in the fourth book I prove that they have no religion, because they have no priests nor sacrifices nor prayer, & scarcely any sacraments, notwithstanding that these things and religion ever went together. Secondly in the alleged fift chapter I have compared our ancient pastors of whom we received our religion, with their new ministers of whom they received theirs, and I have proved that our pastors in all points are to be preferred, and consequently our religion. Thirdly in the second book and fift Chapter, I prove that once Christian religion was planted in the world, and Pastors were appointed. I have proved also that this religion and these Pastors are never to be changed, and that consequently, that now is the true Church & religion, which can derive itself by a continual succession from the first pastors and the first faith that was planted and practised; I have proved also that the reformers have not this succession, and that Catholics have, whence it followeth evidently that their religion is not the true Christian religion, and that ours is the true and only religion. In the sixth Chapter I prove that in Christ's Church & religion is peace and unity in faith and doctrine, which Christ at his departure bequeathed to his Church, & I have demonstrated that this peace and unity is not to be found amongst the reformers, but only amongst Catholics, and consequently that the Catholic religion is the only Christian religion. In the seventh chapter I prove that the religion of true Christianes' is no particular sect, but catholic and universal, and one, and the same in all countries and ages, and seeing that only the Catholic religion hath this property, it followeth that that is the true Christian religion. So that I shall not need to use any other argument, to prove that the Catholic religion only, is the true religion and worship of God. It remaineth therefore only, that I now declare how the reformers open the gap to a certain kind of Atheism, which is irreligiosity and contempt of all religion, and because this conclusion is often times to be inferred out of other points of their doctrine in the Chapters following, I content myself in this Chapter with their doctrine alleged in the former Chapter, and out of that only I will deduce my intended conclusion, which I may do with as much brevity as facility. For if God be the author of all sin, then if we may gather what the tree is by the fruit, he is of a malicious nature as is before proved: and if he command us impossibilities and punish us with Hell fire for not fullfilling them, than is he unreasonable, cruel, and barbarous. And if we once make this conceit of God (as we must needs) if we believe the adversaries opinion, then must our hearts of necessity be cold in religion, and worship of God. For who can be induced to worship, love, and honour such a God in whom is nothing which is amiable, nothing worthy honour? well may we fear him for his cruelty, but love him, and honour him from the heart we can not. And so religion falleth.   

The third Chapter showeth that in contempt of the Church's authority they bring all religion in contempt.  
IT is a maxim and almost an article of faith received amongst the reformers, that the true Church which once was, hath erred grossly, & in no lesser matters than faith, justification, merit, free-will, works, satisfaction, purgatory, prayer to Saints, worship of images, number and virtue of Sacraments, Sacrifice, & such like. Yea they confess that the Roman Church was once the true Church, but thy add with all that afterwards it erred grossly and fell sowlye, & now of the Church of Christ, is become the Synagogue of the devil. This is the cause why when we urge the authority of the ancient and present Church, for the proof of the real presence, free will, prayer to saints, & sacrifice of the Mass, they answer us that the Church, was but a congregation of men, which hath erred in these and other matters. And therefore Luther careth not for a thousand Churches, and Caluin, Beza, and others despise all the Councils, and ancient fathers, as appeareth by their words which are related in the first book, and the third, and fourth chapter. So that upon the bare authority of the Church they will not hang their faith, as they say, lest they hang their souls, because the Church as it may be deceived, so it may deceive. I demand of them therefore what assurance they have of scripture, and by what means they come to the knowledge of it? A Catholic would say that he beleevethe these books to be the word of god, because the Catholic Church, which is it the pillar of truth, which by the son of God was promised a spirit which should teach her all verity, 
10.14.15. l. on't epist fund c. ●.  hath ever so believed and defined. Wherefore saint Austin sayeth that he would not believe the gospel unless the Church's authority moved him; not that the Church maketh scriptures, or giveth them their truth and verity (for that they have of God who was the indighter of them) but because we can not know which is Scripture, which is not, but by the voice of the Church, to which only in this matter the ancient fathers were want to hearken, as Ireneus, 
l. 2 c 2 3. 4. l pr●esc. de expos. Symb. l. 2 c 1. 46. l. 4. c 11.  Tertulian, saint Hierom, Leo the first, and deuers others, of whom Nicephorus maketh mention. Wherefore the first Toletane Council, in the one and twentieth canon, accurseth them who accept of any other Scriptures than those which the Catholic Church receiveth. He would allege for an argument that Christemade Peter, & his successor the Pope, supreme pastor of the Church, and commanded him to feed his sheep; 
lo. 2.  and seeing that a principal office of the shepherd, is to show them such pasturs as are most wholesome for them; it pertaineth to the ●uprem pastor of the Church, to tell us infallibly, which are the true scriptures: for when he declareth which are the true Scriptures he shows us our pasture, & the place where we are to graze, and when he expoundethe them, he feedethe us. And seeing that the Pope of Rome is this Pastor (as is proved in the last chapter of the first book) it followeth that we must receive, that for scripture which he alloweth of as scripture. He would allege also the antiquity of scriptures for a proof of their sincerity; 
l. 2. cont. Ap. 〈…〉 prabar. evangel in Apolog c 19 20. 24.  because Moses' who was the writer of a great part of the old testament (as josephus, Tertulian, and Eusebius affirm) by many handred years, was more ancient than all the writers of the Romans and Grecians also: which therefore deserve great credit & reverence, 
1 Tusc.  because as Cicero sayeth in his Tusculane questions, to Antiquity no less is dew. He would confirm this argument by another of no less efficacy, to wit that these books have been conserved so many thousand years, not withstanding so many captivities of the jew, and persecutions of the Christians, which argueth that God who was the Author of them, had a special care of them, and a vigilant eye unto them, as unto his own word and writing. He might allege also the conformity of those book, which were indited of divers, & at divers times, and yet have in them no contrarieties, and were translated out of Hebrew into Latin by 70 Interpreters, 
●nstin. orat. paroen. ad gē●●●.  diversely disposed, who yet not withstanding so agreed, as if all their translations had been copied out of one; For which causes even the Gentiles & Pagans themselves, have borne great respect unto these writings, not daring to mingle them with their ꝓphane writings, because (as josephus and Eusebius affirm) some that have attempted it, 
l ●●. Aut. c. 1. ●. l. ●. praepar●. ●.  by the divine and secret power, have been very sharply and severely punished: all which is warranted by history & tradition. This a Catholic would say with great applause and no less probability, for the authority of scripture, But what would, or what could our reformers say? would they say with the Catholic, that they believe them to be holy scripture, because the Church sayeth so? 
●● Host●. l. 3. ●●nt. Brent.  Luther in deed sayeth that he in this point beleevethe the Church and Pope, and good reason hath he: because of whon did he receive the scriptures when he began first to preach his new doctrine, but of the Roman Church, who ever had the custody of them, even since the time of the Apostles? And how could he know that the gospel of the Nazarens, of saint Barnabas, 
Euseb. l. ●. c. 25.  and saint Thomas, were not as rrue scripture as the gospel of saint Matthewe, and other Evangelists, but that the Roman Church allowed of these, and not of those? For this cause some of them do say, that in this point they must needs believe the Pope, & Roman Church, because they can not in deed have any probable knowledge of Scripture, but by this means, as shall appear by the refutation of all other means which they can feign or imagine. But I will be so bold as to take this means from them, and then I will ask them, how they know that the new and old testament are not mere fables, and fictions as the Atheists say that they are? For they are of opinion, that the Roman Church may deceive, & be deceeved, and therefore they will not believe her for the number of canonical books, nor for the meaning of scripture; how then can they credit her when she defineth that the old and new testament are holy scripture? her authority is one and the same in the affirmation of this, and of other things; if than they believe her not in those things, they can not believe her in this. For as if the ginger say that to morrow shall be rain, & that with in three months there shall be rain, I can not believe this to be true for his assertion, unless I also believe that, because his authority is the same, and yet I may believe rather that within three months we shall haverayne, than that to morrow we shall have rain, because that in itself is more likely: so if we believe one thing which the Roman Church affirmeth, and not another, we believe not any thing because she sayeth so, but either for the probalitie of the thing or for some other reason which pleaseth us. Wherefore seeing that out reformers believe not the Roman Church in all points, it must need follow, that they can not believe that the old and new testament are holy scriptures because she sayeth so, but for some other imaginations which they have, for if they belecued this because she sayeth so, they would believe other things also which she avouchethe, because her authority being the same, deserveth the same credit in the one, and in the other. But let us suppose that they believe that the old and new testament are holy scripture because the Roman Church sayeth so, yet because they affirm that the Roman Church may lie, and hath also lied loudly in many importaunt matters; it followeth that they have hereby no assurance of Scripture, because as the Church, in their opinion, hath erred in other things, so may she in this, & if she may, peradventure she hath erred, and so they have no assurance of scripture. They will say peraduentur that they are assured by tradition from time out of mind, unto this present, that those books are holy Scripture, because our forefathers ever esteemed them so. But neither can this be a sufficient warrawt, because they are want to say, that all things necessary to be believed, are contained in scripture, and that therefore they will believe no traditions. And if they believe that these books are holy scripture, because by tradition so it is delivered unto them, why do they not believe the real presence, and the Sacrifice of the Mass? Why contemn they, the Fast of lent, Images, holy water, the sign of the cross, & such like, which we have by the same tradition, by which we have the scriptures. Yea seeing that Tradition is nothing else but an opinion or custom of the Church, not written in holy writ, but yet delivered by the hands of the Church from time to time, and from Christians to Christians, even unto the last age, and Christians; if the Church can err, she may allow, of evil traditions and so traditions also may be erroneous, & consequently can be no sufficient warrant unto the Reformers, for the authority of holy scripture. They will say peradventure, that they believe most voices, and therefore seeing that all the world alloweth these books for holy scripture, they will join with them in this opinion, because the voice of the people, is the voice of God. but neither can this voice assure them▪ for either they understand by this common voice, the voice of the whole world, or the voice of the Christian world, if they mean the voice of the whole world, them have they more voices against them, then for them, because the greatest part of the world was ever pagan; if they mean the Christian world, then in deed the most voices are for Scripture, because the Catholic Church which alloweth of scripture, was, is, and shallbe, the greatest part of Christianity; but because they say that this Church may err, they can have no assurance of scripture by this voice. They will say peradventure that they belceve that scripture is the word of God, because their own Church, which is the true Church, affirmeth it to be so. But neither will this shift serve their turn. Because first of all they can not prove their Church to be the true Church, not their Pastors to be the true Pastors. Because their Church hath not the marks of the true Church, having neither succession from the Church planted by the Apostles, which should make it Apostolic, neither having ever possessed the greatest part of the known world, which should make it Catholic, and being so far from being, one, that it is divided into contrary sects, & so far also from being holy, that it leadeth to all vice and Atheism, yea having all the Marks of heresy, as my second book demonstrateth: As for their pastors, they can not prove their mission, as also is proved. But if I should grant them that their Church is the true Church, yet by their Churches warrant, they can have no assurance of Scripture, because they are of opinion that the true Church may err, and consequently their Church also may err, and if it may err in other things, it may err in this, and if it may err in this, peradventure it hath erred in this, and so they have no assurance of Scripture. Wherefore laying a side the Church's authority, as insufficient▪ in their opinion, I demand what assurance they have of scripture? They can not allege Scripture to prove scripture, because no part of scripture affirmeth that the books called Scripture, are the word of God, dictated and indited by his spirit. And if Scripture did affirm itself to be holy Scripture, yet were not that a sufficient warrant, for as I may doubt whether the books called Scripture be the word of God, so may I doubt of that testimony which scripture giveth of herself, unless by some other means I be assured, that these writings are the word of God. They will say peraduen● that the very majesty of the phrase of Scripture, and the divine matters, and mysteries which it conteinethe, do argue, that it is the word of God. But this answer is also insufficient; because to a worldly man or Profane Philosopher, the style of Scripture seemeth base and barbarous, and the mysteries seem to be nothing else but dreams and imaginations, the histories seem tales, and the matters seem either follies or impossibilities; and so they would seem unto us also, were it not that we have a reverent conceit of them, because we believe them to be the word of God. Wherefore julian the Apostata, Celsus, Porphirius, Apion, and others, contemned scriptures, both for the Phrase and matter, and esteemed no more of them, than we do of Aesop's fables. They may answer me peradventure (and now I know not what else they can answer) that the spirit assurethe them that these books & no other; are the holy Scripture. But against this spirit; I have disputed at large in the ●rst book and third Chapter, and so I might refer the reformer, and the reader unto my arguments, where with in the afore said place, I have refuted this fantastical spirit; yet to ease them both of that labour, I will in a word reject this answer, by rejecting this spirit. I will ask of him that thinks himself most deeplye inspired, why Bee believeth this his own private spirit, rather than the common spirit of the Church? especially seeing that it is more like that God will more amply communicate his spirit to his Church then to a private man; and if the Church may be deceived (as they say she may) not with standing that Christ promised her a spirit which should teach her all verity; 
Io. 14.15.  why may not every private man doubt at least, lest his own private Spirit be a lying and deceiving spirit? he answereth that his spirit assures him, that it is a true spirit. But how doth it assure him? by what reasons, miracles, or revelations? by no such means (saith he it doth assure me) but yet I am sure. Why art thou sure? if neither for reasons, nor miracles, nor revelations; then art thou sure only because thou thinkest thyself sure. And so did Suenlkfeldius think himself sure of a right spirit, when he denied all scriptures, and would be ruled only by the inward spirit, and yet he for all his suernes, was deceived, and consequently so mayst thou be, though thou think thyself assured. And do not all heretics think then selves to be inspired with the right spirit? As they therefore are deceived, So mayst thou be, unless thou have some certain rule and judge, such as the Church is, to ascertain thee of thy spirit. If now some infidel or atheist would deny the old and new testament to be holy scripture, how wouldst thou convince them? what a Catholic could say for the proof of scripture, I have already declared, I demand therefore what thou who takest upon the to be a reformed Christian, couldst allege for the authority of Scripture? Wouldst thou allege the Church's definition or tradition, or common consent? he would say, Tush, tell me not of Church, Tradition, Fathers, Counsels, all these by your own confession may err and have erred in other as great matters as this, and therefore this can be no sufficient warrant. Wouldst thou say that scripture giveth testimony of her self that she is Scripture? he would ask thee wheare, and thou shouldst not be able to quote the place, & if thou couldst, yet he would say that Scripture is not to be believed in her own cause, and that as he doubteth of scripture, so he doubteth, whether it be Scripture, which affirmeth these books to be Scripture. Wouldst thou say that the phrase of scripture argueth it to be god his own word? He would tell thee that he will show thee as good phrases in Tully, Livy, & other ꝓphane writers. And if thou shouldst say that thy spirit assures thee, that these books are of Gods own indighting, he would laugh at thee, and tell thee that Suenkfeldius by his spirit denied all scripture, and that he hath no more assurance of thy spirit then of his. Yea he will come upon thee with the common spirit of the Roman Church, and tell thee, that if that spirit may deceive, as thou sayest it may, much more may thy private spirit deceive thee, and all that will be so mad as to believe thee. And so if thou contemn the authority of the Roman Church, thou shalt be able to assure him no more of Scripture, then of a Robin Hoods tale. If the Church's authority then be rejected as insufficient, we have no probable assurance of scripture, and so we may justly doubt lest it be but some Apocryphal writing, which hath hitherto been called the word of God, to keep fools in awe. And if we may doubt of the books of Scripture we may as justly doubt of the contents, and so the mysteries of the Trinity, and incarnation, Christ's life, doctrine, Passion, death and resurrection, may be called in question, and so Christian religion falleth; and seeing that after an Apostasy from Christianity, we have no reason to embrace Turcisnie, or the judaical ceremonies; much less the superstitions of Pagans, and idolaters, adieu all religion, and welcome Atheism. And thus thou seest, gentle reader, how contempt of Scripture must needs follow the contempt of the Church's authority, which being laid a side, we have not so much as probable assurance of Scripture or Christian religion. Wherefore let us hold fast with the Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church, and let us never link ourselves in religion with the reformers, who like Chammes contemn their mother the Church, lest we be enforced to shake hands with Atheists, whose friendship we can not refuse, if we break amity and league with the Roman Church, as is most evidently demonstrated.   

The fourth Chapter showeth that in admitting some books of Scripture and rejecting others, they open the gap to contempt of all Scripture and religion.  
We say commonly that a liar had need to have a good memory; for otherwise he being always ready to speak, not as the truth requireth, but as he may best for the present serve his own turn, will be in danger to contradict himself, and to vary in his own tale. for want of which memory, the reformers do often eat their words, and go from that which before they stood unto. And amongst many other examples, this may serve for one, that they will needs receive scripture at the Roman Churches hand, and for this point account her authority sufficient, but their memory is so short, that forgetting them selves, they will not accept of the number of the books of scripture which she hath delivered unto them; although they have not any other warrant of Scripture, than they have of the number of the books of Scripture; which is the Roman Churches authority. I must therefore desire them better to remember themselves; For if the Roman Church be of sufficient credit, to warrant us of Scripture, why is not her authority a sufficient warrant also, for the number of the books of Scripture. Or if she may err in the number of the books of scripture, she may err also in scripture, and so if they would remember themselves better, and tub their brows harder, they would see plainly, that either they should take all, or none, of her, because her authority is as sufficient (being one and the same) to warrant us for the number of the books of Scripture, as for scripture. If they believe then that there is scripture, because she sayeth so, they must believe that there are so many books of scriptures, because she also sayeth so; her word being as good for the one as for the other. But as they are liars so are they forgetful, & therefore so contrary in their tale, that they will say that they believe her in that, but not in this, where as rather it followeth, that they believe her neither in the one nor in the other; but only do give credit to their private spirit & imaginations, affirming that to be scripture, which they imagine, & those books only to be scripture, which their spirit liketh of. Wherefore Luther affirmeth that the book of job is but a tale, 
in ser. con. tit. de libris vet. & novi test.  devised to set forth an example of patience before our eyes; he jesteth at the author of Ecclesiastes, saying that he wanteth boots and spurs, and therefore rideth in his socks, as he did when he was a friar. 
Praef. in nowm Test.  Yea he spareth not the new testament, affirming that he liketh not of the common opinion, which alloweth of four gospels: and he addeth, that saint Ihons', is the only true and principal gospel: whence it followeth that the other three are not authentical. For if they were, then were all four of equal authority, 
Prafat. in Heb.  and so saint Ihons' gospel were not the principal. he denies that the epistle to the Hebrewes is Apostolical, the like is his censure of the epistle of Jude, and james. 
Praefat. li. 1. Inst c. 11. §. 8 l 2 c. 5. §. 18. l. ● c. 5. §. 8. Ant. s●ss. 1●.  Caluin rejecteth the books of wisdom, of Ecclesiasticus, of judith, of the machabees, of Toby. And why? truly for no other reason, then that these books seem most contrary to divers points of their doctrine. For other wise, seeing that they can not discern scripture from other writings, but by the censure of the Roman Church, as is proved in the last Chapter, they have no reason to receive some books on her word, and not all, seeing that she giveth the same testimony of all. But give an Atheist this advantage, and what will he say? he will tell the Reformers, that he seeth no other warrant which they have for the epistle to the Romans, then for the epistle to the Hebrewes, and the epistle of saint james: nor for saint Ihons' gospel, more than for the other three● nor for Genesis, more than the first and second book of the Machabies, Toby, judith, and job; and that therefore if the reformers deny these, he will deny all the other, because if the Roman Churches warrant (for they have no other warrant as in the former Chapter is proved) be not sufficient for some of these books, it can be no sufficient warrant for any. And so he will say, that you may as well deny all scripture, as some books of scripture; or if you willnot, he will deny it for you, and ground himself in your own doctrine. And he will yet go farther, & avouch; that if he may doubt of Scripture, (as why not, because there is no other warrant for it but the Roman Church's word?) he will doubt also of the contents of Scripture, and so he will call in question Moses, Christ, the Apostles, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion of Christ and Resurrection, and all the mysteries of Christian religion. Wherefore as you credit the Roman Church for scripture, so give her credit for the number of the books esscripture, because her word & warrant is as good for this, as for that; or if you will not believe her in this, you can have no assurance of any part of Scripture, and so you may bring all into question; whence followeth contempt of all religion, as is before proved.   

The fift Chapter proveth that their dissension in religion, openeth the gap to contempt of all religion.  
NOthing is of more force than religion, which keepeth us in awe, bridleth our appetites, ruleth our actions, governeth our life, and inculcateth unto us our duty towards God and man. And if there were no other argument, than the example of so many thousand martyrs, who have endured so exquisite torments and so horrible deaths, rather than they would deny their religion; it were sufficient to bear witness for religion, that it is of greater force, than all the violence of the tyrants, than all their engives, and instruments of cruelty, yea then death itself. But so the force of a river is great, and so great, that sometimes it over-throweth houses, and bridges, and beateth down all which standeth in the way of his stream; but yet divide it into many little brooks, and a child will resist his force. Even so religion is of great force and efficacy, and beareth a great sway in the life of man; but yet if it be divided into divers sects, it looseth force and vigour, and whereas, whilst it remaineth united, 
See the second book chap. 6.  it will not be resisted, when it is divided it is easilic contemned. I have already described the jars, and dissensions of the Reformers in matters of religion, and by this mark I have descried them to be heretics; now let us see what an advantage, this their dissension, giveth to an Atheist, and what a wide gap it openeth unto Atheism. An Atheist out of these their diversities of opinions, may easily draw this discourse. I see, sayeth he (or at least he may say) divers sects and opinions divers Synagogues, and religions, divers conventicles, and congregations, amongst you: which as they have diversnames, so profess they divers doctrines, and follow divers Authors. And some of them are called Lutherans, some calvinists, which are by a subdivision parted into soft and rigorous Lutherans, and into Protestants, & Puritans, others are called Zwinglians, others Bezites, others anabaptists, others Libertines, others Brownistes, others Martinistes, others are of the family of love, others of the damned crew. And although all these aggree against the Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, yet they disagree amongst them selves, and although they hold many, and those also contrary opinions, yet they all use one argument to prove their opinions, to wit Scripture sensed by their private spirit. And so, will this Atheist say, if I believe one of these sects, I must believe all, because they allege one proof for their religion; but seeing that I can not believe all, because they teach contrarieties, lest I do any partial wrong in preferring one before another, all having the same reason; I will believe none of of them all, nor none of their opinions. And seeing that they condemn the Catholic and Roman religion, for a farthel of superstitions (which not withstanding was ever counted the true Christian religion even by the Pagans themselves, who therefore persecuted it) and have no reason to bind me to any of their religions, unless I will be bound to an impossibility, that is to be of all their religions, and neither can, neither will, with any reason persuade me to be either Turk, or jewe; I may by authority be of no religion. And thus Atheism must needs follow division in religion, & contempt of the Roman Church.   

The sixth Chapter showeth how their want of a visible head; givethe a great advantage, to Atheists, and such as mock at all religion.  
IN the first book, and last chapter, I have declared at large, how necessary a visible head is in all societies, and especially in the Church of Christ, and I have also demonstrated, that there is no such visible head in the Synagogue of the reformers; whence I have inferred, that amongst them, it is lawful for every heretic, to preach what doctrine he will, and no man shall controlle him. Now I am to deduce another conclusion, to wit, that thus also the gate and gap is opened unto Atheists, and godless, and irreligious persons: which I can do easily, and will do in a word. For if a visible head be wanting, every man may preach and embrace what religion he will (as in the alleged place I have proved) and seeing that, if this head be wanting, there is no certainty for any religion, but only the private spirit, and bare scripture, which are altogether uncertain, 
In the first book, ch. 2.3.  as before is proved, it will follow that a man shall have no more reason to embrace one religion than another, yea he shall have no probable reason to induce him to any religion at all, and consequently he may take good leave to be of no religion. And thus he may argue in form and figure. If there be no visible head to determine by authority what religion is to be embraced, every man may be of what religion he will, and no man can control him, and so I also may use my liberty in choosing my religion, as well as another. And seeing that if the authority of a visible head be laid a side, I have no more reason to be of one religion then another (because all religions, allege the same reason which is no reason, to wit, bare scripture sensed by the private spirit) and I can not possibly be of all, because they be contrary to one another; I may by good reason refuse to be of any religion, and no man can control me for it, if there be no visible head, who can prove that he hath authority to determine of religion. And so he that forsaketh the Catholic Church, where only this visible head is to be found, hath leave and licence to be of what religion he will, yea to be of no religion at all, because leaving that he hath no more reason to be of one religion then another, because he hath no other reason then bare scripture sensed by a private spirit, which is not sufficient, as is proved in my first book and third chapter; yea leaving the Catholic Church, he can not have any probable reason to induce him to any of these new religions, as I have proved in my first book, and fift chapter, and seeing that God neither can, nor will command him to be of a religion, for which he seethe no reason, nor motive which is sufficient to induce a reasonable man, as in the same place is proved, he may with reason, after he hath left the Catholic Church, join with Atheists who are of no religion.   

The seventh Chapter showeth how the Reformers in denial of the real presence, do ruin Christian religion, and call all the other mysteries of faith in question.  
SAcrifice is a thing so highly pleasing, and acceptable unto God, that he will have none to be partakers with him in such honour, but reserveth it as an homage dew only to himself, and proper to a divine majesty. 
1. Reg. 15.  Yet obedience is more grateful unto him, than all the Hecatombs and Sacrifices in the world: because by sacrifice we consecrate unto his service the lives and substance of brute beasts, but by obedience, we make a burnt-offering, and Holocaust of our own souls, resigning our desires and wills, yea our own selves, wholly unto his will and pleasure. But whilst this obedience resteth in the will, though it be very meritorious, yet hath it not the full complement of perfection, because so long as the will hath reason to persuade her, the less thanks she deserveth for obeying: but when this virtue reacheth to the understanding, and maketh reason, against sense and above reason, to yield to more than reason can reach unto, then hath this virtue the top of her perfection. But this perfection she hath not of herself, because of herself, she can only submit the will unto the commandment of the Superior, but she is fain to borrow so much of the Theological virtue, called Faith, whose property is, to make the very understanding to stoop, & without any reason to yield to things, for which there is no reason, because they are above reason. Many such things there are in Christian faith which seem to sense senseless, to reason unreasonable, and to humane faith incredible, and (as far as man's reason can see) even to divine power impossible. Amongst the which, three are the most principal, and to human reason, most incredible, to wit the Trinity, in which we believe that three are one, that is that three persons are one God; The incarnation, in which we confess that twoe are one, that is twoe natures in Christ, the one divine, the other humane, are one and the same person; the blessed sacrament of the altar, in which we acknowledge that bread and wine, by the virtue of Christ's word, are changed into his body and blood, and that one body is not only in one, but in divers places, at one and the self same time? But as these three, are the hardest to conceive of all the mysteries of Christian faith, so hath our blessed Saviour given us more plain and evident testimonies of them in his holy writ, then of any other which are more easily to be conceived. For the blessed Trinity, what more pregnant proofs can we desire, than we have in saint Matthew? Going therefore teach you all nations in the name of the father, 
cap. vlt.  and of the son, and of the holy ghost. Where the ancient father's note that three are named, to signify three distinct people, and yet Christ biddeth his Apostles to baptize, in the name, not names of these three, to signify that these three are one God. And that the father is God every leaf almost of Scripture doth testify; that the son is God, many places most manifestly do bear witness, 
Rom. 1.9. Tit. 2.3. juda 2. Mat. 1●. Act. ●.  & testimony. That the holy ghost is God, S. Peter averreth, who having demanded of Ananias the reason why he would lie unto the holy ghost, avoucheth, that he lied not to men but to God. wherefore S. Paul sayeth that we are the temple of the holy ghost? and seeing that to God only temples are erected, if we be his temple he is our God. now that these three are one God, saint John will ascertain us, for (sayeth he) three there are which give testimony in heaven, the father, the word, 
I. Io. 5.  and the holy ghost, and these three are one. No less pregnaunte proofs doth holy writ afford us, for the incarnation, in which mystery we confess one divine person, Christ jesus, to be true God and man. And first let the father speak for his son. 
Mat. 3.  This is my beloved son in whom I have taken great pleasure. Secondly let the disciple speak for his master: 
cap. 18.  thou art the son of the living God. Let another disciple, and no other than he whom jesus loved, because he loved, tell us his opinion in this point: 
Io. ●.  he sayeth that in the beginning was the word and that the word was with God, yea was God. and after wards he sayeth, that this word was made flesh that is became man. Let Christ himself be credited also in this matter, because he is the truth: when the jew told him that he had not yet 50. 
Io. 8.  years of age, and therefore could not see Abrahame: he answered that he was before Abraham, and yet the same Christ is called by saint Mathewe, 
Mat. 1.  the son of Abrahame, which must needs argue twoe natures in one person of Christ, the one divine, in respect of which he was before Abraham, the other humane, by which he was after Abrahame, as the son is after the father: and so the self same person, is God and man; and that man jesus that lived in earth and conversed amongst us, is the natural son of God, & the word of God, is the word Incarnate, who in respect of his divinity was before Abrahame, but in respect of his human nature, was long after him. Now as concerning the third mystery, if I bring not as plain text for it, as can be brought for the others, I will yield the bucklers, and grant the victory, unto my adversary. But to avoid multitude of allegations, I will make choice of twoe places only, which seem to me to be the plainest. And the first shallbe taken out of the sixth of saint John, 
Io. 6.  which Chapter although of some it be expounded only of Spiritual eating of Christ, yet by the common consent of Interpreters, it speaketh not only of a spiritual, but also of a Sacramental, and real eating, as shall be made most manifest. For first our saviour Christ, to dispose them to a firm belief of this mystery, made such a multiplication and increase of five barley loaves & two fishes, that he fed and filled about five thousand persons therewith, and that so sufficiently, that the fragments of the banquet were as much as the whole feast. For if he could make so much of a little, why can he not turn bread and wine into his body? and if he could without diminution of the feast, satisfy so many, why may he not feed us all with his body; without division or diminution of the same? And if after that five thousand had eaten their fill of the loaves and fishes, the fragments and relics, which they left, were as much as the feast with which they were filled, why should it seem impossible, that Christ's body should be eaten of us, and yet remain in the pix, or Altar, or that after, that the communicantes have received it, the Relics which they leave, should remain still as great as the whole banquet was? Secondly after that this miracle was wrought, because there was a great aggreemenr, betwixt it, & the blessed Sacrament, thus he taketh the occasion to discourse with them of it, and to induce them to the belief of the same. Amen Amen I say to you, you seek me not because You have seen signs, but because you did eat of the loaves, and were filled; so sweat a taste had that miraculous banquet, and such contentment it gave, though of itself it was mean, that they followed him for the good cheer he made them. but sayeth Christ work not the meat that perisheth, but that which endureth to life everlasting, which the son of man will give you. They answered, what shall we do, that we may work the works of God? This is the work of God (sayeth Christ) that you believe in him, forasmuch he hath sent. What sign (said they) dost thou, for which we should believe thee? Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; and God gave them bread from heaven to eat. Here Christ beginneth to close with them, and to enter in to his intended discourse of the blessed sacrament. True (sayeth Christ) but Moses gave you not that bread, but my father only hath the giving of bread from heaven. Lord (said they) give us always this bread. jesus answered, I am the bread of life. At which the jew murmured, because they understood him not. And yet most fitly is he called the bread of life: for first in Scripture all that nourisheth is called bread: wherefore seeing that Christ is the food of our soul, well is he called bread, and not whatsoever bread, but the bread of life, to distinguish him from common bread. Secondly in scriptures when one thing is changed into another, that into which the change is made, taketh the name of the thing changed. So the serpent into which Aaron's rod was changed is called a rod, 
Exod. 7.  because it was made of a rod; wherefore because bread was to be changed into Christ's body and blood, well is he called bread. Thirdly because his body was to be covered, with the forms of bread, it is called bread because it hath the show and form of bread, 
Gen. 49.  and for this cause his blood is called, wine, and the blood of the grape, because it was to be invested as it were, with the accidents of wine in the same blessed Sacrament. But not withstanding the jew murmuration, Christ will not eat his word, but again he repeateth it; I am the bread of life, your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and they died; this is the bread that descended from heaven, that if a man eat of it he die not. And I (sayeth he) am this living bread that came from heaven, of which he that eateth shall live for ever, and the bread that I will give, is my fells he for the life of the world. Now he speaketh his mind plainly, and so plainly that he compareth the figure, with the verity manna with his bread of the blessed Sacrament, and gives the preminence to the verity; for (sayeth he) your fathers did eat of manna and yet died, but my manna is a more sovereign viand, because who soever eateth of it shall live for ever. Now if it be true that the blessed eucharist, is only a sign of Christ and his body and blood; then I demand of our adversaries with what show of truth Christ could prefer it before manna? Why should Christ's bread give life rather than manna, seeing that manna signified Christ, who is this bread, as well as the Eucharist? Yea unless the eucharist contain Christ's flesh and blood really, manna must needs take the precedence in dignity, as it hath in antiquity. For first manna was better in substance, 
Sap. 16. Psal. 77. See the fourth book chap. 6.  as being made by Angels hands, and in the air, having also all tastes, as is before declared, and so in substance manna, is more excellent. In figure and signification, manna is as good, if not better, for if the Eucharist contain not really Christ's body and blood, it is but a sign and consequently no better than manna, because it signified the same Christ, and so was as noble a sign, & it was more apt to signify, and so was a fit figure. for as Manna, was framed by angels hands, 
Ex 16. joan. 6.  and never passed the heat of the fire; so Christ our bread of life, was framed by the king of angels fingers, without all help of man, and was baked in the oven of the Virgin's womb, without all heat of concupiscence. As when God rained down Manna, the jew cried Manhu, that is what is this? So when Christ promised his Manna, the Capharnaites murmured. That Manna was given to the jew in the desert, this to Christians in the wilderness of this world only, for in the next world, I mean in heaven, our only home and land of promise, we shall not feed any more of Christ's body by eating or communicating, but we shall taste of the sweetness of his divinity by fruition. That Mamna was white, but yet was no common bread, and it was like a coriander seed, but yet was not of any such substance. and this Manna in extern form and colour, seemeth bread, but in deed is the body of Christ: That when it was measured was found to be of one measure, in all the gatherers' hands, and this Manna although some have great hosts some little ones, although some receive whole hosts, some but a piece, some many hosts, some one only, yet when by faith it is measured; we find as much in the little host, as in the great, as much in the whole host, as in the piece, and as much in few, yea in one, 
Sap. 16.  as in many. That manna had all tastes, and those most delicate, according to the eaters desire; but this it had not of the own nature, but of God, who gave it such a supernatural virtue; So hath this Manna also, because it tasteth to our souls, according to our devotion, and desire, and though it be but flesh, yet it feedeth the soul, not by the own virtue, for to the soul, flesh of itself non pr●dest quicquam, profiteth nothing, but by a supernatural virtue, which it receiveth by the strange conjunction, which it hath with the divinity, even as the hot iron burneth, but not as iron, but as it is united to the fire. And seeing that such convenience, and aggreement, can not be found betwixt bare bread, and Christ's body, it followeth, that if the Eucharist be but bread in substance, that Manna was a better sign than it, and so the figure shall excel the verity, and the shadow shall surpass the body, and the promise the performance. But let us go on. After that our Saviour had told the Iewes, that he was the bread of life which descended from heaven, and giveth life everlasting, which manna could not do; because it only extinguished hunger, and prolonged life for a time; the jew murmured once again, and grombled at the matter, yea, as the text sayeth, they strove amongst themselves saying, how can he give us his flesh to eat? But Christ will not go from his former words, rather now he threateneth, that unless they eat his flesh, and drink his blood, they shall have no life in them. And he inculcateth again, and again, that his flesh is meat in deed, and that his blood is drink in deed; that he that eateth him shall live by him; that his bread, is the bread that came down from heaven; and so for the. Vherfore, now, many of his disciples begin to stagger, saying, that this is a hard speech not to be endured. But yet Christ for all this their scandals, changeth not his tune nor tenor of words. Only because he knew, that the matter was hard & high, of which he spoke, he seeks to induce them to believe this mystery, by another of as great difficulty. doth this, sayeth he, scandalise you, that I say you must eat my flesh and drink my blood? if than you shall see me ascend, from whence I am descended, you will much more be scandalised. but yet to take away as much scandal as I can, and to ease your understanding as much as the mystery whereof I talk, will permit; It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, 
Aug tract. 7.10.  the words which I have spoken unto you be spirit, and life. That is, you must not conceive any horror in that I tell you that you must eat my flesh, for you must not imagine, that I will give it you raw, or roasted, as the meat which cometh from the shambles or kitchen, I will give it you after a spiritual manner, hiding it from your eyes, under the veal of a Sacrament, 
Ibidem.  and in this spiritual manner it shall profit you, for as for that carnal manner in which you do imagine, that I will give you my flesh, that profiteth nothing. Or if you think it impossible that flesh should give life, it is not flesh only that can do it, because flesh only profiteth nothing, but it is the spirit of the divinity and flesh united to this spirit that quickeneth; 
Ibidem.  for (as saint Austin sayeth) if flesh could profit nothing, Verbum caro non fieret ut habitaret in nobis, the word would not have been made flesh to devil amongst us, So that Christ meaneth that they must eat his flesh, not only in a figure (for so they had eaten it in the paschal lamb) nor only by faith (for so their for fathers and all that ever believed in Christ had eaten Christ, and therefore at this eating they could not have been scandalised) but he speaketh, of a real eating, though in a spiritual and sacramental manner; and so the jews even after the explication mentioned, understood him, and therefore still they murmured; yea after this (as the text sayeth) many of his disciples went back and now they walked not with him. Blessed Saviour, thou that camest not to deceive, but to save souls, if thou have any easier meaning than that is, in which these men do take thee, tell it them out of hand, to help their understanding. If thou meanest only an eating of thee in a figure, or by faith only, as Caluin and Zuinglius do interpret thee, do but say so, & thou shalt take away from these men, all cause of scandal, & murmuration: because they are well accustomed to figures whose whole law was figurative, and they can easily conceive how thy may eat thee spiritually by faith, because that is only to believe in Christ and the Messias, which thy disciples that stagger at these thy words, do already believe, and all their forefathers have long since believed. But Christ will give them no such easy answer: which argeweth that he spoke neither of figurative eating only, nor of spiritual eating only, but of real eating of his flesh, though in a spiritual manner. What then answerethe our blessed Saviour unto these afflicted people, nothing at all more, than which already he hath answered, but rather now he turneth to the twelve Apostles, saying. What will you therefore depart? As if he had said: I have told you a high mystery, at which many murmur, many are scandalised, and for which many have left me also, but I have no other thing to say, faith is here required, without which none can come to me or my father, none can believe this mystery: but, they that will not captivate their understanding to the obedience of faith, let them go; but will you my twelve who are used to my parables and mysteries, be gone also? Saint Peter answereth for all twelve, (not knowing judas infidelity, whom not withstanding Christ calleth, a devil for the same) Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. Out of this discourse I gather twoe things for my purpose. first that the jews understood Christ, not of a figurative, or spiritual eating by faith, because such eating could not have scandalised them, who were accustomed to spiritual eating, neither would such meats have gone against their stomach, because figurative dishes, were their ordinary fare. Secondly I gather that Christ meant not figurative or spiritual eating only, but sacramental and real eating. For if he had meant so, he no doubt would have explicated himself, to take away all occasion of offence and scandal, which they conceived, because they understood him of real eating, as is proved; or if Caluin will needs have it, that Christ meant only figurative and spiritual eating, he must needs say with all, that christ was most cruel, and peremptory, and that he endeavoured rather to deceive souls, then to save them, & to blind them rather than to illuminate them: who, though he perceived that they understood him of his flesh, which scandalised them, yet would not vouchsafe, to tell them that he meant only a figurative, and spiritual eating; that so with a word he might have taken a way the scandal, taught them the truth, and given the deceived souls, satisfaction.  
My second argument, 
Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Lu●. 22. 1. Cor. 11.  shallbe deduced out of the words of our Saviour, which he used, in the institution of this Sacrament; This is my body: this is my blood: or, this is the Chalice of my blood. What could he have said more plainly? Tell me, Caluin, if Christ would have given us to understand, that he meant to give us no bare figure, but his true body, what plainer words could he have used? he might have said (sayeth Caluin) This is my true body. but might not yet Caluin have used his ordinary gloss and have said, that he meant only to say that it is the true figure of his body, or the figure of his true body? And I demand of Caluin, whether Christ was able to turn bread in to his body, as before he had turned water into wine, and multiplied the loaves and fishes? If he say he could not, 
Io 2. Io. 6.  I ask why? If he answer, because it seemeth impossible; I must needs tell him, that he taketh much upon him, in confining God his power within the narrow compass of his shallow head; as though God could do just as much as Caluin can conceive, but no more. All the ancient fathers, though they could not conceive this mystery, yet because Christ calleth that which was in his hands, his body, do confess that Christ was able to do it, because they knew he could do more than they could conceive. And why could he not do this as well as he hath done the like? speak Caluin, and tell us where lieth the difficulty, which maketh thee with judas and the Capharnaites, to think that Christ can not give us his body really? either thy reason is because he can not turn bread into a man's body: and why I pray the can he not as well turn one thing into another, as create a thing of nothing? Why can he not turn bread into his body, and wine into his blood, 
Io. 2. Exod. 2. Psal. 77. Exod 7.  who turned water into wine, a rod into a serpent, and a serpent into a rod, and a rock into water. Yea he that turned water into blood, can he not turn wine into blood? Or else the reason is, because a man's body can not be in so little a room, as is a little host or a little piece of the same: And why can he not make a great body to be in a little room, as he can make twoe bodies, by penetration, 
Mat. 1.2. Mar. 16. Lu. 24.  to be in one room, without enlarging the place; which he did when by penetration he issued out of the virgin's womb, without breaking her virginal closet, and when he came out of his grave, without removing the stone, entered into his disciples, the door being shut, and passed thorough all the heavens in his Ascension, without division of those incorruptible bodies? or else the reason is, because one body can not be in diverse places: And why may not one body, be in divers places, as well as diverse bodies by penetration were in one place in his nativity, and resurrection, in his entrance into the house, where his disciples were, and in his ascension into heaven, and above all the heavens? Briefly it is no more repugnant, for a body to be in a little room or in diverse places at once, then for a man's body to stand upirght upon the water and not to sink, 
Mat. 14.4. Reg. 6.  as Christ's and saint Peter's bodies did, or for a heavy body to ascend in the water as the head of a hatcher did? neither is it more impossible for a body to occupy more place than the own quantity is, then for a body to live a longer age than nature will afford, & yet Exechias lived longer, and Elias and Henoch are as yet living. But Caluin will say that it is no more necessary to understand Christ really in these words this is my body, then in diverse others, in which he sayeth I am the door, I am the vine or in those, Christ was the rock, or in those, behold the lamb of God. But by Caluins leave there is much more reason, why we should understand Christ really in those word, This is my body, then in the other words alleged. For when Christ said. This is my body, he made his last will and testament, at which time men speak plain, and not in parables or figures, lest that the heirs should take occasion to wrangle, and to sew each other in the la, about the meaning of ●he will. He spoke also those words ●o his Apostles, 
Luc. 8.  to whom he used not ●o speak in parables but in plain words, or if he chanced to speak obscurely to them, 
Mat. 14.15. Io. 16.  they used to desire him to explicate himself, which here they did not, or else some one of the Evangelists would have explicated this figurative speech, as they used in other matters to do; yea when Christ spoke these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, & blessed the bread which he never did, but some great miracle followed, as appeareth by the miracle of the multiplication of loaves and fishes, 
Io. 6.  and such like; which argeweth some real change in the substance of bread; which can be no other than transubstatiation, the very words, this is my body, importing no less. secondly he said in the present-tense this is my body which is given for you: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  This is my blood which is shed for you. For so the great text teacheth us, which addition also argueth some thing, that then was offered for them, and seeing that bread and wine, could only be offered to them, but not for them, nor for remission of their sins; it followeth that Christ then, made an oblation and sacrifice unbloody, of his body and blood, as is before, upon another occasion, proved. which saint 
1. Cor ●●. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Paul confirmeth saying that Christ said This is my body which for you is broken (for so the greek word signifieth) to signify that Christ's body was really under the accidents of bread and wine, else it could not lave been said, to have been broken in respect of the accidents of bread, which are broken: wherefore saint Chrisostome said, that Christ who would suffer no bones to be broken on the cross, was broken in the Sacrament. Thirdly if Christ had given them but bare bread, or a bare sign of his body, he would never have added this is my body which is given for you, because that argueth a real giving of his real body, and thetfore when he said I am the vine, he added not, who suffered on the cross, nor any such like words: and although pointing to the image of Cesar; we say sometimes behold Cesar, or, this is Cesar, yet not so aptly can we say of the image, this is Cesar, that overcame Pompey, because that addition argeweth Cesar in person. Fourthly when we speak metaphorically, we name and express the thing; so Christ expressed himself, when he said I am a vine, so saint Paul named him expressly, when he said, Christ was a rock, so saint John pointed at him, when he said behold the lamb of God, and seeing that Christ remaining Christ, can not be truly a vine, a rock, or a lamb; we easily perceive that such speeches are to be taken metaphorically. And so if Christ had said, this bread is my body, we must have understood him figuratively, and metaphorically, because bread remaining bread, can not be really his body: but for as much as Christ said only, in confuso, confusedly, this is my body, we must understand him really, and so the sense of these words must be: this which I have in my hands, is truly, and really my body. Lastly the greek text in saint Luke is sufficient to demonstrate this verity, 
c. 22.  where speaking of the chalice he hath these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. By which it is plain that the pronoun (which) is referred unto the chalice, which in the greek, is of the neutergender, as also the pronown (which) is. And so this is the sense of those words: This is the chalice the new testament in my blood which chalice is shed for you. Where the continent is taken for the contained, for the material chalice or cup, can not be shed, and seeing that wine can not be said to be shed for us, it must needs follow that Christ's blood was in the chalice, because that only was shed for us. Which text is so plain, 
In Annot.  that Beza confesseth, that it must needs be translated quod pro vobis funditur, which chalice is shed for you, if we will follow the Grammatical construction, yet because thus he maketh an argument against himself, he translateth it qui pro vobis funditur, which blood is shed for you, saying that thus it should be, and that either the Evangelist made a sollecisme, or that the text is corrupted. But in the one he is very saucy to correct the Evangelist, in the other he lieth, because all the greek copies, have it as I have set it down. By this, it is manifest, that as Christ promised, that he would give his body and blood to be eaten and drunken really, as is proved in the first argument, so he gave really his body and blood to his Apostles, at his last supper, under the forms and accidents of bread and wine. And so the text and letter of Scripture is plain for the real presence; and that the letter is to be understood really, as it soundeth, and not metaphorically, tropically, or figuratively, I have proved by many conjectures, and not only coniecturs, but by a plain discourse of Christ with his disciples, in the first argument, and by many circumstances and evident signs in the second argument. Yet because every man must be believed in his Art, especially when there is no suspicion of partiality, I will prove the meaning of Christ's words to be real and literal, and not figurative or spiritual only, by the authority of the ancient fathers, whose art and profession was to interpret scriptures, in which also they were so couning, that for the same, they are as famous amongst Christians, as Aristotle for Philosophy or Cicero for eloquence, Homer, Virgil, and Ovid, for Poetry, Livy and Sallust for history; who also can not be suspected to favour partially one side, rather than another, because they are more ancient than either the Catholics or the Reformers of this tyme. And having these men on my side I will not fear to show myself in the field against all the reformers in the world, because having them on my side I shall have many more to fight for me, then against me. And as having them on my side, I may take courage, so my adversaries if they had any forehead, would be ashamed, so few, to stand in field against so many, so young upstartes against so ancient Captains (who most of them have vanquished one Arch-heritike and sectmaster or other, by their learned writings) so unlearned against so learned, so vicious against so renowned Saints, and so light ministers against so grave Pastors, and Prelates. But because a Chapter is not a field large, and spaciours enough, to muster all these souldious of Christ together, I will only bring forth a few of them, and those that speak most plainly, and consequently do strike most forcibly: and for the others I will refer the Reader to Cardinal Bellarmine, Suarez, Gregorius de Valentia, and others, who have brought them all into the field, and placed every one of them in his rank, and station, that is, in the time, and age, in which he lived. And because all these fathers, either expressly do interpret the words, afore said, This is my body, or at least do ground themselves upon them, or allude unto them; their sayings may well serve for interpretations of the text alleged. Ignatius, saint Paul's Scholar, hath these words: 
Ep. ad Rom.  non gaudeo corruptibili nutrimento, panem Dei volo, panem caelestem, qui est caro Christi & filii Dei vivi, & potum volo sanguinem eius: I rejoice not in corruptible nutriment, I will have the bread of God (he alludeth to Christ's words in saint John, 
Io. 6.  where he calleth himself bread) the heavenly bread, which is the flesh of Christ and the son of the liviug God, and I will have the drink which is his blood. To which words, Caluin can not shape any reasonable answer, unless he use much violence, in wresting the text: for he calls the eucharist incorruptible nurriment, Caluins' Supper is as corruptible as bread, he calls it the bread of God and bread celestial, alluding to Christ's words, 
Io. 61  who of his own flesh and not of common bread, pronounced those words I am the living bread, which descended from heaven, Caluins' bread hath no higher source & origin from which it is descended, than the backhowse or oven; This bread he calleth the flesh of Christ the Son of God, and this drink he avoucheth to be the blood of Christ, whereas Caluins' bread and wine, is but bread and wine, or to make the most that may be of it, is but a sign of the flesh and blood of Christ, but in deed it is no sign nor sacrament at all, because Christ instituted, that bread for a sign and sacrament, which is consecrated by a consecrated Priest, which consecration calvin's bread hath not, because his ministers are no priests as I have demonstrated. 
See ye fourth book chap. ●●  But because Caluin might by a violent gloss, affirm that Ignatius calleth the Eucharist, incorruptible meat, celestial, and the bread of God, because it is a sign of Christ's flesh, which is incorruptible, and celestial, & the bread of God I will bring places, that can admit no glozing. And first of all I will bring some fathers, who say that this Sacrament is not a bare figure, but is the true flesh of Christ. Saint Chrysostome, that golden Mouth of the Church of Christ, stoppeth Caluins' mouth, with these words: Semetipsum nobis commiscet & non fide tantum, 
Ho. 61. ad pop..  verum & reipsa nos suum corpus efficit; he doth mingle himself with us, and not only by faith, but also in very deed he maketh us his body. Caluin sayeth that we eat Christ only by faith, and consequently that his substance, is not really united to our substance, because according to his opinion, they are distant as far as heaven and earth, but saint Chrisostome sayeth, that Christ's substance in this Sacrament is mingled with ours, not only by faith, but also in very deed, ergo in very deed, Christ's body is in the sacrament, and by means of the sacrament, in the recevers also, and communicantes. Theophilactus writing upon the sixth of saint John speaketh, 
Theoph. in c. 6.10.  if it be possible, more plainly: Attend autem quod panis qui à nobis in mysterijs manducatur, non est tantum figuratio quaedam carnis Domini, sed est ipsa caro Domini: Mark, that the bread which is eaten of us in the mysteries, is not a figuration (that is an expression or figure) of the flesh of our Lord, but it is the very flesh of our Lord. how is it possible for the greatest Papist that is, to speak more plainly? Hilarius speaketh as plainly, as if he strove, who should speak most plainly: De veritate carnis, 
l. ●. Trin.  & sanguinis non est relictus ambigendi locus, nunc enim & ipsius Domini professione, & fide nostra, verè caro est & verè sanguis est: Of the verity of the flesh and blood, there is no place left to doubt, for now, both by our Lord's profession, and by our faith, it is truly flesh and truly blood. Where the words, verity, and truly are clean opposite to Caluins' figures, and spiritual manducation. Secondly the fathers admire how Christ's body remaining in heaven, is not withstanding received of us in the blessed Sacrament. Saint Chrysostome as a man astonished, exclaimeth in this sort. O miraculum ô Dei benignitatem, 
l. 3. de Sa●erd.  qui cum Patre sursum sedet, in illo ipso temporis momento omnium manibus contrectatur: O Miracle, o Gods benignity, he that sitteth above with his father, in that very moment (that is in time of Consecration and Communion) is handled in every one's hands. Now if Christ be only in the Sacrament as in a sign or figure, what miracle is there here, worthy such an exclamation? For so Christ is only really and in his own person, in heaven, and in earth he is but as in his Image, and consequently it is no greater a miracle, then that the King at the same time should be really in his chamber of presence, and yet figurately in as many other places as he hath coins or images. Yea this miracle the vintner maketh daily, whose wine is really in the cave or Cellar, and at the same time in the juiebushe which is without the Cellar, because in it, the wine is as in a sign. Saint Austin wondereth, how Christ carried himself in his own hands when he said this is my body; 
Cano. 1. in Ps. 33.  which is no wonder if the Sacrament be but a figure and sign of him, for so he carrieth himself, who carrieth his own image. Thirdly the father's compare this sacrament with strange and miraculous mutations. 
Li 4. c. 34. Cat. 4.5 l. de ●js qui initiam. 〈…〉. 9 & sum 〈◊〉 Iren l. 3. c. 12. Ab. l. 4. the see c. 4.9.  Ireneus and Cirillus compare it with the Incarnation, saint Ambrose compares, it with the creation of the world, and the Nativity of Christ of the Virgin Mother. The same Ireneus, and saint Ambrose, liken it to the conversion of the rod into a serpent, of water into blood, and of the rock into water, which strange mutations, were wrought by Moses in Egypt & in the desert. Which comparisons were very foolish, if the bread and wine, had no other mutation, then that of bare bread and wine, they are made a sign; and as well might they compare an juie-bush unto the same mutations, because the juiebushe, when it is hanged before the Inn, of no sign, is made a sign. Fourthly as in these alleged conversions & mutations, the afore named fathers, make recourse unto God's omnipotency, so do they in the mutation of this Sacrament, proving that it was possible, because God is omnipotent. Saint Ambrose sayeth; 
li. de ijs qui initiantur c. 9  he that of nothing could make something, can he not turn one thing, 
Cipr. ser de Coena Domini.  into another? And saint Cyprian sayeth, that by the omnipotency of the word, the bread is made flesh. And were not these father's mad, to endeavour to explicate by so hard examples, how God his omnipotency was able to change bread into Christ's body, and wine into his blood, if the mutation were figurative only, seeing that the vintner without omnipotency, can do the like, in making an juie-bush, of no sign, a sign? Fistly they admire herein our saviours great charity and bounty, who is so liberal, as to feast and feed us, with his own flesh, and blood. 
Ho 45. in 10.  What shepherd (sayeth saint Chrisostome) feedeth his sheep with his own blood? And what say I, Shepherd? many mothers there are, which will not bestow their milk upon their suckling babes, but rather do put them forth to nourcing, but Christ dealeth not so niggardly, but rather feedeth us with his own flesh and blood, and mingleth his substance with ours. Now if Christ hath given us, only a bare sign of his flesh and blood, I see no such extraordinary love and charity; at least herein he showeth no more, yea not so much charity, as he showed to the jew, to whom he gave manna from heaven in their extremity, which was a more noble substance, and a better figure than calvin's bread is. Lastly the father's note for a strange thing, that Christ is eaten of us in the blessed sacrament, and yet neither divided, 
in vita apud Sur.  nor diminished, nor consumed. This saint Andrew told Aegeas the Proconsul for a great miracle. I (sayeth he) do offer daily unto the omnipotent God, the Immaculate lamb, of whom when all the people have eaten, the lamb remaineth whole, and entire. 
Ser de Coena Domini. Hom 2. de Verb. Apost.  Saint Cyprian calls this sacrament, inconsumptibilem cibum, meat inconsumptible. Saint Austin speaking of this Sacrament, and of the murmuration of the jew who imagined that they should tear Christ's flesh with their teeth, sayeth thus: sicreficeris, ut non deficiat unde reficeris: so thou art refreshed, that it is not deficient, of which thou art refreshed. And the reason is, because Christ's body is glorious, and is received whole of every one and so is not divided, and when the forms of bread and wine perish, Christ's body leaveth them, and though one man receiveth Christ's body whole, yet there is never the less for another, for he also receiveth it whole, neither in this is there any greater difficulty, than that 5000. 
Io. 6.  men should be fed with five barley, loaves, & tvoe fishes, & yet the relics, to be as great or more, than was the feast. now if Christ be not really present in this Sacrament, but only as in a sign and figure, it is no more marvel, that he is not consumed, then that the kings picture should be burnt or broken, and he receive no harm; and if we eat him only spiritually by faith, what wonder is it, that his substance is not divided, seeing that faith hath no teeth to rend or tear him. I could add to these fathers, who as I have proved in the first book ener went with the Church, 
Chap. 4.  the practice of the Christian world, 
l. 1. de Eucharist. c 20.  which for reverence of this Sacrament (as Cardinal Allen noteth) hath builded so goodly Churches, erected so stately Altars, prepared so rich vessels, of gold and silver, to contain this Sacrament, hath carried it in Procession, and adored it; which honour and homage, Christians would never have given it, had they thought that it were but bread and wine, or a bare sign, or figure of Christ's, body. So that if ever there were any truth in the Church, this of the real presence, is a truth, because the Scriptures are as plain for it, as for any other mysteries of our faith, the father's aggree in the exposition of the scripture for the real presence, as they do in the exposition of scriptures against the Arrians for the defence of the Trinity, or against the Nestorians or Eutychians, for the Incarnation; the practice of the ancient Church, argueth no less, miracles, unless all books even lately Printed lie, were always as frequent for this mystery, as for any, the consent of all Christians conspireth in this article as well as in the Trinity, & this the pagans knew full well, 
In Apol. c. 5.7. Pamel ibid. Euseb. l 5 c. 1  who therefore called us Anthropophagos and Infanticidas as witnessethe Tertulian. And so if we have any truth of any article of our faith, this is an assured verity: and if ever there were any heresy, Caluins' opinion, which denieth this real presence, is an heresy, because the authors of this opinion, were ever noted for heretics, as Berengarius, Wicleph, and others before them; and their followers had particular names, as the Arians have, they were condemned by Counsels, and by that Church which was commonly called Christian, and they have all other marks, of heretics, set down in the second book, as will easily, appear, by application of them, unto Caluin, and his followers. When this opinion was taught, the world wondered at it, and the Pastors and fathers of the Church, written against it, and they alleged as plain scripture against this heresy, as ever they did against Arianisme. And so, if ever there were any heresy in the world, the denial of the real presence is an heresy. Confer now (gentle reader) the testimonies which Catholics have for the real presence, with those which the reformers allege against it, and tell me where is likest to be the truth? Catholics have plainer scripture for it, than they have against it, the fathers also who are interpreters of scripture, stand for it, the reformers stand against it. Which are to be believed, thinkest thou? Whether all the fathers, or all the Reformers, yea or every one of the Reformers, because they aggree not, and every one will be supreme judge, by his private spirit? They will say scripture must be believed before ffathers. but this is not the question; for scriptures are plainer, for the real presence, than those are, which the reformers bring against it, And fathers bring scriptures to prove it, as well as they do to disprove it; so that the question is, whether the fathers are liker to understand the scriptures rightly, rather than the reformers, yea, rather than any one of the reformers, in particular. But to draw to my intended conclusion, out of all this discourse I gather, that we have as plain scripture for the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the blessed Sacrament, as we have for the blessed Trinity, and we are as sure of the real meaning of the texts, which are alleged for the real presence, as of them, which were used for proof of the Trinity or Incarnation; because the text is as plain, and the Interpreters as many and as plain also, the circumstances also of the text make as much for the real presence, as for those other tvoe mysteries; The real presence is no more impossible, nor incredible, to man's conceit, than those mysteries are, yea those are of greater difficulty. Why then do the reformers deny the Real presence, rather than the Trinity or Incarnation? If we have as good proofs for this as for those verities, we can not believe those, but we must believe this, or if these testimonies be not sufficient for the real presence, they are not sufficient for those verities, and so if not with standing plain text, circumstances of the text, Interpreters of the text, and practise of the Church, we deny the real presence, or doubt of it; we must necessarily doubt of the Trinity and Incarnation, and call them, and all the other mysteries of Christian faith in question, for which we have no greater, nor no other proof, because one proof is for all; and as good for the eucharist, as for any. And if all the mysteries of christian faith be called in question, then seeing that we have no reason to join with Turck or jew in their Religion, we may bid adieu to all Religion, and sort ourselves with Atheists, who are of no Religion.  
FINIS.    

Errors in Printing.  
Imyliethe, for implieth. page 3. line 25. high for he. pa. 3. lin. 29. to for do pa. 10. li. 9 oner for over: pa. 24. li 12. veary for very: pa. 18. li. 28. branisicke for brainsick pa. 27. li. 6. show for show pa 36 li. 4. veal for veil pag. 36. li. 8. thy for they pa. 61. li. 6. Hugo for Richardus, pag. 114 in the mark they for then pag. 129. li. 9 they for thy pag. 247. l. 4. it is self, for itself 155. li. 31. biourrovinge for borrowinge pa. 175. lin. 8. some for son pa. 198. li. 29. larned for learned 240. li. 19 sow for four pa. 240 li. 28. followed for followed pa. 252. li. 23. ruled reason for ruled by reason pa. 253. li. 15. bodily for boldly: pa. 259. li. 31. woe for two 294. li. 17. demonstrate for be demonstrated: pa 299 li. 27. this for his 337. li. 20. there for other pa. 354. li. 13. as it well for as well. pa. 355. li. 20 haw for la pag. 382. li. 10. is not for it is not: pa. 422. li. 29. pravers for prayers pa. 436. li. 28. am for and pa. 346. li. 16. I me for I am pa. 546. li. 22 they for then pag. 588. lin 18. boidled for bridled 606. li. 29. farthe for faith pag. 607. lin. 20. staunge for strange pag. 632. li. 16. this for his pa. 635 li. 4. great for greek pa. 727. li 23. lave for have pa. 728. li. 6.  
words omitted page. 158. line 2. which come in after the second word of the same line  
Fiend. So it happeneth to the Heretic the   

THE TABLE.  

A  
SAint Peter and the rest of the Apostles sent extraordinarily. pag 8. they prove their mission by their works. pag. 22.  
Antiquity in all kinds of arts always reverenced. p. 91.  
The Arrogancy of heretics in this age. p. 92.  
An admonition to Atheists. p. 112.  
S. Ambrose his words to Valentinian the Emperor concerning his office. p. 147.  
Infallible arguments to prove the stability of the Catholic or Roman Church. p. 198. 202.  
The agreement and consent in opinions that is in the Catholic Church p. 214. that the same can not but proceed of God. p. 218.  
Arius condemned for an heretic by the council of Nice consisting of three hundred and 18. Bishop's p 237.  
The two advents of Christ. p. 294.  
Adame endued with all natural sciences. 308.  
The divers affections of the superior and inferior part of the soul in respect of the same thing. p. 328. how they wear both in Christ in respect of his passion, without sin. ibid.  
The reason of the abrogation of the old sacrifices and sacraments. p. 382.  
No moral or probable assurance of any sacraments at all amongst the reformers. p. 409.  
The Arian heresy. 32.  
No probable assurance of scriptures, if the Roman Church be rejected. 679. usq 688.  
Two kinds of Atheists. 640.  
Authority, how it is gotten. 118.  
Authority of the Fathers and the new preachers compared. 93.  
The Sacrament of the Aultare. 223. 703.   

B  
Baptism is of no force, and to no purpose according to Caluins' doctrine. 422.  
The prodigious beginning of heretics 17.  
Nothing in our belief against reason although above reason p. 276.  
What manner of belief or confidence is required in prayer p. 440.  
Beza his presumption in correcting an Evangelist 720.  
divers bitter blasphemies where with most spitefully Luther, Caluin and a rabble of other miscreant's bark at the blessed virgin. 343.  
That the Catholic Church never made breach out of any other Church, as always heretics have. 163.   

C  
THe success Caluin had in his pretended miracle. p. 25. his small account of fathers. 88 marked in the back not for his goodness. 121. his herodian death. ibid. his assertions injurious to Christ, to which in some sort suscribe whytaker and jewel. p. 249. his lewd distinction betwixt the old and new law. 281. his absurd blasphemy. 304. his execrable doctrine concerning God. 303. he take the from Christ the title of a judge. 300. he maketh him a desperate man. 325. he bringeth him to hell and make the him a companion of the damned 332. his miserable end. 338. he make the God a greater Patron of sin then the devil is. 450. His justifying faith taketh away prayer under penalty of becominge an infidel. 439. His opinions of justifying faith. 442. of sin ibid. of good works. 442. of free will ibid. which makes the Pater noster, or our lords prayer to be needles, yea pernicious to faith. 443. His opinion of the number of Sacraments. 408. of what small importance he maketh them. 413.  
The good alteration that Catholic religion worketh in those which sincerely embrace it. ●23.  
That in sundry perfections Catholics excel the reformers. p. 120 usq. ad. 124.  
The effect of true Charity. 341.  
Christ himself sent. p: 4. he proveth his mission by his works. 22. the reason why he instituted a succession of Pastors in his Church. 16. in what sense he is said to have been the Priest, the sacrifice, and the God to whom the sacrifice, was offered. pa. 251. how he is said to have satisfied for our sins, notwithstanding that sanctification, is required at our hands. pag. 261. that he played all the parts of a spiritual Physician q: 271. he hath no successor although many vicegerentes. pag. 285. 364. How his sole supreme authority over the Church, consisteth with the necessity of a visible, head here in earth. pag. 365. Christ did not suffer the pains of hell as Caluin most impiously contendeth that he did. 337.  
The reason why the Church only should judge of scriptures deduced even from the donctrine of the reformers. p. 44. why it is called apostolical. 190.  
divers heretical opinions about the fall of the Church. 198. a difference betwixt Scripture and the Church's definitions. 43.  
The true Church can not be invisible. p. 206. it is not confined as heretical sects are. 231.  
A Contention betwixt the jew and Samaritans resembling very well the controversy betwixt catholics and heretics. 129.  
The convenience that the Church of God should have a visible head●. 133. usq. ad. 136.  
The divers offices of conscience with the great sway it beareth in all our actions. 58. the reformers take it away. 544.  
The Contrariety of Caluins' assertions, and the Scriptures. 594.  
In what manner our Cooperation in divers kinds is required notwithstanding the sufficiency of Christ's passion. p. 263.  
The first Council called in jerusalem by the Apostles. 189.  
Proofs of a creation. 648.   

D  
The deceit that heretics use by places of scripture, no sufficient warrant of sound doctrine to allege bare scripture for it. 37.  
divers secret derogations by Luther from Christ whereby he seemeth to pull at the divinity itself. 24.  
After what manner the Devil do the seek to imitate Christ by heretics. 30.  
The difference of scholershipp, life and conversation, betwixt the planters of Catholic religion and the first brochers of heresy. 121.  
The difference betwixt an heretic and a Schismatic. 175.  
An apparent difference betwixt sin and the pain of sin. 173.  
The difficulty amongst the reformers to call any kind of council. 154. the likelihood of disagreement amongst them. ibid. no waraunt to rely upon their sentence supposing agreement. 152.  
The manner of discussion or examination at the day of judgement. 298.  
From whence desperation proceedeth. 326.  
The ruin that proceedeth of dissension. 212.  
Dissension arguethe heretics to be the synagogue of Satan. 219.  
The deep dissimulation of the reformers and their traitorous meaning to Christ himself made manifest by an example. 357.  
The manifold divisions and sects of the late reformers. 221. the same acknowledged by many of them. 224.  
The reason why all the Doctors and Pastors of the Church can not err. 100   

E  
Epiphanius very fitly comparethe heretics to vipers of divers kinds. 224.  
Erasmus how he liketh of Luther's doctrine. 246.  
diverse Examples out of the old and new testament for prayer to saints. 355. for religions respect to relics and images. 356.  
The eucharist and real presence proved. 223. 703. The denial of it, calleth all the mysteries of faith in doubt. ibid.  
The Eutychian heresy. 32  
Examples of pride & self love in heretics. 66.  
The Excellency of Christ's priesthood above all others, and how it differeth from them. 286.  
A triple Exposition of that place of saint John exierunt ex nobis. applied to the first or chief heretics of every sect. 156.  
Who are said to be sent by Extraordinary mission. 8. why the foresaid mission is to be proved by miracles ibid.   

F  
A comparing of ancient fathers with the late reformers and new bible clerks. 93. the difference betwixt them. ibid. 121.  
How the reformers cut themselves from the Church by refusing fathers. 94.  
The force of religion. 113.  
In what sense faith is said not to have increased from the beginning, or no new things to have been defined by councils. 170. the same expressed by a similitude. 170.  
The reason why faith admitteth no novelty. 171.  
One obstinate error in a matter of faith deprivethe a man of all infused faith. 180.  
Man's feticitie in Paradise wherein it consisted. 253.  
The force of true amity and friendship. 339.  
How disciplinable fear and hope make men in every well ordered common wealth. 514. the reformers take them both away. 516. four kinds of fear ibid.  
Faith only doth not justify. 532. it may be separated from good works. 530. Luther's false dealing in this point as appeareth in his German translation. 528.  
Manifest proofs for free will. 561. usq. ad 566.   

G  
The reason that we may suspect the Gospelers for false prophets. 25. why they translate elders for Preestes. 368.  
By what means God delivered religion in the law, of nature in the law written, and in the law of grace. 105. he willeth not sin but only permiteth it. 452.  
Good before bad in all kinds. 165. proofs of a God head 646.  
The nature of goodness 229. proofs that God is not the author of sin. 453.  
The Gospelers take from Christ the title of an eternal Priest. 291. they deny him to be a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech. 293.  
The Gospell●rs especially Caluin blasphemously derogate from Christ knowledge, accusing him of ignorance in many things. 311. they make God the only sinner. 457. they make him an unreasonable prince. 462. they make him a most cruel tyrant 465 in their opinion he might as well exact the observation of the law of beasts as of men 464.   

H  
The manner of refuting heresies before counsels. 237.  
Heretics urged to show scripture for their extraordinary mission. 18 their absurd answer, urged to show their succession. 11. how heretics may be termed parricides. 8●. theenes. 3●. how they imitate Aesop's crow. 33. how they are compared by Epiphanius to vipers of divers ky●des● 224. by others to the Cadmean brethren. 225. to Sampsons' fo●es. ibid. to wasps by Tertullian. ibid. Why heretics covet to decide all things by the bare letter of scripture. 35. Many evident demonstrations that if ever were any heretics the reformers are also heretics. 184 usq. ad 186.  
The reason why heretics seem to give so much to temporal princes. 483. The gross absurdity of heretics in denying all kind of honour to Saints. 348. of what small virtue and efficacy heretics make sacraments to be. 410. their 2. reasons that they attribute so little force to them, refuted and rejected. 413. their erroneous and impious opinion of the form of words used in sacraments. 427.  
S. Hierome recurreth to the Pope of Rome in a doubt concerning the holy Trinity. 143.  
Hierome of pragues beastly behaviour to a crucifix 347.  
S. Hilarius his counsel to a perplexed man in religion. 226.  
Three kinds of honour according to three kinds of excellency. 349. which is dew to God only and which to saints. ibid.  
The reason why we give a religious honour to saints, bodies, images. and relics. 351. By the honour given to saints God is honoured, and more them if we honoured him alone. 352.   

I  
Idleness the perfection of a Christian life according to the reformers. 607.  
Idolatry what it is. 353.  
What kind of imperfections Christ undertook in our nature. 315. why he refused ignorance. 316.  
The congruity of the Incarnation of the second person. 255.  
The inconvenience that followeth relying upon bare scripture or the naked letter. 40.  
The great inconvenience that would follow in the Church for defect of a visible head. 151. 156.  
Three great inconveniences if Christ should have suffered the pains of hell, as Caluin diabolically contendeth that he did. 337.  
The institution of Preesthoode and Preestly function. 366.  
Certain interpretations of places impiously alleged, of heretics to prove Christ ignoraut. 313.  
That there is no sufficient judge of controversies in religion in England or any other Church of the reformers. 145. usq. ad 148.  
The large and supreme jurisdiction of the Popes of Rome according to the which they have always practised. 142.  
Imputed justice doth not really heal the soul or sanctify it. 274. The heretics imputed justice admitteth no augmentation or increase. 305. it maketh every man as just as Christ himself.   

K  
Christ's Knowledge. 309. Adam's Knowledge. 308. Salomons Knowledge. 308.   

L  
How agreeable labour is unto man. 603.  
The succession of government in the Church even in the law of nature. 138.  
Recourse had to the high Priest concerning, all difficulties in religion in the law written. 139.  
The law of grace requireth a visible head. 140 the excellency thereof alone all others 275. it consisteth in believing and observing. 276.  
To say that the laws and commandments of God be impossible, giveth occasion to all impie-570 the like doth, to say that Christ hath freed us from all laws 572.  
The liberty that Luther and Caluin give all faithful men to sin. 547. that they give all men leave to sin in saying that all our actions are mortal sins. 549.  
By what Likelihood sentence would pass of the Catholic part if the matter were put to the hearing of any indifferent person. 130.  
Luther's presumptions & proud words against all fathers with his railing terms, against king Henry. 8.24.86. his attempt with the success in dispossessinge of a devil. 25. He accusethe the council holden at Jerusalem of error. 297. his reproachful words against the council of Nice. 198. against saint james his Epistles. ibid. His little flock and invisible Church disproved 202. he despoilethe Christ of the title of a la maker. 280. he rejecteth prayer. 446. the opposition that is betwixt his doctrine and S. Paul's. 623. betwixt his and our saviours 635. Luther admitterhe a plurality of wives at once. 624. his four cases wherein as he sayeth it is lawful for a man to leave his old wife and 〈◊〉 take a new. 625. his notorious infamous lice 〈◊〉 death 122. his opinion of sacraments. 408. of Baptism, wherein he thinketh no form of words necessary. 4.6. the reason why a man is more ashamed of his lusts then other vices and Passions. 61●.  
He thinketh no form of words necessary. 41   

M  
Two manner of missions concerning preachers. 7.  
Extraordinary mission require the extraordinary signs and confirmations. 20. two ways Christ proved his mission. 106.  
Marcious heresy concerning the creation of the world. 30.  
Mark●s of heretics: to make a breaehe out of the Church. 159. novelty. 166. a particular name from their sectmaster. 172. a renovation almost of all old heresies. 179. want of succession. 188. dissension in doctrine. 208. to be of a particulet sect. 228. to be condemned for an heretic by the Cath. Church. 236. many others. 241. all with in their several places above noted are severeally proved to agree to the reformers of this tyme.  
men's to induce men to religion. 115. a mean to distinguish the true Church from a bastard and heretical synagogue. 191.  
The manner of refuting heresies before the time that general councils could be called. 237.  
The different manner of prayer to Christ and to his Saints. 354.  
Melancthon covert detracteth from Christ. 247.  
Man's misery and servitude after sin. 254.  
Caluin could work no miracles p. 25.   

N  
The nature of goodness. 229.  
The Nestorian heresy 32.  
The general and ancient name of Christians and Catholics argueth the true Catholic religion. 177.  
Novelty a mark of heretics. 166.  
What the name Catholic importeth. 231.  
The number of prelate's present at the council of Trent. 240.  
The necessity of a visible head over the Church here in earth. 365.  
The railing speeches and odious names that heretics especially Caluin with great contempt use against all Saints. 346. their reproachful usage of relics and Saints pictures. 347.   

O  
The order that was taken to reclaim Luther. 240. the manner of proceeding against his obstinacy. ibid. his heresy condemned by the council of Trent. 240.  
The Catholic opinion of justification, & with what reason it is affirmed. 261.  
The just occasion we have to suspect the reformers sincerity towards Christ. 355.  
The distinction of holy orders, and the manner of giving them proved out of the scriptures. 367  
The ancient opinion for the number of seven sacraments. 399.  
The diversities of opinions amongst the reformers themselves for the number of the Sacraments. 408. their erroneous opinion for the form of words used in sacraments. 427.  
The Epicures witless opinion concerning the origin of the world. 654.  
An objection of our voluptuous heretics against chastity. 619. the same answered. ibid. the object of religion. 661.   

P  
Intolerable pride in heretics. 73. 66.  
The probability of the Catholic religion. 102.  
Saint Peter's commission and pre-eminence above the rest. 142.  
Pelagius his heresy. 182.  
A property of heretics which saint Austin obseruethe. 199.  
The different manner of prayer to Christ and to his Saints. 354.  
The peace and agreement that is in the Catholic Church. 214. 228. that the same must needs proceed of God. 218.  
The superabundant price of our redemption. 156.  
Christ's passions or rather propassions. 327.  
The change of preesthood with the change of the la. 364.  
The conjunction or inseparability of priesthood and religion. 363. 369.  
Plain proofs both by scripture and reason for the sacrifice of the mass. 384. 389.  
Predestination. 420.  
The excellency of prayer 430. the continual practice of it in the Church. 437. the contempt of it conformable to the reformers doctrine. 438. prayer to Saint's 355.  
Why the Pope can not err in defining scriptures and their exposition. 155. 677.  
Precepts of good life reduced to twoe heads. 277.  
Parricide aggreing to heretics 81.   

R  
The truth and evidence of the Catholic Religion. 105.  
The reason why the Church relyethe upon the Pope's sentence as infallible. 155. that a visible head in the Church is necessary. 144. the reason of the daily sacrifice in the Church. 288. why Christ is said to be a priest after the order of Melchisedech. 289. the reason that we may suspect heretics, for false Prophets. 25 why we give a religious honour to saints and their relics. 341. why we make intercession. 353.  
The liberty of rebellion that Luther and Caluin give to all their followers. 485.  
Recourse had to the high Priest about all difficulties of religion in the law written. 139.  
The certainty that the reformers are heretics. 172. nothing can excuse them from heresy but Apostasy. 187. their absurd doctrine of ●us●●●cation with their pernicious consequences which they infer upon the same. 258. their doctrine how injurious it is to Christ and Christian religion. 633. 260. usq ad. 267. 318. to all civil government. 490. usq. ad. 534. how it openeth the gap to all vice and sensuality 547. usq. ad. 598. 621. usq. ad. 727. it take the 579. away all speculative sciences and moral virtues. 550. all conscience. 594. it directly tendeth to atheism. 666. it bringeth into contempt all scriptures and religion. 674. 689. usq ad. 696.  
The proud conceits that the reformers have of their sanctirie. 206. they affirm that all our actions good and bad are mortal sins. 300. that all sins are equal. 301. that we have no liberty nor free-will in our actions. ibid. that God is the author of all sins. 302.  
The liberty of rebellion that Luther and Caluin give to all their follows. 485.  
The reformers upon necessity believe in some things the Pope and Roman Church. 679 they take away in effect all sacraments. 12. 16. Examples out of scriptures for religious respect to relics and images. 356.   

S  
The custom of offering sacrifice even by the Apostles themselves. 367.  
The necessity of a daily sacrifice in the new law for the upholding of true religion. 379. of a visible sacrifice hear in earth. 360. of a proper sacrifice not metaphorical. 383  
Examples of self-love and pride in heretics. 66.  
The convenience or rather necessity of corporal and sensible Sacraments 391. the proof of them severally out of scripture. 398. 402. the reformers have no Sacraments at all. 416.  
The only service of our heretics, a sermon. 447. that also absurd according to their doctrine ibid.  
The difficulty of understandig scriptures. 49.57. the bare letter without the true sense no scripture. 40. the reason thereof. 45. how the scripture is said to be dependent of the Chut-che. 44. 676. Arguments against the private Spirit 53. 65. Selffelove a common disease to all heretics. 65.  
Thet insufficiency of resolving all by a private Spirit in matters of religion. 75. usq. 80.  
The force of Succession in Preisthoode. 193. two shifts of heretics disproved touching Succession. 196.  
The Lord's Supper according to Luther can not be eaten. 422. Caluins' doctrine makes it a niggardlie Super. 424.   

T  
Tertullian complaineth of heretics in his time. 374.  
The reason that God can not give testimony of an v●●truthe by miracles. 106.  
Proofs of the blessed Trinity. 700.   

V  
Valentinus his heresy. 30.  
The Lutheran ubiquetaries take away Christ's divinity. 248.  
The commendation of virginity. 614.  
The right understanding of certain places of the scripture which seem to impeach the freedom of the will. 167.   

W  
William Rodings foolish fiction which he invented to derogate from the blessed virgin 347.  
A woman's complaint of Caluins' doctrine as derogating to their sex. 690.  
The four wounds which we received in our soul by sin. 269.   

Z  
Zuinglius rejecteth fathers. 87.  
His opinion of the number of Sacraments. 408.  
Excuse this Table; I was enforced to commit the making of it to a friend, who also had not leisure to make it exactly.