THE Trial of the New RELIGION. Containing a plain Demonstration, that the late Faith and Doctrine of the Church of Rome, is indeed the New Religion. By Thomas Bell. PRUDENTIA printer's or publisher's device AT LONDON Printed by William jaggard dwelling in Barbican. 1608. The Contents of the Chapters following. CHapter 1. Of the name (Pope.) Chap. 2. Of the Pope's superoyall power. Chap. 3. Of the marriage of Priests. Chap. 4. Of Popish pardons. Chap. 5. Of Popish Purgatory. Chap. 6. Of Popish auricular confession. Chap. 7. Of Popish venial sins. Chap. 8. Of Popish faith. Chap. 9 Of the condign merit of works. Chap. 10. Of transubstantiation in popish Mass. Chap. 11. Of Popish invention of Saints. Chap. 12. Of the Communion under one kind. Chap. 13. Of private Mass. Chap. 14. Of Pope 〈◊〉 ●●●pensation. Chap. 15. Of worshipping of Images. Chap. 16. Of Church service in the vulgar tongue. Chap. 17. Of the antiquity of Popish Mass and the parts thereof. Chap. 18. Of the mysteries of popish Mass. Chap. 19 Of kissing the Pope's foot. Chap. 20. Of praying upon Beads. Chap. 21. Of changing the priests name. Chap. 22. Of the Paschall Torch. Chap. 23. Of the Popish Pax. Chap. 24. Of the Pope's Bulls. Chap. 25. Of the popish Agum Dei. Chap. 26. Of C●●●●lmasday Chap. ●●. Of the 〈◊〉 made to the Pope. Chap. ●●. Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p●pish L●nt-fast. Chap. ●●. Of 〈…〉ing of Wedlock. Chap. ●●. Of 〈◊〉 power of a General Council. To the Right Worshipful and my approved good friends, Sir Charles Hails, and Sir Cuthbert Pepper, Knights, and worthy pillars of his majesties honourable Counsel, established in the North-parts of England. (⁂) THE visible Church, (as writeth Egesippus) remained a Virgin, Egegesip: apud Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. free from all heresies and corruptions, during the life of the Apostles: that is to say, about one hundred years after Christ, to which time S. john the Evangelist was living. But after the death of the Apostles (saith he,) Errors by little and little crept into the Church, as into a void and desert house. This Assertion is doleful enough, and yet very profitable against all Popish Recusants of our time: as who are not ashamed, impudently to avouch, that after so many hundred years from Christ's Ascension, there hath been no Error at all in their Romish Babylon. If any demand the cause hereof, the answer is at hand; viz. That many without due examination, receiving negligently and carelessly the Doctrine of them that went before them, have unawares brought Errors into the Church. Euseb: 〈◊〉 lib. 3. cap: ult. So writeth Eusebius of Errors in his time, that Papius, a man of no sound judgement, was the Author of the Chiliasts; who fond & grossly first invented, that there should be a thousand years after the Resurrection. To which Error, (though most palpable) Iraeneus, and sundry others, (otherwise well learned,) gave place only for antiquity sake. This sottish imitatien, without all rhyme and reason, was, is, and will be, the cause of many Errors: which many not of the meanest sort of Papists, have both gravely & prudently considered. For this cause did that great Shoolemaister Melchior Canus, 〈…〉 oppose himself against all the Chanists and Scotists, both the old & latter Papists. For this cause did Cardinal C●●eranus, 〈…〉 (a man of high esteem in the Church of Rome,) 〈…〉 both in his literal exposition of Genesis, an in his other books, roundly reject the multitude of fo●mer Commentaries. For this cause said their learned 〈◊〉 and school-doctor Victoria, that he reputed nothing certain, 〈…〉 albeit all Writers agreed thereunto, unless he could find it in the holy Scriptures. For this cause did their famous Canonist Navarrus, 〈…〉 peremptorily condemn the common opinion, when it was not grounded upon right reason. For this cause gravely wrote S. Augustine, 〈…〉 19 that he reputed no man's writings wholly free from Errors, save only the Writers of the holy Scriptures. For this cause wrote their own Roffensis, 〈…〉 that it is lawful to appeal from Austen, Cyprian, Hierom, and all the rest, because they are men, and do not want their imperfections. I (saith S. Augustine) do not repute S. Cyprians writings as Canonical, 〈…〉 cap. 32. but judge them by the Canonical and whatsoever doth not agree with the Scriptures, that by his leave do I refuse. And for this cause is it, that so many silly, foolish, rude, and ignorant Papists, do at this day, term late upstart Popery▪ the Old Religion. They only respect the external face of the Church, as it was in the late days of their forefathers, And for want of skill, and reading of ancient councils, Fathers, and histories of the Church, they deem that to be very old, which is indeed very new. Hence cometh it, that nothing more moveth the rude vulgar people to embrace Popery, than this their fond persuasion, that it is the old Religion. In regard hereof (right Worshipful) I have taken upon me, for the glory of GOD, the peace of his Church, and the common good of my native Country, to set before the eyes of all indifferent Readers, as clearly as in a glass of Crystal, the original and daily excrements of Popery, and that it is not the Old but the New Religion: I have proved succinctly and evidently, first, that the name (Pope,) was common to the Fathers of the Church, for the space of 528 years after Christ, and afterward usurped as peculiar to the Bishop of Rome. Secondly, that the Pope's superoyall power, was unknown to the world for the space of 607. years, until Phocas the Emperor of Rome. 3. That the Priests & Bishops were ever married in the East Church, and in the West Church, for the space of 385. years. 4. That Popish pardons were unknown 1300. years. 5. That Purgatory was never believed of the Greek Church, nor yet of the Latin Church, for the space of 250. years, about which time Origen (too much addicted to his allegorical Speculation) feigned many odd things touching Purgatory. After Origen, others began to call the matter into question: others rashly to believe it: others to add many thing to Origens' conceit: and so by little & little it increased, till the late Bishops of Rome presumed to make it an Article of Popish saith. That auricular confession, was no Article of Popish faith, for the space of 1215. years. 7. That Popish venial sins, were first invented by Pope Pius the fifth of that name, that is to say, 1566. years after Christ. 8. That the Article of Popish saith, that the Pope cannot err in matters of faith judicially, was never known to the Church for the space of 1500. years. 9 That the condign merit of man's works, was not an Article of Popish faith, for the space of a thousand, five hundred, and forty years. 10. That the popish Transubstantiation, was first hatched in the Council of Lateran, 1215. years after Christ. 11. That Popish invocation of Saints, was never known nor heard of, for the space of 1047. years. 12. That the Communion under one kind, was never known, for the space of 1230. years: neither was it an Article of Popish faith, until the Council of Constance, about 1414. years after Christ. 13. That Private Mass began 1000 years after Christ. 14. That it was ever holden unlawful for the brother to marry his natural sister, for the space of 1418. years, at what time Pope Martin set it abroach, by the instigation of the devil. 15. That worshipping of Images was thought unlawful, for the space of 1484. years. 16. That the Church service was ever in the vulgar tongue, for the space of 443. years at the least. 17. That Popish Agnus This were not heard of, for the space of one thousand two hundred years after Christ. 18. That the Pope's Bulls were unknown, for the space of 772. years after Christ. 19 That Popish hallowed Candles on Candelmasday, were invented 843. years after Christ. That Bishops were not sworn to defend the Pope and his Canons, for the space of one thousand, two hundred, twenty nine years after Christ. 21. That Lent-fast in Popish manner, was never heard of for the space of 427. years. All which, and many other important points of Popish faith, are so lively discovered to the first hatching thereof, in this short and plain Discourse, as every child may with all facility, boldly pronounce, and constantly affirm, that the late Romish Faith and Doctrine, is not the Old, but the New Religion. Which if the silly Papists would once duly consider, they would no longer obey the Pope, or like of his Religion. The Work, such as it is, I have dedicated to your Worships, as a sign of a thankful heart, for your manifold kindnesses towards me at all times. And so I humbly commend your Worships to the protection of the Almighty. From my study, the first of julie. 1607. Yours in Christ jesus Tho: Bell. CHAP. 1. Of this name and word (Pope.) IT is a wonder to consider, how the late Bishops of Rome have aspired to their super-lordly Primacy, and chiefest so supposed Sovereignty in the Christian world. Popery with our jesuits, & jesuited-papists, must needs be the Old Religion, and that self same Doctrine, which S. Peter and S. Paul delivered to the Church of Rome. This is their invincible Bulwark, which (as they boast) all the Canons of the faithful and good Christians can never batter down. And this they never cease to inculcate into the ears, and to instill it into the hearts, of the silly vulgar people; telling them forsooth, that Popery is the Old Religion, and the faith of their forefathers in all ages. I therefore to take this stumbling block out of the way, do purpose in God (the fountain of all goodness, and the chief workman of every good act) to set before the Readers eyes, in a very summary & succinct narration, that Popery is a new Religion, by little and little crept into the Church, and patched together as clout upon clout in a beggars cloak. Now, for this name (Pope,) which the silly people admire (God-wote) as a most sacred thing; and for all that know no more what it meaneth, than how far it is to Heaven; it is a Greek word (Pappas,) which signifieth (Father.) It was given of old indifferently, as well to other Bishops, as to the Bishops of Rome. I prove it first, because the Clergy of Rome writing to the Clergy of Carthage, Apud Cyprian page 11. call S. Cyprian, (the blessed Pope, or holy Father.) Secondly, because the Priests, Moses and Maximus, and the Deacons, Apud Cyprian page 46, pa● 66 page 61. Nicostratus and Ruffinus, and sundry other Confessors, did all with one assent, call the same Cyprian, Beatissimum Papam, the most blessed Pope. Thirdly, because S. Hierom called S. Austen, Apud Augu. ●pist. 11. 13 14, 17, 18. 25. 30. Beatissimum Papam, most holy Father or Pope; and this he did many times, and in many Epistles. But after that the Emperor justinianus, had in his Legal constitutions named the Bishop of Rome (Pope,) the arrogant Bishops of Rome began to challenge the Name, as if it were proper unto them alone: And so in process of time, the Bishops of Rome were only & solely called Popes; and of late years, Our holy Father, & His Holiness, An: Dom: 528. is his usual Name. But this Emp●rour lived after Christ his birth, about 528. years; Ergo this point of Popery, is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 2. Of the Pope's superoyall power. BOnifacius Bishop of Rome, An: Dom: 607. and the third of that Name, above six hundred years after Christ, obtained of Phocas then Emperor of Rome, that Rome should be the head of all Churches. Before which time, no authentical Writer can be named, who ever ascribed the Headship, and Universal government of all Churches, to the Church of Rome. For first, Saint Policarpus would not yield to Anicetus' Bishop of Rome, in the controversy about Easter, which for all that he would & must have done, if the Bishop of Rome had had any true prerogative over him. Secondly, S. Iraeneus, & other holy and learned Bishops of Fra●nce joining with him, reproved Victor, than Bishop of Rome, very sharply and roundly, as one that had not due respect to the peace and unity of the Church: Which doubtless those holy & learned Bishops would not have done, if the Bishop of Rome had had in those days the supreme Sovereignty over them. Thirdly, S. Polycrates, and many Bishops of Asia, did stoutly withstand the same Victor, them the Bishop of Rome, in his presumptuous proceedings touching Easter. Fourthly, S. Cyprian roundly opposed himself against Stephanus then Bishop of Rome, contemning his Decree, and deriding his reasons. Fiftly, the Apostles at jerusalem, Acts. 4. 17. sent Peter and john, to confirm the faithful in Samaria. And consequently, if the Pope be not above Peter, but his supposed Successor, he may be sent of the Bishops his Brethren, as Saint Peter was. But who is that Bishop, and where dwelleth he, that at this day dareth do to the now Pope, such supposed villainy? Sixtly, the Fathers of the famous African Counsel, (in which Saint Austen, that holy Father, and most stout Champion of Christ's Church was present, to the great honour and credit thereof,) would in no wise yield to Celestine then Bishop of Rome, in the controversy of Appeals concerning Appiarius. And when Pope Celestine alleged for himself, and his supposed Sovereignty, that the ancient and famous Council of Nice, gave liberty to appeal to Rome, the Fathers of the Council answered roundly, that the true copies of the Decree were otherwise. Where I wish the Reader to observe with me, these two points seriously; First, A worthy note, not to be forgotten. that the Pope could not, (and therefore did not) allege any better reason for his usurped and falsely pretended Primacy, than the authority and Decree of that famous Council of Nice. Secondly, that the Pope Celestine falsified the canon and Decree of the Council, so to gain credit and authority to himself, if it might be. seventhly, the famous Council of Chalcedon, gave the Bishop of Constantinople equal authority with the Bishop of Rome, in all Ecclesiastical affairs. Eightly, the council of Nice prescribed limits, as well to the Bishop of Rome, as to other patriarchs. First therefore, seeing the holy council of Chalcedon, acknowledged the authority of the Bishop of Constantinople, to be equal with the Bishop of Rome; Secondly, seeing Celestine the Bishop of Rome, could allege neither Scripture, council, Father, or reason for his pretended Primacy, but one only false allegation out of the council of Nice; Thirdly, seeing the Fathers of the African council, contradicted and reproved the Pope, for his forgery of the Nicene council, concerning Appiarius; Fourthly, seeing S. Polycarpus, S. Polycrates, S. Iraeneus, and S. Cyprian, with many Bishops of Europe, Asia, and Africa, contemned the Bishop of Rome, his Decrees, & his supposed Supremacy; I cannot but conclude, with this inevitable illation: Ergo, the late pretended Sovereignty of the Pope, is but a rotten rag of the new Religion; as which was never heard of in Christ his church, for the space of six hundred years and odd. Al● this is proved at large, in my Survey of Popery. CHAP. 3. Of the marriage of Priests, and Ministers of the Church. MArriage was lawful for all Priests in the old Testament. jerem, 1, 1. For the Prophet jeremy was the son of Helkiah, who was one of the Priests at Anathoth: Hophni and Phinehas, ay, S●m, 1. 3 were the sons of Eli the Priest: Sephora was the daughter of jethro, Exod, 18, 1, Luke, 1, ver: 8, 9, 13. who was the Priest of Midian. Saint john the Baptist, (that holy precurser of our Lord jesus,) was a priest's son, even the son of Zacharias. Yea, the marriage of Priests was then so dear in God's sight, that the Highpriest was forbidden to marry; not simply and absolutely, Leuit. 21. ver: 13. 14. but to marry a Widow, a divorced, or polluted woman: and he was charged to take a Maid of his own people. In the New Testament, no prohibition can be found, as which is consonant to the Old; pronouncing Marriage honourable in all, Heb. 13, v. 4 and a bed undefiled. Marriage (as the Apostle teacheth us, 1, Cor, 7. ) was ordained for a remedy against fornication, to be used of all such, as find themselves grieved with that disease; & consequently, seeing that disease is as well incident to persons Ecclesiastical, as to persons secular, and oftentimes more, the Medicine is as necessary and as lawful for the one sort, as it is for the other. For this respect did holy Paphnutius stand up in the Council of Nice, An: Dom: 327. (at such time as the Fathers then and there assembled, thought to have severed married Priests, and Bishops, from their wives,) and told them according to God's word, that to forbid marriage to priests, was too severe a Law. He yielded this reason, because marriage is so honourable in all sorts of men. Thus writeth Cassiodorus, thus writeth Socrates, thus writeth Sozomenus. For this respect was it, that the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons of the East-Church, would never admit or receive the Canons of the West and Romish Church. For this respect was it that Priests were ever married in the East Churches, until these our days; and in the West Church generally, for the space of three hundred, 385. eighty, and five years: at which time Pope Siritius excited by satan, prohibited Priests marriage as an unlawful thing. Yea, An: Do: 1074. Priests continued still married in Germany, for the space of 1074. years, until the days of the ungracious Pope Hildebrand; who termed himself Gregory the seventh, so soon as he had crept into the Popedom by naughty means. For this respect was it, that the famous Popish Cardinal Panormitanus, committed to print to the view of the whole World, that priests marriage, was neither of the substance of their Order, nor forbidden by God's Law, and that therefore it were for the salvation of souls, that all such as would might marry. He addeth the reason; Because experience (saith he) teacheth us, that the Priests debarred from marriage, live not spiritually, but are polluted in unlawful copulation, though they might live chastened with their own wives. For this respect was it, that the great Papist Polydorus, could not contain himself, but pitifully exclaim against the wicked prohibition of Priest's marriage; affirming stoutly and resolutely, that the compelled chastity of unmarried Priests, was so far from excelling chastity in wedlock, as no crime whatsoever hath brought greater shame to Priesthood, more harm to Religion, or more grief to all good men, than the unchaste life of Priests. For this respect was it, that Pope Pius the second of that name, (who before his Popedom was named Aeneus Silvius, a very learned man, & famous Writer, after he had reproved many vices in the Romish Church, concluded very gravely; that though there had been great reason to debar Priests from marriage, yet was there greater reason to restore marriage again unto them. For this respect was it, that many holy and learned Bishops were married men, in the ancient time, and flourishing state of the Church; viz. S. Gregory, Saint Clement, S. Spiridian, S. Chereman, S. Philogonius, S. Eupsichus, and others. First therefore, seeing priests marriage is approved both by the Old and New Testament. Secondly, seeing all Priests were always married, (or at the least might have married) in the East Church. Thirdly, seeing priests marriage was holden for lawful in the famous Council of Nice, and that the holy Bishop Paphnutius, (a man full of miracles in his life time, An: Dom. 327. ) did pronounce openly in the same Council, that the conjugal acts of married Priests was true chastity; Mark this point well. whose sentence was approved of the whole Council, and thereupon the matter was left as indifferent, for every Priest either to marry, or not to marry, at his own choice. Fourthly, seeing priests marriage was ever holden lawful and Christian, for the space of three hundred eighty five years, even until the time of the untimely birth of Siritius, 385. than the Bishop or Pope of Rome; and in the great country of Germany, for the space of 1074. years, even until the days of wicked Pope Hildebrand, 1074. whom at that day, the whole Clergy of Germany, accused of flat heresy; for that his most damnable Decree or Constitution, against the honest and lawful marriage of Priests. Fifily, seeing the famous popish Abbot and Bishop, and Cardinal, Panormitanus, (for he was all the three,) and seeing withal, that the great learned Papist Polydore Virgil, did bitterly and pitifully exclaim against the ungodly, and unchristian prohibition of priests marriage, crying out, that it was the destruction of many souls: and seeing also, that Pope Pius the second, confessed freely, that it was time to restore marriage to their Popish priests again, and to suffer them to live as they had done in old time, all which and much more, (for the lawful and honest defence of the marriage of all Bishops, Priests, & Ministers of the Church,) the indifferent Reader shall find pithily and copiously proved in my Survey of Popery, ●age 3. chap. 3. 4. I cannot, but perforce I must conclude with this inevitable illation; Ergo, the prohibition of the marriage of Priests, is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 4. Of the Popish execrable Pardons. THE famous Popish Writer Sylvester, for his great learning surnamed by the Papists, (Absolutus Theologus,) knew right well, that Popish Pardons are but a toy for Children to play withal, sylvest de Indulgent. these are his words; The Pope's Pardons (saith he) were never known to us by the Scriptures, although some allege S. Paul for that purpose, neither were they known by the ancient Fathers, but only by lare Writers. Saint Antoninus, their popish Saint, Page 1. tit. 10 Capit. 3. and famous Archbishop, had the self same opinion. And Petrus Lombardus, their famous Master of Sentences, (who collected with great diligence into one Volume, all the worthy Sentences of the ancient Fathers,) could never find the Pope's Pardons, or any mention thereof, in any of all their writings. For as Sylvester truly said; The old Writers were not acquainted with any such thing. Yea, their famous Martyr and Bishop, Master Fisher, in his answer to Master Luther's Articles, was enforced to admit the newness of the Pope's pardons: Contra. Artic. Lutheri. and withal forsooth to yield this reason for the same, viz. That Purgatory was not then so well known to the Church, as it is now adays. Peruse and note well the next Chapter, which is of Purgatory so supposed pains. First therefore, seeing the great popish Sylvester confesseth plainly and boldly to the pope's Holiness, that his popish pardoning, is neither found in the holy Scripture, nor in ancient Fathers; Secondly, seeing Antoninus Fumus, and many other learned Papists grant freely, that Sylvester saith the truth herein; Thirdly, seeing their famous Bishop Fisher, was enforced to grant the young age & nonage of popish-pardons, when he could not answer Ma. Luther's reasons; Fourthly, seeing their Master of Sentences, could not find any mention of them, in all the the Father's writings; I must perforce thus conclude, Ergo, the Pope's pardon, is a rotten rag of the new Religion, An: Dom: 1300. brought into the Church after 1300. years, by Pope Bonifacius the eight. CHAP. 5. Of Popish Purgatory. COncerning the original of Popish-purgatorie, it shallbe enough to set down the words of john Fisher, the late Bishop of Rochester, & the pope's canonised Martyr: these are his express words; The greeks to this day do not believe that there is a Purgatory. Cont. assert. Luth. art. 18 Read who will the Commentaries of the ancient Grecians, and he shall find either very seldom mention of Purgatory, or none at all. For neither did the Latin Church conceive the verity of this matter at one time, but by leisure. Neither was it without the great dispensation of the holy Ghost, that after so many years, Catholics both believed purgatory, & received the use of pardons generally. So long as there was no care of Purgatory, no man sought for pardons. For of it dependeth all the estimation of pardons. If thou take away purgatory, to what end shall we need pardons? for if there be no Purgatory, we shall need no pardons. Considering therefore, how long Purgatory was unknown, then that it was believed of some by little and little, partly by revelations, and partly by the Scriptures; and so at the last believed generally of the whole Church, we do easily understand the cause of pardons. Since therefore purgatory was so lately known & received of the whole Church, who can admire pardons, that there was no use of them in the primitive Church. Pardons therefore began, after the people stood in some fear of purgatory. Thus writeth the popish Bishop Fisher. Whose words I heartily wish, that the indifferent Reader may ponder seriously with me. For if he so do, he cannot choose but abhor late popery, and know it to be the new Religion. This Bishop was a learned man, a great papist, & said for popery what possibly he could, yet he granteth many things, (of such force is the truth,) which quite overthrow popery, and turn it upside down. First we see that the Greek church never believed purgatory to his days, An: Dom: 1517. and so it was unknown to them 1517 years. Secondly, that the church of Rome believed it not, for the space of 250. years, after which time it increased by little and little. Thirdly, that the church of Rome, did not believe purgatory all at once, but by little and little. Fourthly, that the invention of purgatory, was the birth of Popish-pardons, as which could have no place, till purgatory was found out by feigned revelations, and the people brought into some fear thereof. Fiftly, that the primitive Church was never acquainted with the Pope's pardons, nor yet with his counterfeit and forged purgatory. Of which, (as the popish Bishop telleth us,) the silly people do stand in fear. See the fourth Chapter Thus therefore I must conclude; Ergo, Popish purgatory, is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 6. Of Popish Auricular Confession. SCotus, (who for his great & subtle learning, was of the Papists termed Doctor subtilis,) affirmeth resolutely, that popish Auricular-confession, is not grounded on the holy Scripture, but only instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome. The popish Gloss (of great credit with the Papists) telleth them roundly, that Auricular-confession can no way be defended, but by tradition of the Church. Panormitanus, Rhenanus, Richardus, Durandus, Bonaventura, An: Dom. 1215. Hugo, and all the popish Canonists generally, approve and follow the same Gloss. To this I add, that Auricular-confession, was not an Article of faith in the Romish Church, for the space of 1215. years. All which I have proved at large, in my Survey of Popery, Part, 3. cha. 12 and in my Motives. First therefore, seeing popish Confession cannot be proved out of the Scriptures; Secondly, seeing it is only commanded by the Pope; And thirdly, seeing it was no matter of faith with the Papists for the space of one thousand, two hundred, and fifteen years, I must needs conclude, that it is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 7. Of Popish venial sins. THE newness and young age of Popish-Religion, may be sufficiently known, by the coining and inventing of Venial sins; if nothingels could be said therein, the Thomists will have some sins not against the Law, but besides the law: and those sins they call their Venial sins. But Durundus, a famous popish school-doctor, & many other learned Papists, affirm every sin to be against Gods Law. And this opinion doth now prevail in the popish Schoole●, as I●sephus Angles in his Book dedicated to the Pope's Holiness 〈◊〉 us His words are these; Io: Angle●i● 2. Sen. pa. 275 Et hae 〈◊〉 in schol● 〈◊〉 cōm●nior; and this opinion seemeth now adays, to be more common in the Schools. Where I wish the Reader to 〈◊〉 by the way, this word (mod●, now adays,) because it doth most ●●●ely and sufficiently, set before our eyes, the mutability of the late Romish Religion. For in that he saith (niod●, now adays) he giveth us to understand, that their Doctrine is now otherwise, their it was of old time, and in former ages. Behold here the new Religion, and that popish doctrine is uncertain. Again, Ma. Fisher, late Bishop of Rochester, granteth to Ma. Luther, (when he was overcome with the force of his Reasons,) that every sin is mortal of it own nature. jaeobus Almaynus, Durandus, Io: Gorsonus, Michael Baius, and other famous papists, not able to answer the reasons against Venial sins, confess the truth with the Bishop, That every sin is mortal. Page 281. Yea the jesuit. S. R. with the advise of his best learned friends, in his Answer to The downfall of Popery, confesseth plainly, & blusheth not thereat, that the Church of Rome had not defined some sins to be Venial, An: Dom: 1566. until the days of Pius the fifth, and Gregory the thirteen, which was not fifty years ago. These are the jesuits own words; True it is, that Bishop Fisher and Gerson, were in that Error, but that was before it was condemned in the Church, as it was since, by Pius Quintus, and Gregorius 13. Lo the jesuit cannot deny, that great learned Papists, held every sin to be mortal; and therefore he had no other shift to defend Popery withal, save this only, which is a very silly one; That the Church of Rome had not yet defined the matter. O sweet jesus, what a world is this, that silly foolish papists should be so bewitched, as to think Popery the Old Religion. We see it plainly confessed by our Adversaries, that for the space of one thousand, five hundred, and threescore years, all sins were deemed mortal. But, because some sins to be Venial, made greatly for the life of popery, as without which it could hardly live, & continue, pope Pius, and after him Gregorius, decreed it for an Article of popish faith, That some sins are mortal, and some Venial: for which venials, God cannot justly condemn any one to hell, if we will believe the Pope and his doctrine. First therefore, seeing the Papists cannot agree among themselves, what sins are against God's law; Secondly, seeing their opinions in their Schools, are now adays changed, and not as they were in old time; Thirdly, seeing all sins were believed and holden for mortal, for the space of one thousand, five hundred, & odd years; Fourthly, seeing pope Pius, and pope Gregory, could change sins mortal into Venial; Fiftly, seeing the Pope, si●ting in his Chay●e, or ●yding on his White Palfrey (so he do it judicially,) can make that a point of popish faith, which was of no faith, for the space of one thousand and five hundred years before that time; I cannot but needs I must conclude with this inevitable illation: Ergo, the Popish distinction, without all rhyme or reason, of mortal and venial sins, is nothing in deed, but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 8. Of the Pope's Faith. Wisdom, with the whole troop of Virtues, were needful for him, that should dispute of the holy Father's faith or power, I therefore (post deosculationem pedum) humbly pray to be heard in defence of Truth, wherein I will desire no more of his Holiness, but only that he will grant so much to be true, as I shall prove to be true by the testimony of the best Popish Writers. In the Anatomy, book 3. adu●so 6. The popish Seminary Priests, write of this subject in this manner. As the prudent Greek appealed from Alexander furious, unto Alexander sober; and Bishop Crostrate, from pope Adrian private, to pope Adrian public; and as Summus Pontifex in Cathedra Petri: so may the Seculars, notwithstanding any decree set down by his Holiness to the contrary, by wrong information given, appeal even from the Pope as Clemens, unto his Holiness, as Peter. Thus 〈◊〉 William Watson, in the name of all the rest. By this Doctrine thus plainly delivered, (which is a constant position in the Romish Church,) the Seculars give us to understand, that execrable, and never enough detested fallacy, wherewith the Pope & his popelings, have a long time sedueed, the greater part of the Christian World. viz. That the Pope may Err as a private man, but not as a public person. This is a great wonderment, observe well the sequel. First therefore, if we mean to wring any truth out of the Pope's nose, we must have recourse to his Holiness, at such time as he is sober, not when he is furious, lest he become stark mad, and forget the knowledge of the Truth. Secondly, we must have the Pope's advise, when he is a public person, not when, or as he is a private man. Thirdly, we must go unto him, not as he is indeed, this or that pope, but as he is Saint Peter, that blessed Apostle of our Lord jesus. Thus much is necessarily gathered out of this popish doctrine. Which being well marked, Popery will be the New Religion, and turn itself upside down. For first it is a constant Maxine in all popish doctrine, that the Pope, and none but the Pope, must judge in all Controversies of faith & doctrine. This notwithstanding, we see by this popish doctrine, (so contrary is popery to itself,) that if the Pope judge of any matter, as he is furious, and not sober; as he is a private man, and not a public person; as he is Clemens, Sixtus, Adrianus, or some other like Pope, and not S. Peter himself; then he may Err and so both he deceived, and deceive others. O my s●rable Papists, how are ye led headlong into pernicious Faith and Doctrine▪ and either do not, or will not see the same? Your Pope (say you,) may Err as a private m●n, but not as pope or public person. This distinction may fitly be termed a trick of fast and loose. For if the Pope define a truth, they may say, he defined it as a public person: but if he define an error, then say they, he defined it as a private man. Behold here (gentle Reader,) upon what rotten stuff, In the hunting of the Fox. the Papists would have us to ground our Faith: when we prove (as I have done elsewhere,) that pope Anastasius, pope Honorius, pope john, pope Celestine, and others, have both holden and taught false Doctrine; they tell us, they did that as private men, not as pope's of Rome. That their pope cannot err in faith judicially, it is this day with papists an Article of their faith. The famous papist Dominicus Scoto, shallbe the spokesman for the rest. Scoto in 4. sent. D. 22. Qu. 2. Art. 1. Albeit (saith he) the Pope as Pope cannot Err, that is to say, cannot set down any Error as an Article of our Faith, because the holy Ghost will not that permit: nevertheless, as he is a private person, so may he Err even in faith, as he may do other sins. But how old is this Romish Doctrine? Of what age is this strange Faith? Of this subject I have written at large, in my Golden Balance of Trial. This only will I now say; that this popish Article, (The Pope cannot Err in faith. An: Dom. 1500. ) was never heard of in Christ's Church, for the space of 1500. years. Many famous papists I might allege, but one Alphonsus will suffice. Libr. 1. de haer. Capit. 4. We doubt not (saith he) whether one man may be a Pope & an heretic both together. For I believe there is none so shameless a flatterer of the Pope, (ever except our Jesuits, and jesuited Papists,) that will ascribe this unto him; that he can neither Err, nor be deceived in the exposition of the Scriptures. First therefore, seeing the Pope may Err in faith and doctrine; Secondly, seeing many Popes have so Erred De facto; And thirdly, seeing this strange faith was not hatched or heard of in the World, for the space of one thousand and five hundred years, no not in Alphonsus his days, as we have heard already: I cannot but perforce I must conclude, that it is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 9 Of the condign, so supposed merit of works. TRue it is, I freely grant, that the holy Fathers do often use the word merit, and do often call the works of the Faithful, merritorious: yet this they do not for any worthiness of the works, but for God's acceptation and promise sake, who hath promised, and will perform, not to suffer so much as one cup of cold water given in his Name, Math, 10. 42. Mark, 1, 12. to pass without reward. That is to say, the Fathers term good works merritorious, because God hath promised to accept the works of the Faithful as worthy, for the worthiness of his Son: and for his merits, to reward them with heaven, as if they had merited the same. For which respect, either ever, or almost ever, they join Merit and Grace together. Part. 3. chap. 9 Of this subject I have written at large in my Survey of Popery. I will now only say with their dear Abbot Bernard, Super cant: Serm. 18. It is sufficient to merit, to know that our merrites are not sufficient. True it is likewise, that not only the Fathers generally, See the Survey, vb● sup. but the best popish Schoole-Doctours also, Durandus, Aquinas, Gregorius, Ariminensis, Dominicus Scoto, Marsilius, Waldensis, Burgensis, and sundry others, do uniformly and constantly affirm, that no man's works, (how holy soever they be,) either are, or can be meritorious properly; but only merritorious in an unproper & large kind of speech, as is already said. This is proved at large in my other books. True it is thirdly, that the religious Friar and popish Bishop, In 2. Sect: Dist. 27. Concl. 2. diffic. 4. josephus Angles, telleth the Pope roundly, that it is the constant and uniform faith of all the holy Doctors; that the best, and holiest man's works upon earth, neither are, nor possibly can be merritorious, or worthy of eternal life, if God's holy & free promise be set aside: Without the which, (saith Angles in the name of all the rest,) the best works of all, are altogether unworthy of so great reward. His express words are these; (prorsus digna, wholly unworthy.) Where I with the Reader to observe seriously with me, this word (prorsus, which signifieth wholly;) for if out best works be wholly unworthy of the reward or glory, (as josep: Angles in the name of all the holy Fathers & Doctors, telleth the Pope both gravely and constantly,) then doubtless the best works of all, can no way be meritorious. The case is clear; for, to be meritorious, (as every child knoweth,) is to be worthy: And consequently, seeing to be worthy, and to be meritorious, is all one, our works which are no way worthy, but every way (prorsus, unworthy) can no way be meritorious. When any Papist in the world can truly disprove this Illation, let me be his bondslave for his reward. Again, for the simple Readers help and capacity, this is the state of the Controversy. The Papists hold, that man's works do condignly, or woorth●ly (which is all one) merit eternal reward. ay, (in the name of all Catholics, and good Christians,) do hold, and constantly defend the contrary. Now to merit, is to be worthy, (●s is both already proved, and of itself evident) but the best works are no way worthy, (as is alieadie proved, Ergo, the best works do no way merit. If this argument be well marked, all papists are consounded everlastingly. True it is fourthly, that the jesuit S. R. Robert Parsons, (indeed I challenge the man,) in his supposed and pretended Answer to The downfall of Popery, hath set down these Conclusions against both the Pope and himself. The first Conclusion; There is merit of eternal life, Concl. 1. ●age 218. 221. 223. and our supernatural works done by God's grace, are meritorious of eternal life and glory. The second Conclusion Good works done in God's grace, are condignly merritorious of eternal life. The thi●d Conclusion; This condign merit is not absolute, but supposeth the condition of Gods promise made to reward it. These are the jesuits Conclusions, set down by the best advise of his best learned friends, among whom, the jesuitical Cardinal Bellarmine must needs be one. Which Conciusions for all that, do evidently prove, as much as I desire. True it is five, that the late popish Council of Trent, hath accused all such, as 〈◊〉 or not believe the condign merit of man's works. And consequently, it hath made that an Article of Popish faith, (o wonderment of the World,) which was no point of faith in the true Catholic Church, for the space of 1540 years. An: Dom. 1540 viz. The condign merit of man's work, amonster lately borne at Rome. Now, to take away all wrangling, true it is (I will it not deny,) that the Council of Trent hath not the word (condign,) but it hath another word equivalent to the same, viz. True merit. And therefore, to answer (as the jesuit doth,) that the Council hath only the word (true,) The jesuit consuteth himself. not the word (condign,) is mere foolery. For to merit truly and condignly, is all one. Otherwise, let our jesuit tell us, how one can merit that thing truly, which he doth not worthily and condignelyd serve? Yea, to the Jesuits everlasting shame, and to the utter confusion of all his lesuited brethren, S. R. himself; doth most plainly against himself, testify the same to all the world. These are his express words; That good works are a condign, Page 224. or whorthy merit of Heaven, Mark this point well. followeth of that they are a true merit thereof: because as I think, only condign merit, is true merit. Thus writeth our jesuit. I allege his words truly, as I will avoswere before God. And consequently, seeing true merit and condign merit is all one, even by the Adversary his free grant; it followeth of necessity, that the Council decreed the condign merit to be a matter of saith. First therefore, seeing the Fathers and Schooledoctors, do all generally deny the condign merit of man's works; Secondly, seeing all the Fathers, & best learned Papists, do all uniformly affirm, that the best works are altogether worthy of heaven; Thirdly, seeing the Jesuits own conclusions, do prove the same against himself; Fourthly, seeing this deformed monster, (condign merit of works I mean,) is yet scarce threescote years of age; I cannot but perforce conclude, with this incuitable illation, Ergo, it is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 10. Of Transubstantiation in Popish Mass. THE popish Transubstantiation in their Mass, is to themselves so unceritaine, that they cannot toll in the world, what to say or think thereof. Rupertus, a famous popish Abb●r, holdeth; that the Bread is united hypostatically to the Son of God, Caietmus Henricus, and Capreolus, are of an other opinion. Ioha●●es Parisiensis, held also that the Bread was assumpted, but in a different manner from the opinion of Rupertus. Another opinion affirmeth the annihilation of the Bread. Durandus for all that telleth us, that only the form of Bread is changed, and ohat the matter of Bread remaineth still in the Eucharist. But Bellarmine, the Pope, and all his lesuites, hold with the Council of Trents definition; that the Bread is transubstantiated into the body of Christ Behold this sive● harmonic and good agreement, in this important point of popish faith. Of this subject I have written elsewhere 〈◊〉, I will here only touch the birth & age thereof Transubstantion, is not only repugnant to all Philosophy, but also so absurd in all Christian speculation, that it was unknown to the Church of God, and to all approved councils, Fathers, and Histories for the space of one thousand and two 〈◊〉 years. It was first hatched by Pope Innocentive the 〈◊〉 of that Name, in the late Council of Lateran, which was holden 1215. years after Christ. An: Dom: 1215. Yea, this council, and the determination thereof, was of so small reputation at that time, that Durandus they own famous popish Doctor, who lived abode threescore years after it, boldy published the contrary doctrine. Which thing doth ●ogall the Papists, that they cannot tell what to say to it. But seeing this monster of popish saith, was hid and unknown for 1206. years together, I must needs conclude with this inevitable illation; Ergo, it is but a rottenrag of the new religion. CHAP. 11. Of Popish invocation of Saints. OF this subject I have disputed at large in my Survey. Part. 3. cap. 7. The Papists in their fond popish invocation, ascribe that to Saints, which is only and solely proper to Christ himself. I prove it, because they make the Saints departed, (I will not say, Traitors buried in hell) not only Mediators of intercession, (which is their usual refuge, and fond so imagined evasion,) but also of redemption and salvation. This one example may suffice for many. Thomas 〈◊〉, sometimes Bishop of Canterbury, (what a subject let others judge,) is invocated of the Pope, and all his popish crew; not barely and absolutely as an holy man, (if perhaps he so were, which is more than I know,) but as the Son of the living GOD, and the only Saviour of the World. This Affection to the godly, may seem wonderful; but it is such a known truth, as no Papist whatsoever he be, 〈◊〉 without blushing deny the same. These are the express words of their Hymn, which they both say and sing upon that day which they keep holy for his praise and honour: Tuper Thomae 〈◊〉, quem pro te 〈…〉 christ scandere, In Hymno Tho. Cant. qua Thomas ascendit. By the blood of Thomas, which he for thee did spend, bring us shether, O Christ, whether Thomas did ascend. Lo, Thomas 〈◊〉 died for us, and shed his blood to bring us to heaven, as the Pope telleth us, and would enforce us to believe. If this Poperly be not flat blasphemy, my wits are not at home. Let the indifferent Reader judge, and be careful of his soul. This blasphemy is confirmed, by the usual practice of the Papists, especially of the jesuits. For their brother jesuit Polanthus, in his Treatise of Consesson, testifieth as a truth unto the world, Polanch. de modo audiendi confess. that they ever add in the end of their Absolutions, these express words, The Passion of our Lord lesus Christ, the merits of the blessed Virgm Mary, and of all Saints, and all the good thou shalt do, and the punishment thou shalt suffer, be to thee for the remission of thy sins, for increase of grace, and for the reward of eternal life. Lo, the merits of Saints, are joint purchasers of our salvation with Christ's blood; and our own works, (God have metcy upon us miserable sinners,) procure us remission of our sins, increase of Grace, and etternall glory. O intolerable Popery, who can endure to hear thy blasphemy! No Scripture, no Council, no Father, no approved history, was ever acquainted with this newly invented heresy, never known to the church of Christ, for the space of one thousand years and odd. An: Dom: 1407. I must therefore perforce conclude with this inevitable illation, Ergo, popish invocation of Saints, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 12. Of the Communion under 〈◊〉 kind. CHrist only, by the uniform consent of all learned Papists, hath lawful power to institute a Sacrament. Yet notwithstanding, our Papists have presumed to alter this holy Order. For Christ commanded the holy Eucharist or Communion, to be celebrated in two distinct kinds, Math, 26. 27. Math, 14, 23. viz. in Bread and wine. He commanded all to drink, and they all drank of it, saith the holy Evangelist. And the Apostle Paul urging Christ's institution to the Corinthians, telleth them plainly and religiously, Cor. 11. 27 That they must receive the holy Eucharist under both kinds. This was the practice of the ancient Church, for the space of 1230. years after Christ. An: Dom. 1230. About which time, they began in some odd Churches to lean off the Cup, and to minister the Sacrament in Bread only. P. 3. q. 80. art. 12. in corp. But that was done (as Aquinas confesseth,) in some few places only. Afterward, the Council of Constance, An: Dom: 1414. (about the year of our Lord, 1414.) decreed it as an Article of Popish faith, that the Eucharist might be lawfully received under one kind. I therefore must perforce conclude with this inevitable illation; Ergo, to receive the holy Eucharist under one kind only, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 13. Of private Mass. THe private communicating in the Popish Mass, where the Priest devoureth up all alone, is wicked, profane, & execrable, because it is repugnant to Christ's institution, Math, 26. Mark, 14. who commanded all to drink thereof; and to the Evangelist, who affirmeth all to have drunk thereof; as also to the Apostle, who chargeth the unpriested Corinthians and laical people, 1, Cor: 11. ver: 26, 27. to make a remembrance of the Lords death until his second coming, so often as they receive the holy Eucharist: and this to do, as well by drinking the Cup, as by eating the Bread. This was the use and practise of the Church every where, An: Dom: 1000 for more than a thousand years together. But afterward, when the people's devotion began to be remiss, the priests then devoured up all alone. I therefore cannot but conclude, with this inevitable illation; Ergo, late popish private Mass, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 14. Of Pope Martin's dispensation, for the Brother to marry his natural Sister. POpe Martin, saith Antiminus, the popish Archbishop & canonised saint, Anto: pa. 3. tit: 1. cap: 11. prepe sin. took upon him to dispense with one, that he might marry his own natural sister. Silvester Prierus, a famous religious Friar, sometime Master of the Pope's sacred palace, sylvest in verbo Pap●. hath these words; Howbeit, pope Martin the fifth, dispensed with him, who had contracted and consummated matrimony with his own natural sister: having first consulted with his skilful Divines, so to avoid scandal, which otherwise was likely to ensue thereupon. Bartholmaeus Fumus, Fumut in verbo dispens. a religious Dominican friar hath these words; Nevertheless, when the deed was done, Martin the fifth dispensed with one, who had consummated marriage with his own● natural Sister. Angelus de Clau●sio, a religious Franciscan friar, & Vicar general of the Cismontim Minor Angel: in verbo pap●. hath these words; Whereupon, my L. Archbishop of Florence affirmeth, that he heard men of good credit say, that Pope Martin the fifth, after he had consulted with many learned Divines and Canonists, dispensed with one who had married his own natural sisters. Card: 〈◊〉 (faith Barthol Fumus,) affirmeth roundly, Fumus verbi supra. that the Pope can dispense in all the degrees of consanguinity and affinity, save only with the Father and his daughter, and with the mother and her son. Martinus Navarrus, In Euchirid Pag. 115. a famous popish writer, descendeth the opinion of Caietan greatly. Yea, Cajetan himself, 〈…〉 capit. 18. in his Commentary upon Leviticus, which he dedicated to Pope Clement, with the Pope's good liking and grateful acceptance, singeth the self lame song. This doctrine was never heard of, for the space of 1418. An: Do: 1418. years. At which time, the Pope brought it from hell. Ergo, such popish dispensation, is nothing else, but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 15. Of worshipping of Images. THe worshipping of Images, is this day hightae esteemed in the Romish church, insomuch that the Priests themselves, on Good-Friday, are enjoined to salute the Cross three several times, and that both kneeling, and with their shoes put off. Yea, adoration, and worshipping of Images and Relics, is this day grown to such excessive superstition, as it is almost incredible to be told. Yet Gregory the great, An: Dom: 590. in his time, sharply reproved the worship done to Images, albeit he disliked Serenus, the good Bishop of Mas●l●ae, for breaking the same in the Church. Bieto in can: missae, lect. 40 Yea, Gabriel Bieto, a religious popish Friar, and a very learned school-doctor, who lived long after Gregory and Serenus, even one thousand, four hundred, An: Dom. 1484. eighty and four years after Christ, doth sharply inveigh and reprove the worship done to Images. Ergo, the worshipping of Images, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 16. Of church-service in the vulgar tongue. SAint justine, S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. Chrysostome, S. Cyprian, S. Hierom, S. Gregory, Sozomenus, Pa. 3. cha. 10. Lyra, and many others, (as I have proved in my Survey at large,) do aftirme constantly & uniformly, that the people in their days, were not as owls, parrots, crows, pies, and other birds, which were taught to sound they knew not what, but as godly Christians, who both knew what the Minister said, and made answer to the same. Whosoever readeth my Survey of popery, cannot stand in doubt hereof. lib 4. cap. 36. Sozomenus showeth plainly in his Ecclesiastical History, that in his time, (which was 400. years after Christ,) An: Dom: 400. the people and the Ministers of the Church, sang psalms together in the church. I therefore cannot but conclude, that to celebrate Divine service in an unknown tongue, is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 17. Of the antiquity of popish Mass, and the parts thereof. THe Canon of the Mass, (which the late Papists have in great esteem & rare admiration) is both uncertain, variable, & of young years. S. Gregory telleth us, Greg. Epi. lib. 7. capit. 68 that one Scolasticus composed it. Platina a famous Papist, and Abbreviator Apostolical, showeth plainly and compendiously, both at what time, and by whom, every piece of popish Mass began. Platinainv. Sixt●. Peter (saith Platina) used only the Lords prayer, when he celebrated the holy Mystery. james the Bishop of jerusalem, increased the holy Mystery. Basilius likewise added to them, and so did others. For Celestine the Bishop of Rome, added the Introite; Gregory, the Kyrie Eleyson; Telesphorus, glortain excelsis Deo; Gelasius the collects; Hieronimus, the Epistle and Gospel. Hallelu-ia was borrowed of the Church of jerusalem; the Creed was received of the Nicene Counsel. Pelagius invented the commemoration of the dead; Leo the the third, Incense: Inuocentius the first, the Pax, and Pope Sergius the Agnus dei. This being so, I cannot but conclude, that every patch and p●ece of the Romish Mass, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 18. Of the profound Mysteries of Popish Mass. POpe Sergius is the Author of Christ's threefold body, Peconecr. dist 2 Cap. tr. form. the body of our Lord (saith Sergius) is threefold, the part that is put into the Chalice, signifieth Christ's body risen again; the part eaten, Christ yet walking on earth, the part remaining to the end of the Mass, Christ's body in the grave: And that the Reader may the better know, the mutability of Popish Mass, I give him to understand, that this practice of reserving one part to the end of the mass, is at this day wholly changed, for the Priest eateth up aleven in the church of Rome. O wonderful Novelties, in the disholy popish Mass, which for all that, are as old, as Pope Sergius his nose: Ergo popish foolish Mysteries, are but rotten rags of the New Religion. CHAP. 19 Of kissing the Pope's feet. IVstinianus the Emperor, after he had sent for the Pope Constantinus to come to him at Nicomedia, Ar. Po. Burdeg● An: Dom: 708. received him very honourably, and sent him back. But first of a certain fond conceived humility, he fell down and kissed the Pope's feet. This Emperor reigned about 700. years after Christ; & here first began the kissing of the Pope's feet, which kissing as it was then done by the Emperor upon a fond zeal, so is it this day continued with intolerable superstition, Ergo it is but a rotten rag of the new religion. CHAP. 20. Of praying upon Beads. AFter that the people of God had lived above a thousand years, An: Dom: 1089. Polid, li, 5, ca, 9 using altogether godly books of prayer, one Peter, an Eremit a Frenchman borne, perceiving the Nature of men to be so desirous of Novelties, was the first that invented praying upon Beads. From hence sprang their Rosaries, their Corones, their Lady Psalters, and a thousand superstitious kinds of Prayers, whereof the rehearsal of the Original, is a sufficient confutation. Ergo, to pray on Beads, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 21. Of changing the Pope's Name. POpe Sergius the second, being somewhat ashamed of his ancient name, because it sounded not pleasantly in men's ears, (for he was called Os Porei, Swine's mouth, or Hogs-snoute, If ye will), he changed his old name, and termed himself Sergius. He lived above 840. An: Dom: 843. Plate ●n serg. 2. Ca●. l●. 336 years after Christ, from which time, it hath been the manner of Popes or Bishops or Rome to change their names, so soon as they aspired to the Popedom. What a pride is this? For the Popish Bishops of Rome to change their names, which they had given in their Baptism. No marvel, if they be ashamed of Christ's religion? Well, I must perforce conclude; Ergo the changing of the Pope's name, is but arotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 22 Of the Paschall Torch. THe Papists use upon East●r-Eue, 〈◊〉 in Chron. to hollow a Torch or Taper of Wax, 〈◊〉 lib, 6, cap. 7 (which they call Caerea, Pasch. lis,) into which they instill and sasten Crosle-wise five of their hallowed grains. To this Taper they ascipe great holiness, and reserve it till the Ascension or Pentecost: An: Dom. 417. Howbeit, it was first invented by Pope Sozimus 400. years after Christ. This Sozimus ●alsified the Decrees of the Nicene Counsel, so to establish the v●utped primacy of the Church o. Rome: And so I must conclude; Ergo, it is a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 23 Of the Popish Pax, and the mysteries thereof. INnocentius the first invented the Pax; the Mysteries whereof (as Durandus their famous school-doctor telleth us) are so wonderful, An: Dom. 404. Durand lib, 4 cap, 55 that they had need to put many of their Priests to the School all their life, before they will perfectly underst and their obscure and unsavoury significations. The Pax may not be given in Mass for the dead, because the faithful souls (as Durand telleth us) are not now in the troubles of the world, but rest henceforth in the Lord, so that the kiss of peace or Pax, is not needful for them, which is the sign of peace and concord. This is the Mystery of the Popish Pax, An: Do: 404. invented 400 years & more after Christ, but here, I must tell them another M●sterie; (Viz) that if the withholding of the Pax do signify their rest in the Lord, then doubtless is the Mass itself Idolacriticall, which is offered for their Pargation. Again, if the souls be in Purgatory, & so stand in need of the Mass; then is their Ceremony false and fantastical, which signifieth them to be in rest. To this I most needs add, as a merriment, that our Popish Monks do never receive the Pax, because forsooth they are dead to the World, but how they are dead to the world, let the world judge. They have goodly houses, pleasant Gardens, fine Cells; they are seated in the most wholesome air, planted upon the most fertile soil, environed with most desired prospects, their diet is finely provided, their table ever well furnished; they want neither wine, nor any dainty. This one sure thing may be the proof, sir Tho. Bedle the Monk, Bedle the Monk. was imprisoned in York many years, at what time myself for Popery was a prisoner with him in the Kidcoat on Owse-bridge. He is dead, I will repeat no unttuth of the man, this only will I say, for instruction sake. He used usually to send every day for a quart or a pint of wine, which was very chargeable to him, being but a prisoner, his friends sometime wished him to abstain, adding sundry reasons for the same, but he answered; that in their Abbey he had been so long used to drink Wine at his pleasure, that he could not now live without it. O mortified Monks? O poor Friars? Nay, O Hypocrirall deceivers of the world? For that more fitly is your name. Now I must conclude, Ergo the invention of the popish Pax is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 24. Of the Pope's Bulls. POpe Adrian the first of that Name, Polid. li, 6 ca, 7 caused his pardons, Privileges, and Grants, to be sealed with Lead, which they called the Pope's Bulls. These Bulls were unknown to the Church, for the space of 772. An: Dom: 772 years after Christ. Ergo, the Pope's Bulls are a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 25 Of the Popish Agnus Dei. THe Church of God was above 1200. years, without the use or knowledge of this Agnus Dei, Who was the first Author thereof, I do not read, An: Dom: 1247. In libel, inst. sodal. jesus. but cerraine it is, that it began of late years; for the Popes of late time have used every seventh year, and the first year that every one is made Pope, to consecrare solemnly with prayers, Chrismes, and manifold Ceremonies, certain round pieces of wax, having the Print of a Lamb, and for that cause so termed; With this kind of paltry stuff, the world is so bewitched, that infinite numbers do ascribe a great part of their salvation thereunto. He that hath an Agnus des about him, must believe (as he is taught by our Jesuits) libel, sod. jesus that he shall be delivered by Sea and by Land, from all Tempests, Thunder, Earthquakes; from Hail, Thunderbolts, sudden death, and from all ill evil. If any man will not believe me, let him read a little Book printed at Colonia, containing therein, the order sodalitatis B. Maria Virgins, which is every where to be fold. In which Book he shall find much more than I have said. Ergo the Popish Agnus dei, is nothing else burr a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 26. Of Candlemas-day THe old Pagan romans in the Calends of February, used to honour Februa, the Mother of Mars, whom they supposed to be the God of battle, the honour they did exhibit unto him was this, they went up and down the streets with Candles and Torches burning in their hands, in regard hereof, that the Christian Romans should not be inferior to the Pagan Romans, 〈…〉 7. cap. 6 in Heathenish superstition; Pope Sergius decreed, that upon the day of the purification of the blessed Virgin, An: Dom: 843. Par. 3. cap. 5 being the second of February, they should go in procession with burning Candles in their hands, thereby signifying the blessed virgin to be pure and free from sin. Of which point I have at large disputed in my Survey. Now I must conclude, Ergo, to go up and cowne with burning Candles like Pagans, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 27 Of the doleful Oath which Popish Bishops make to the Pope. IN the ancient church for the space of 1227. years, all Bishops had free access to Counsels, and free liberty when he came thither to speak the truth out of the holy Scriptures: An: Dom. 1229. but Pope Gregory the 9 took another course with them, that none should have voices in Counsels, but such as s●vare obedience to the Pope, Decret, lib. 2. 〈◊〉 24, cap. 4 and promised with an Oath to defend his common Law. The express words of the oath, the Reader may find in the downfall of Popery. I must here of force Conclude; Ergo, this execrable Popish Oath, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 28. Of the Popish fast of forty days, commonly called Lent. OF the Popish manner of fasting, Sur●ey. part 1. book 1. Chap 16. I have written elsewhere at large. Lent-fast (as Papists use of late years) is ridiculous and hurtful both to souls and bodies. Ridiculous; first because they prohibit to eat Eggs, Primo principaliter. Cheese, and Butter, and yet do they permit all manner of strong Wines, all ●iads of most delicate Fishes, and other dainties whatsoever, flesh only excepted. Albeit, sundry men do like as well of Fish as of flesh, if not better. Again, because Wines & lundry kinds of Fish, bring forth all those inordinate effects; for the breaking whereof (fasting is appointed no less than flesh) or rather more. Thirdly, because in all their sasts, the richer fort fill their bellies at noon with daincy dishes, which is as much as any udle man, will ask for his diet any day. unless it before fashion sake. Fourthly, because at night they will have wines, Fruits, Figs, Almonds, Dates, Ra●●ous, M●rmela●e, Conserves of Cherries, 〈…〉 Fiftly, because they vs●to stuff; their pa●uchos so 〈◊〉 at noon, as they may well end 〈◊〉 the naxt day. Sixtly, because great injury is done to the poorer sort, by this kind of Popish fasti●●. For, where at the rich in ●ort are either near the sua; or else have store of Fishes within themselves, or at least have money enough to provide the same and other dainties withal, others have all, others want all. This not with standing, the Popish Law, abandoneth the poor as well as the rich, from Eggs Cheese, Butter, milk, the only food they have to live upon. seventhly, because all the day long, they commonly will drink wine, eat bread funnels, manchets, & fruits, and fed thereon at night, as if it were an ordinary settled dinner. And if they defer their dinner till night, as sundry do for better liking jundry times, and as Englishmen have done of latter days, generally on Christmas-eeve, then do they practise the former privilege, in eating & drinking l●octally at noon. Where I wish the Reader to observe this with me; that the popish Lent-fast cannot be broken with drinking, though one be drunken twenty times a day, no learned papist can this deny. For, albeit he sin by their law so often as he is drunken, yet doth he not thereby break their holy fast. O wondo● of all wonders in the Christian world! (Hurtful to the soul.) 〈…〉 because by means hereof, many have believed false doctrine to be the word of God; and not only so, but they have also-ludged & rondemned themselves, for transgressing men's traditions, Rome, 10, 3. as the very laws of God. Wherein, while they sought to establish their own tighteousnes, they fell from the righteousness of God. Math, 15, 9 For to put religion in man's traditions; is flarly to abandon the worship of the living God. Yea, by reason of these fasts, their souls were after in damnable stare. I prove it, because they persuade themselves, that they were aswell bound to keep the Pope's laws therein, as the flat commandments of God; and consequently, so often as they broke them, (which was norare thing,) so often did they commit damnable sin, because their acts were not of faith. Rom. 14, 23, (Hurtful to the body,) First, Tertio principaliter. because many have shortened their days, by forbearing necessary food; which they did, through fond persuasion of popish holiness'. Secondly, because the poor souls are so wringed with these superstitious f●sts, that by reason of their excessive hunger, they rejoice above measure when the fast is at an end. Yea, they keep a better reckoning how Lent passeth, and how they may fall to flesh again, then ever they did of and for their sins. Thirdly, because Lent-fast is not proportionable to man's body, or to the season of the year. For as there be four distinct times of the year, the Spring-time, Summer, Autumn, and Winter; so be there four different diets, aptly corespondent to the same. Whosoever will eat temperately and in measure, must eat according to the force & equability of his digestion; and consequently, he ought to moderate and rule his diet, after the qualification and season of the year. The Art of Physic condemneth popish fasts in Lent. Native heat is the proper workman of digestion, as granteth every, skilful Physician; and consequently, because our bodies are most hot in winter, (as saith Hypocrates,) at that time they stand in need of most meat. And because our bodies be then cold and moist, hot and dry meats be convenient. In Summer, because native heat is dispersed by exhalations, concoction is weakened, and so less meat required. And because our bodies then be hot and dry, cold and moist meats are proportional. In Autumn, because the extrinsical heat is more remiss then in Summer, and the natural heat thereby more united, meat ought more largely to be used. The Spring-time keepeth a mean between Winter and Summer, and taketh part of them both: and therefore out diet then, must neither be altogether of hot and dry mea●es; as in Winter 〈◊〉 either yet altogether of cold & moist meats, as in Summer. And consequently popish institution of Lent, was not only superstitious and ungodly, but also altogether previdieiall to the health of the body. I prove it, because as Hypocrates w●iteth, all sudden murations are dangerous, & ● so after abundant eating of flesh all the Winter season, suddenly to abstain wholly from the same, cannot but be evil. This is confirmed unto us sundry ways: first, because there is like proportion in cating fish suddenly after flesh, as there is in eating flesh suddenly after fish. Which alteration how dangerous it is, the usual infirmities in Easter-weeke do witness. Secondly, because the nourishment of fish is cold and moist, and so very disproportionable to the Spring time. Thirdly, because concoction is very strong, as well for the ambrient restraint, termed Antiperistasis, as by reason of long sleep. And therefore since much meat is necessary at that time, our popish Lent-fast prescribing little meat, must needs be prejudicial. Although there were in the ancient Church, a free kind of yearly fast, whereof the Papists pretend an Apish imitation; yet is their usual Popish Lent-fast, not only superstitious, but altogether different from the same. Superstitious, because they intent thereby to satisfy for their sins, and to merit heaven. Different many ways; First, because the ancient Church, never intended any meirite by her fast. Secondly, because the said fast, commonly called Lent, was not uniformly practised in the 〈◊〉 Church, but lest indifferent to the discretion of their one. The old Romans fasted three weeks before Easter; intermitting their fast weekly upon their saturdays and Sondai●e. The Slavonians, Alexandrians, Hist: trig. lib. 9 cap. ●. 38. and Greecians, fasted 〈◊〉 weeks. Others continued their fast senueil weeks, but they fasted only fine days in every week. Thirdly, because the fast of the aunclent Church was free, voluntary, and not commanded by any Law. Fourthly, because as in the ancient Church, the time was variable, so was also the manner of their diet. For, some ate nothing that liveth; some, of living things, ate nothing but only fish; some are both fish and also birds; some ate only herbs and eggs; Trip. hist. lib. 9 cap. 38. Soz●m: lib. 7. capit: 19 Euseb: lib. 5. cap. 24. some only becade; othersome nothing at all; othersome, at night are all kind of meats. All which, Cassiodorus both summarily & pithily compriseth in these golden words; Because there is no Law made for fasting, I think (saith he,) the Apostles left this matter to our own consideration, that every one should do without fear or necessity, what seemed most convenient for himself. Fiftly, because S. Spiredion, (a man so holy that he was renowned with miracles in his life time,) refused not to care flesh in the time of Lent; no not in his own house. Yea, he did not only eat flesh himself, but also earnestly introated a Stranger that lodged with him, Soz●m: 〈◊〉. cap: ●. 11. to eat as he did. And when the Stranger refused to eat flesh with him, alleging for his refusal, that he was a Christian, and so prohibited to eat flesh at that time, N●cep. li. 8 capit. 42 Histo: trip. lib. 1. capit. 1●. S. Spiridion replied & said; that he ought the rather to eat, because he was a christian. For (saith S. Spiridion,) All things are pure to the pure. This example is able ourself, to satisfy any indifferent Reader. For first, S. Spiridion (that holy man of God,) did eat flesh contrary to popish doctrine Secondly, he urged the stranger to eat with him. Thirdly, he constantly anouched his doing, to be the part of altrue Christian. Fourthly, he taught plainly, that to make conscience in choice of meats, was thy badge of an Infidel. Fif●lie, the fact of S. Spiridion, proveth evidently, that to make choice of meats for religion sake, was deemed superstitious and ungodly, not only in the Apostles time, but also many hundred yetes after their departure hence. To which I add, that this freedom of eating all Kind of meats in Lent, was usual in the Church for the space of 400. An: Dom. 427. years after Christ. And so I must conclude with this incuitable illation; Ergo, late popish Lent-fast, is but a rotten rag of the New Religion. CHAP. 29 of the annulling of Popish wedlock. Whatsoever the Bishop of Rome holdeth & defineth, that must every Papist believe, hold, and maintain, Math, 19 17 as an Article of his faith. Matrimony pronounced by God to be indisloluble, An: Dom. 1540 the Church for the space of 1500. years durst never dissolve: but the late Pope of Rome, (Pius, Paulus, and julius,) have taken in hand roundly to dissolve the same. This truth is proved at large, in the Downfall of Popery. But the Papists tell us, that the facts & Decrees or their Popes, must be defended, how false and absurd soever they seem,▪ Cavarravias' a famous and learned popish Bishop, hath these words, Nec me latet, etc. I know (saith he) that 〈◊〉 holdeth the contrary opinion, but nevertheless, we must defend the first opinion, lest those things which every where are practised, be utterly overthrown. Thus saith the great Canonist, and learned popish Bishop Cavarruvias, whose words are setre down at large in my M●tyues. This is the same doctrine in effect, which the popish cano●●ted Saint Antonius, and their famous S●mmrst, Syl●●iter Prierus telleth us, viz. Anton: part 1. tib. 10. cap. 3. Sylu●deindulg. That whatsoever the Pope doth, whether we can prove the same by the holy Scripture, or no, yet we must belseeve it to be so. Lo, the Pope's doings must perforce be 〈…〉 otherwise, Popery cannot stand I 〈◊〉 therefore but conclude, Ergo, Popery is the new Religion. CHAP. 30. Of the Pope's pretended 〈◊〉 over and above a general Council. THe late Popes, or Bishops of Rome, (which is all one,) with their Ies●●es and jesuited Papists, do obstinately and peremptorily affirm, as an undoubted truth, that the Pope is above a General Council; and they seem to prove it, because the Pope sitting in his Chair at home, (as one that cannot Err,) confirmeth or condemneth the Council at his good pleasure. And therefore do the Rhemists, (that lesuited brood) tell us plainly, (if we will believe them,) that there is no necessity of a General or Provincial Counbell, save only for the better contentation of the people. But this is a lote upshirt faith and doctrine, never known to the church of God, An: Dom: 1415. for the space of 1415. years after Christ, that is to say, until the General Council of Constance. Which Council defined by a firm and resolute Decree, as a matter of faith; than a General Council was above the Pope: and therefore did the said Council depose three Popes, (john 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13.) and cho● Ma●tin 5. and made him Pope. And so likewise the General Council of Basill, An: Dom. 1431. about fifteen years after that, cited Pope Eugenius to appear, and for his contumacy deposed him, and chose Amadaeus. (who was named Faelix 5) in his room. Yea, Cardinal Camer acensis, Abbas panor●nitanus, 〈◊〉 C●sanus, 〈◊〉 Papa, Cardinalis Florentinus, johannes Cersanus, ●s●obus Almaynus, Abulensis, and other learned Papists generally, (the Jesuits and their jesuited crew excepted) do all constantly defend as an undoubted truth that a General Council is above the Pope. I therefore cannot but conclude with this incuitable illation, Ergo popish, saith & doctrine, by which we must believe the Pope to be above a General Council, is but a rotten r●gge of the New Religion. (⸪) Laus Deo uni et trino. Amen.