AN ABRIDGEMENT OR SURVEY OF Popery, Containing a compendious declaration of the grounds, doctrines, beginnings, proceed, impieties, falsities, contradictions, absurdities, fooleries, and other manifold abuses of that religion, which the Pope and his complices do now maintain, and wherewith they have corrupted and deformed the true Christian faith, Opposed unto Matthew kellison's Survey of the new Religion, as he calleth it, and all his malicious invectives and lies, By MATTHEW SUTCLIFFE.  
LONDON Printed by Melchisedech Bradwood for Cuthbert Burbie. 1606.   

TO THE WORTHY and noble Lord, Prince HENRY, son and heir to the most puissant King, and our dread Sovereign, JAMES, by the grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith.  
THere are two principal offices, most worthy & excellent Prince, of a true Christian. the first is, To decline from evil: the second is, To do good. And these two, as they are necessarily required in all, so principally in those, which are to command and govern others. But the ground of both is the true Catholic and Apostolic Faith; without the knowledge whereof, not only good things are often times refused, as evil; but also things evil embraced for good.  
Seeing then our adversaries the Papists of late time have both violently and fraudulently sought to bring back into his majesties Dominions, whereof your Grace by the grace of God is undoubted heir, not only the heresies and superstitions of Popish religion, but also the tyrannical government of the Pope, that is so prejudicial both to Princes and their states, and also to all Christians & their liberties; I have thought, I could not do either to God or my Country better service, then to declare to the world both their weak and absurd grounds, and their impious and wicked doctrines, and how they have proceeded in the maintenance and defence of the same. And this I doubt not would appear far more clearly, if without prejudice of men's persons, or respect of private men's interests, matters might be debated before indifferent judges, and sound tried by the touchstone of holy Scriptures, and none of those excluded from hearing, that profess true Catholic religion.  
My purpose is not, God I take to witness, to touch any man particularly, but only to set forth the truth of all matters, that the obstacles of Christian unity, and the causes of the good success of the Turk being removed, we may all for the most part consent in the unity of the Catholic faith, and conjoin our minds and forces the better to resist public enemies.  
This I present to your Grace, as the first fruits of my affection and service, that thereby learning to eschew evil, and to embrace that which is good and pious, you may, as it followeth in the 34. Psalm, seek peace & follow after it. Nay you may the better be instructed not only in following the true means of peace, but also obtain your desires, and for ever truly possess it. This your affection in pious promoting the true service of God, & preventing of the treacherous plots of the factious complices of Antichrist, shall be the foundation of your prosperous estate. It shall increase the joy of your noble Father our Sovereign Lord and King, and glad your Mother, whose hearts joy you are. S. john rejoiced to see the children of that noble lady, to whom he directed his second Epistle, walking in truth. And this is the affection of all your friends and well-willers, who rejoice to see the heroical virtues of your Father budding forth in your Grace. The Prophet Psal. 112, doth assure us, That his children that feareth the Lord shallbe mighty upon earth, and that the generation of the righteous shall be blessed. On the other side the adversaries of religion shall weep and lament, when they shall see the Prophecies of S. john, Apocalyp. 17. and 18, concerning the destruction of the great whore, and the ruins of the city of Babylon accomplished, and the rather, as we hope, by your Fathers and your godly endeavours and means. Vouchsafe therefore, most gracious Prince, to give reading to this Discourse made in opposition of that infamous libel, which not long since one Matthew Kellison a Priest of Baal, and a marked slave of Antichrist, presumed to direct to the King your Father: and consider what reason he had to talk of the surveying of religion, seeing his own religion can so evil abide any examination or survey.  
The Lord of heaven bless you with all spiritual graces, and the rest shallbe added unto you. This is also the continual prayer of all the servants of God & your Father's true subjects, That your Grace may be made a worthy instrument to advance God's glory, and that the vows of your Parents, and all well affected to his Majesty and to your Grace, may plentifully be performed in you.  
Your Grace's most affectionate servant MATTHEW SUTCLIFFE.   

THE PREFACE TO THE Christian Reader.  
Much it were to be wished (Christian Reader) that the same affection and fervent desire were in all true Christians, and especially in those that are Pastors and Teachers, to maintain the truth, which we find to be in false teachers and heretics to uphold and maintain their errors. The Scribes and Pharisees in time past (as our Saviour Matth. 23, teacheth us) compassed sea and land to make one of their profession. And so in time past did the Novatians, Donatists and Arians. But what need I to speak of times past, when we see before our eyes the present example of the mass-priests and jebusites, and their complices? They spare neither cost nor labour. some writ, some discourse, some practice. one taketh on him one part of the labour, and another performeth the rest. So nothing is left unattempted, that either fraud could devise, or malice execute, or industry and labour perform.  
Among others, one Kellison (not long since, as is said, my L. Vauxes Butler, but now a drawer of Popish doctrine) hath showed himself very busy: and for his part hath gathered together out of the libels of Staphylus, Cochleus, Bolsec, Sanders, William Reynolds, and other the Pope's Parasites & agents, a whole pack of slanders, lies, and wicked imputations against Luther, Zuinglius, Melancthon, Caluin, Beza, and other Teachers of truth. To this he hath also added divers fragments of certain idle declamations of his own, and the most malicious railing terms that either himself could devise, or else find out in his fellows invectives. And all this put together, he calleth A Survey of the new religion: by the terms of Novelty, Heresy, Impiety, and such like; seeking to disgrace that Truth which we profess.  
I did therefore expect, that some learned man or other would take this fellow to task, and indeed I do now understand, that a man both learned, grave and eminent in this Church of England hath both undertaken and finished the Answer to his scurrilous discourse. but seeing the same is not yet published, I thought it not amiss in the mean while to requite his Survey of religion, with this Survey of Popery, and to draw home this idle wandering Surveyor & Searcher of other men's matters, to a careful consideration of his own desperate cause.  
His Treatise is most foolishly titled A Survey of the new religion. for neither shall he ever prove, that one article of our religion is new, nor doth he dispute against any grounds held by us, but only telleth of certain extravagant speeches, partly falsely imputed to Luther, Caluin, Zuinglius, and other private men, and partly falsely gathered out of their words by false constructions, but had they held any private opinions, that justly might be censured, what is that to us? our religion, certes, is not grounded upon Luther, Caluin, or any late Teacher, but upon the Prophets and Apostles. neither is our faith that, which is found in private men's writings, but that which is founded upon holy Scriptures, and contained in our public confessions. he might therefore with more reason have called it a surfeit of his own fooleries and fantastical devices and calumniations, than a survey of our religion.  
Against this idle invention of Kellison, I have, I hope, opposed a more diligent and certain survey of Popery. for I have not devised any thing of mine own, but truly reported the doctrine which they teach. and herein I do not object whatsoever is taught by Scotus, Aquinas, Durandus, Biel, Stapleton, Harding, Bellarmine, or which other Doctors do hold singularly, nor that which Sanders, Parsons, or such idle fellows babble in their trifling books, but only that which is either defined in some Council, or determined by some Pope, or generally taught or practised by all, or most, or best of our adversaries, and which I think Kellison will not deny. And by these grounds, doctrines and practices I hope to overthrow the whole frame and building of Popery, being laid upon weak grounds, and consisting of many wicked and false doctrines, and being maintained by most lewd and wicked means and practices.  
This Discourse I first devised for a private friend, whose wavering (for I will not say defection, until I see further) I do much lament, and whose settlement I do much desire. but because I do think the same may do good to many, who not knowing the truth we hold, nor the errors, heresies, superstitions, idolatry and impiety of Popery, do run headlong upon occasion either of malcontentment, or desire of innovation in matters of State, which they consider may soon be stirred by quarrels about religion, into strange courses; I have been persuaded to make it common. the same also may serve to reclaim the most haggard Papists, if they do not wilfully shut their eyes, and stop their ears against the truth. thirdly, this may serve to stop the mouth of the slanderous jebusites and mass-priests, that imputing to us wicked opinions and practices no way defended, are unable to defend their own doctrines and practices, which they publicly profess, and commend. sinally, I hope wise Christians may learn by these collections of ours, neither to trust the adversary, who maketh no conscience of lying or slandering, nor to condemn innocent men, before they be heard and convicted.  
Vouchsafe therefore (gentle Reader) to read our Discourse with attention, and to judge without partiality. and then I doubt not but thou wilt beware both of the impious doctrines, and of the injurious and lewd practices of Popery.  
If any be offended with this surveying course, let him impute the fault to Kellison, who of a drunken butler, is now become a mad surveyor. and if he find not texts or proofs sufficient to satisfy his humour in proof of every allegation in this Treatise; let him think, that the matters are of that nature, that either they will be confessed of the adversary, or else are notoriously known to the world, though impudently denied by the polshorne pack of Antichrist.  
Finally, as there is but one Faith, one Baptism, one God; so there is but one true religion, which every one is to know and to embrace, if he will be saved. And this is grounded upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. but as Athanasius orat. 2, contr. Arianos', saith of the Arians, Pro Christo apud illos Arius est, that is, They follow Arius as if he were Christ; so we may say of the Papists, The Pope is their Christ, their head, their loadstar, their Northpole, and all in all. This one true religion is also Apostolic and Catholic, and most ancient. Tertullian lib. 1. contr. Marcionem, teacheth us, Whatsoever doctrine hath been brought into the Church after the first publication of the Gospel, that the same is to be reputed heresy. Haeresis deputabitur, saith he, quod postea inducitur. but Popery never came from the Apostles, but from the Pope. neither was the same universally or anciently received, but only taught and embraced by the Pope's faction of late times, and within certain limits. finally, this true and apostolic religion is of God, and not of the invention of Popes, or their polshorne Priests, Monks or Friars.  
Embrace therefore that religion, that is derived from the Apostles and Prophets, that is truly Catholic, Apostolic, and most ancient, and finally, which hath no author but God. and beware of all profane novelties and Popish inventions. and then as thou walkest by faith in this life, so thou shalt attain to the vision of the face of God in the life to come, and also reign with God everlastingly through Christ, which is the Way, the Truth, and Life.   

The Abridgement or Survey of Popery.  
Containing a brief and plain declaration of the grounds, doctrines, beginnings, proceed, impieties, falsities, and other manifold abuses of the Popish sect.  

CHAP. I. What is meant by Popery or Popish religion in this Discourse ensuing.  
TO teach aright saith Plato in Cratylo, we are diligently to expound the terms or words we treat of. and Tully in his first book of Offices saith, that every instruction that is undertaken rightly, aught to begin with a desinition of matters, which we are to discourse of. because therefore I would not be mistaken, nor have our adversaries to take either an occasion of quarrel, or a pretence of evasion: it shall be needful, before we pass any further, to define and declare, what we mean in this discourse by popery, or popish religion. and so much the rather, for that the Papists do hold and profess the articles of the Creed, and divers other points deduced of them, or consonant unto them, which both the Apostles and ancient fathers, and we also believe and profess, and under colour whereof they abuse simple souls recesuing their puddle waters of Popery made sweet with some truth, for the pure streams of Christian doctrine.  
By popery therefore we understand not any point of Christian doctrine generally holden of all Christians, or the doctrine of the Prophets or holy Apostles professed generally by the ancient fathers, and truly termed Catholic (for that we hold and profess as well as the Papists, and far more sincerely than they, albeit we detest and renounce all Popery) but all those errors and corruptions in doctrine both concerning faith and manners, which the synagogue of Rome & her lovers by colour of the Pope's authority, and by his persuasion and enforcement from time to time have received, professed and taught, either contrary to the doctrine & institution of Christ and his Apostles, or else above the same, and above the faith of the ancient primitive church. Neither do we otherwise single Popery from Christian religion, than the ancient Catholics did distinguish Arianisme, Macedonianisme, Nestorianisme, Eutychianisme, Pelagianisme, and other heresies from the true faith. for although the Arians, Macedonians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Pelagians, and other heretics did hold in terms the articles of the faith; yet for that the first denied the divinity of the son of God, the second the divinity of the holy ghost, the third the union of the two natures in the person of Christ, the fourth the verity of Christ's human nature, the fift the necessity of God's grace, and added divers novelties to the ancient faith; they were reputed heretics, and by their heresies ancient Christians understood not any point of Christian faith, but their singular opinions, which they maintained obstinately against the faith.  
The Apostles in the Primitive Church, did teach that doctrine, which they had received from Christ jesus, and delivered the same to their successors, and they to others. the first Christian's likewise received the same pure, and without corruption. but as the envious man, while the men of the house slept, sowed tars among good corn, as we read Matth. 13. so false Apostles and heretics from time to time have gone about with their cockle and tars to corrupt the sincere doctrine of the faith, abusing the negligence of true teachers to their own advantage; but yet none more cunningly and fraudulently, than the Popes of Rome and their complices. for other heretics were soon espied by their opposition to the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets, & Christ's true Church, timely bewraying themselves, but these under the titles of Apostolic men and Catholics have corrupted the Apostolic and Catholic faith, and under the name and title of the Church have undermined the foundations and doctrine of the Church, and under their sheeps clothing have covered their ravening and wolvish natures. and so have they lurked many years mingling their traditions and inventions with the doctrines of faith, and for truth delivering erroneous and superstitious doctrines, and under the name of Christ endeavouring to erect the kingdom of Antichrist.  
At the first they clogged religion with divers superfluous and superstitious ceremonies, & loaded Christians with the burden of their decretales and censures. but in the end they corrupted both the worship of God, & the doctrine of faith. Boniface the 3. obtained of Phocas, that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches. and this was the beginning of the Pope's supremacy. In the wicked assembly under Irene that semipagan empress at Nice the doctrine of the worship of images began first to be established. & this the Popes of Rome willingly embraced, using this occasion to establish their own kingdom, & to free themselves from the government of the Emperor. then also the superstitious worship of Saints relics began to be authorized, and unwritten traditions under the title of Apostolic authority to be commended, as appeareth in the third action of that synod. The French king Charles the great, and his father Pipin and other their successors endowed the church of Rome with great temporal possessions, which made them strong and powerful.  
Nicolas the 2. in a certain synod at Rome first decreed, that Christ's body was present in the eucharist, and handled with the priests hands, and pressed with the teeth: and this fell out about the year of our Lord 1059.  
Gregory the 7. first began to handle the temporal sword, and manifestly to oppose himself against the Roman emperor. before his time, saith Otho Frisingensis, we do not read of any Emperor excommunicated by the Pope. Nether did ever any Bishop of Rome presume to depose the emperor before him. some allege Ambroses' example. but that showeth, that bishops never took upon them, to depose princes, but only to refrain from communicating with them. that which Gregory the seventh began, that in the end his successors obtained. for by their practices they subdued the emperor, and gave way to the Turk.  
The doctrine of transubstantiation was first established by Innocent the third in a synod at Lateran, about the year of our Lord 1215. then also came in the necessity of auricular confession.  
The communion under one kind was brought in first by the synod at Constance about the year of our Lord 1414. there also it was decreed, that the accidents in the eucharist did subsist without a subject.  
In the conventicle of Florence about the year of our Lord 1439. the doctrine of purgatory, and the Pope's supremacy was decreed by the authority of the synod. there also the doctrine of the 7. sacraments was first propounded to the Armenians, as proceeding from the synod. neither do we read of the form of extreme unction, and other Popish sacraments there set down, before this time.  
The rest of the errors and superstitions of Popery were established and confirmed in the conventicle of Trent, about the year of our Lord 1564. for before that time the schoolmen disputed pro and contra. but since that, they have made it unlawful to hold otherwise, than that synod prescribeth, in matters there newly determined.  
Now they have as it were given a perfect form, and full authority to that doctrine, which before was not either perfectly known of all, or in all points allowed of all. so that whatsoever the Papists vaunt of the antiquity of their doctrine; yet it is most evident, that the full establishment of it, as it is now delivered, cannot be proved or showed before this conventicle. than their missals, Breviaries and offices received a great alteration, or rather a new form. than they innovated divers points of doctrine both concerning faith, and manners.  
To relate all the particular errors and abuses of the Romish Church were a matter infinite. for there is no point almost, wherein the Papists vary not from the ancient Church, the article concerning the holy Trinity excepted. beside that they vary in their doctrine and practise daily. but the principal points of Popery, wherein we charge them to have digressed from the doctrine of the Apostles and primitive Church of Christ, are these.  
First they have taught novelties, and false doctrine concerning the very grounds of faith. the Apostle teacheth us, that the Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ being the Chief corner stone. but they believe the church to be built upon the Pope. Irenaeus lib. 3. c. 1. saith that the Apostles did first preach the Gospel, and afterward deliver the same in scriptures, that they might be a foundation and pillar of our faith. they do make the traditions of the church not written equal to the scriptures, and upon them, nay upon the decretales of Popes, and practise of Massepriestes do build their faith. all antiquity esteemeth holy scriptures to be the canon of our faith, and therefore calleth them canonical. But the Romanists esteem them to be an unperfect canon without their traditions, and the Pope's decretales and determinations. Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. dei c. 4. saith they are neither necessary, nor sufficient without traditions. The fathers never accounted the books of Tobiah, judith, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, and the Maccabees equal to the books of the law and Prophets extant originally in Hebrew, as appeareth by the testimony of Hierome in prologo Galeato, of Athanasius in synopsi, of Nazianzen in carm. of Epiphanius and divers others old and new writers. the Papists in the synod of Trent decree them to be of equal authority with the rest. the ancient catholics ever esteemed the Hebrew text of the old testament, and the Greek of the new to be more authentical, than any translation. the conventicle of Trent hath made the old latin vulgar translation of the bible authentical: and doth not give that honour to the original books of the bible. the canonical scriptures, we say, receive their force from the author of them. and this is to be proved by the consent of fathers, and by arguments from scriptures, law and reason. they say that scriptures receive force and authority in respect of us from the Church, or rather from the Pope. Papists are neither willing, that scriptures be turned into vulgar tongues, nor will permit them to be read of the vulgar sort without licence, or publicly read in vulgar tongues in the church. finally they say they are obscure and hard to be understood, and speak what they can in their disgrace.  
Secondly they teach erroneously concerning Christ's natural body, and concerning his office. the body of Christ they believe to be both in heaven, and on earth on every altar at one and the self same time. they also hold, that his body is really under the accidents of bread and wine, giving him a body neither visible nor palpable, nor in any sort like to ours. they teach further, that his body is in divers places, where it filleth not the places, and that his one body hath relation to divers places. they believe, that the souls of the faithful before Christ's coming were in hell, or at least in Limbo, which is a part of hell, and were thence delivered by Christ's going to hell, as if his cross had wrought nothing for them. they teach that Christ as man is omniscient, and per consequent omnipotent, and that he was vir perfectus, that is, a perfect or grown man from the first instant of his conception. his office of mediation they give to the virgin Mary, to Angels and to Saints, they make also Saints our redeemers, teaching, that by their merits Christians obtain their desires, and are delivered out of purgatory. to mass-priests they give priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech, and say that they offer up Christ's body and blood really for quick and dead. finally they make the Pope head, spouse and monarch of the Church.  
Neither do they teach more catholicly of Christ's mystical body, then of his natural body. for they subject the same to the Pope, and exclude all from Christ, that are not subject to the Pope, the true members thereof they persecute, and make heretics and reprobates, and such as live without order or law, professing their religion outwardly, true members of Christ's body. the Church, say they, is always so conspicuous and visible, that every one may see it and discern it. the true marks of the church, that is, true doctrine, and the sincere administration of Sacraments, and holiness of life, they deny, assigning most common and uncertain marks, as unity, universality, antiquity, succession and such like.  
The Pope they make a most certain and infallible interpreter of Scriptures, and judge of matters of faith. they give him authority to make laws for the whole Church, and power to bind men's consciences. they make him more sovereign than a general Council, and say that his power in giving indulgences reacheth into purgatory. they say he hath power to excommunicate and depose kings, and to give away their kingdoms to others.  
Betwixt the Catholic church and Roman church they make no difference equalling a part to the whole. they say also, that the Roman church can neither err nor fail.  
The worship of God consisteth in spirit and truth, but they place the same in certain external rites and ceremonies, and in mere human inventions and devices. nay for God they worship creatures, not only giving divine honour to the Sacrament, but also to crucifixes and images of the Trinity made of wood, stone and colours. they do also adore not only saints, but rotten bones and rags, they know not of whom. to Saints they pray, they make vows, they confess their sins: to saints they erect churches and altars: to their images they burn incense and present divers oblations, and finally in the honour of Saints have devised particular masses and offices, transforming the Psalms and words of Scriptures to Angels and Saints.  
Their doctrine concerning the Sacraments is most exorbitant. for they do not only add unto water in Baptism salt, spittle, oil, and divers other ceremonies, partly idle, partly superstitious, but also unto the two Sacraments instituted by Christ, they equal confirmation, matrimony, penance, orders, and extreme unction, making them Sacraments, as well as Baptism or the Lord's Supper. in Confirmation they have devised both a new sign and new words. in extreme Unction they have devised new forms. in the ordering of Priests they say, accipe potestatem offerendi sacrisicium in ecclesia pro vivis & mortuis, that is, receive power to offer sacrifice in the church for quick and dead. in Penance they urge a necessity of confession, strange forms of whipping, and uncertain hopes and new devices of satisfaction. from Matrimony they exclude Priests, monks and friars, and make it a Sacrament, albeit they know neither certain signs, nor words of the institution of it. but the institution of the Lords supper they have quite abolished. for that which Christ ordained to be received of the Communicants, that the mass-priest doth offer for quick & dead, and in the honour of Saints and Angels, of which there is not one word spoken in the institution. our Saviour in bread and wine instituted his last supper. these neither leave bread nor wine, but make Christians eaters of man's flesh, and drinkers of man's blood like the cannibals, & Cyclopes. Christ ordained this Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion. these make of the same a sacrifice in honour of Angels and Saints. the cup of the new testament they take from Christians, abrogating, as much as in them lieth, the new testament established in Christ's blood. and yet they say Christians sin mortally, if they hear not Mass every Sunday and holiday.  
Of grace they speak, as men devoid of grace, and knowledge. for by grace, by which we are saved, and made acceptable to God, they understand nothing else but either charity, or a habit not distinct from Charity. so that albeit they exclude not grace from the work of our salvation, yet making grace a habit or virtue, they overthrow grace, and ascribe the merit of our salvation, not to God's mercy through Christ, nor to the merit of his Passion, but properly to our own works and merits. divers of them say that men are predestinated for their merits foreseen, and all hold, that men were reprobated for their sins foreseen before. they say further, that the vnregenerat hath free-will as well as the regenerate, and that not only in matters of this life, but also to do works of piety and other supernatural effects.  
The doctrine of faith they have also much corrupted. for they make Charity the form of faith, as if faith were without form or life of itself, and as if the just man did not live by faith. to this purpose they say that not only wicked and reprobat men, but also the devils of hell may have true and justifying faith. they hold further, that by faith we are not only to hold whatsoever is contained in holy scriptures, but also whatsoever is delivered by tradition, or determined by the Pope. and lastly that no man is to believe, that he shall assuredly be saved, but rather to hold, that he that is truly justified, may be damned.  
Concerning the law of God they teach both contrary to reason and law. for first they cut out the 2. commandment in their offices of our Lady and their primers, because it cannot well stand with the Popish worship of images. secondly they teach that concupiscence without our consent is not sin, albeit the law say, non concupisces. thirdly they say, that it is sin as well to transgress the Pope's decrees, as God's laws. four they believe, that the Pope is able either to dissolve the law, as for example, where he absolveth subjects from their obedience to princes, and children from their duty to parents, or at the least to dispense with the transgressors of the law, as for example, with perjured persons, adulterers, Sodomites, murderers, assassinors, thieves, sacrilegious persons and such like. fifthly they believe that a man is able perfectly to fulfil the law. of which it followeth that man is able to live without all sin, which as Augustine showeth lib. 4. de bono perseverat. c. 2. & 5, and Hierome adverse. Pelag. is flat Pelagianisme.  
In their doctrine of prayers they offend much. yet is the practice of Papists far worse, than their doctrine in this point. our Saviour teacheth us to go to his father in his name: they go to God by the intercession of Saints. nay oftentimes they run to Saints, Angels, and the blessed Virgin without once thinking of God, especially if they think no more than they utter in their prayers. they pray in a tongue which they understand not, which is rather prating than praying. they pray for remission of sins for the dead, not knowing whether they be damned or no. they pray before stocks and stones. nay they put their trust in them. for if this were not so, why should they hope for better success at the image of our Lady of Loreto or Monserat, than at any other image or form of our Lady?  
They believe, that alms satisfy for sins, and that those are best bestowed, that are given to Monks and Friars, and such idle vagabonds and plagues of states: whereas the first overthroweth Christ's merits and satisfaction, the second is an occasion of all the mischiefs brewed by these moths of religion, and blemishes of state.  
They teach, that it is mortal sin, not to fast on Saints vigiles, embre days, and other times appointed by the Pope, and that fasting standeth in eating fish, and abstaining from our suppers and such observances, and finally that such fasts do not only satisfy for sins, but also merit heaven.  
Conscience they know not. for they make no conscience to cut Christian men's throats for not yielding to all their abominations, and think it conscience to obey the Pope's decrees, though very unlawful.  
Neither can they well avoid sin, that know not what sin is. The virgin Mary by most of them is acquitted from original sin. and they define sin to be, not only the transgression of the law of God, but also every transgression of the law of the Pope; nay every breach of the law of man, which utterly taketh away the difference betwixt the laws of God and man.  
Of the state of souls departed they seem to know little truly, although some say, they know too much. for they do not say as we do, that there are two ways after this life, the one of the faithful to eternal life, the other of the wicked to eternal death, but they say, that some go into purgatory, and others into limbus puerorum. and out of purgatory they say souls are delivered partly by masses, and partly by indulgences.  
All these points of erroneous & false doctrine, and all others, which either contrary, or beside the word of God, the Pope, and his complices have invented, and brought into the church of Rome, we call Popery. and this is the subject of this discourse, and the doctrine against which we dispute. let no man therefore think, because the Papists maintain many points of Christian religion, that either we reprehend that truth, which they and we defend, or that they can defend the errors of Popery, because they hold some truth. but either let them justify their errors; or else they shall be forced to confess, that the proper doctrine of Popery is wicked and erroneous.   

CHAP. II. Of the grounds and foundations of Popish religion.  
AS Popery is divers from Christian religion, so hath the same other foundations than Christian religion. The doctors of Trent in the fourth session of that synod having pronounced them anathema, that shall not receive all the books of the Bible, as they are found in the old Latin vulgar translation, and read in the church of Rome, for holy and canonical, or that shall wittingly contemn the traditions of that church, do signify that this is the foundation of the confession of faith, which they meant to publish. so it appeareth they ground their faith beside canonical scriptures upon apocryphal writings of Tobiah, judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees, and divers fragments of books not found in the Hebrew text of the Bible, and upon traditions not written, but delivered from hand to hand from the Apostles, as they say, and so come to their hands. but where they speak of scriptures, it is to be observed, that they do not simply allow them, but as they are contained in the old vulgar translation, and as they are expounded by the Church of Rome. those which under any pretence do reject the old translation, or use any interpretation contrary to the Romish Churches meaning, they condemn.  
Stapleton in his book entitled Principia doctrinalia doth deliver unto us seven grounds or principles of his religion. the first is the Church, the second the Pope, the third the means used by the Pope in judgement, the fourth the Pope's infallibility in judgement, the fifth his power in taxing the canon of Scriptures, the sixth his certain interpretation of Scriptures, the seventh his power in delivering doctrine not written. these I say are his grounds and principles absurdly devised, confusedly disposed, and ridiculously propounded, as God willing, shall be showed otherwhere. now it is sufficient to declare, that whatsoever he babbleth elsewhere of scriptures, counsels & fathers, yet here they are all suppressed in this division, or at the least concealed under the name of the Church, or Pope, which in his preface to Gregory the 13. he calleth supremum numen in terris, that is, the supreme God of the world, and who to him is all in all. likewise in his preface to his relection of doctrinal principles, he seemeth directly to exclude the scriptures. Christianae religionis fundamentum habemus saith he, ab ipsis literis apostolicis & evangelicis uliud. that is, we have another foundation of Christian religion divers from the writings of the Apostles & Prophets. if he exclude not scriptures, yet he admitteth them no otherwise, than according to the interpretation of the Pope, and his complices. nay without the Pope's declaration he doth tediously discourse, that Christians are not to receive the canon of scriptures.  
The decretal epistles of the Pope no doubt they admit for the foundation of their faith. for in the rubric of their decrees c. in canonicis. dist. 19 they do determine that the Pope's decretales are to be numbered among canonical scriptures. inter canonicas scripturas, say they, decretales epistolae connumerantur. likewise Gelasius c. sancta Romana. dist. 15. defineth that the Pope's decretal epistles are to be received with veneration.  
In the same decretal Gelasius authorizeth the Roman martyrologue or legends of martyrs. neither can Kellison, or his kettle companions deny this to be one of the grounds of his rammish, I would say Romish religion, seeing these martyrologes and legends contain divers traditions, which the conventicle of Trent will have all Papists to receive with equal affection to scriptures.  
Canus lib. 1. loc. theolog. c. 1. assigneth ten places, out of which he saith, divines are to draw arguments. the first is the authority of scriptures. the second the authority of traditions not written. the third is the authority of the catholic church. the fourth the authority of counsels. the fifth the authority of the church of Rome. where we are to note that more honestly than his companions he maketh the church of Rome to differ from the Catholic church. the sixth is the authority of ancient fathers. the seventh the authority of Romish school doctors. the eighth natural reason. the ninth the authority of Philosophers. the tenth the authority of writers of stories. so we see how he buildeth his faith upon men, as well as upon God, and matcheth traditions not written with the most divine writings of the Prophets and Apostles, and conjoineth the authority of counsels and fathers, nay of schoolmen and Philosophers with the testimony of holy scriptures framing to us rather an human than a divine foundation of Christian faith.  
Martin Perez a plain dealing Papist knowing, that all those points of doctrine, which are in controversy betwixt his fellows and us, are grounded rather upon tradition then scripture, doth entitle his whole discourse of these matters, de traditionibus, that is, a discourse of traditions.  
Finally Bellarmine lib. 2. de Pontif. Rom. cap. 31. doth call the Pope the foundation of the building of the church, Fundamentum aedisicij ecclesiae, and in his preface before his books de pontisice Rom. he saith, that the seat of Peter, or the Pope's chair, is the approved stone, the corner, and precious stone placed in the foundation, of which the Prophet I say speaketh. c. 8. and 28. and with him concurreth Sanders in his book of the Rock of the church. Stapleton also declareth the matter most plainly in praefat. in relect. princip. doctr. where he saith, that the foundation of the knowledge of Christian religion is necessarily placed in the authority of the Pope teaching us, in whom he saith, he heareth God speaking to us. his words are, in hac docentis hominis authoritate (he speaketh of the Pope) in qua deum loquentem audimus religionis nostrae cognoscenda fundamentum necessariò pom credimus. and this others must necessarily also hold. for they hold him to be the supreme interpreter of scriptures, and an infallible judge of all controversies of religion, and a lawgiver to our consciences, binding all men's consciences by his laws; which is the common opinion, as Bellarmine lib. 4. de Pontifice Rom. c. 16. saith of all casuistes. a pitiful case therefore it is, wherein the Papists stand, whose consciences are chained with so many bonds.  
This then being found in the survey of the grounds of Popish religion, let us also consider what conclusions may be hence inferred, that we may as well survey the conclusions as the premises. First it followeth, that these grounds being blasphemous both in regard of the spirit of God which is the enditer and author of holy scriptures, and also in regard of Christ jesus, the foundation of the church and finisher of our saith, the doctrine and religion of Popery cannot be clear of blasphemy. for to match Popish decretales with holy scriptures, and the Pope's determination with God's law, is derogatory to God's holy spirit, and a plain disparagement to God's holy law. likewise it is blasphemous to accuse the holy scriptures of insufficiency and imperfection, and to attribute more certainty and perspicuity to the decretales of the Pope, then to the laws of God. it is also blasphemous either to remove Christ out of the foundation of the church, or at the least to join the Pope with him in the foundation, and that as a more necessary foundation for the knowledge of Christian religion, as Stapleton saith. the same also is directly contrary to the words of the Apostle. 1. Cor. 3. Ephes. 2. and of S. james. c. 4. in the first of which places we find, that no other foundation can be laid of the church, but Christ jesus. in the 2. we read, that the Church is founded upon the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. in the 3. we understand, that there is only one Lawgiver and judge, which is able to save and destroy. it is finally very impious and blasphemous to assirme, that the Pope is a more certain and superior judge, than God himself speaking to us in scriptures, or then the Apostles and Prophets, that were led into all truth by the spirit of God. of other blasphemies of Popery we shall have further occasion to speak hereafter.  
Secondly seeing the Papists are not certain of their grounds, it must needs follow, that the religion of Papists is most uncertain. that they cannot be certain of their grounds divers arguments declare. for neither are they certain whether Clement, Leo, or any other sitting in the Pope's chair be true Pope. nor can they assure themselves, whether the decretales, which go under the names of Popes, were indeed their decretales, whose names they carry. Antonius Contius a learned Papist in a certain annotation of his added to the ch. sancta. dist. 15. in Plantins edition, saith, that all the decretales set out under names of Popes before Silvester, are false. and this he saith he hath showed manifestly. further it cannot be proned, that all the determinations of the Popes are right and equal. nay contrary, we have by divers most certain demonstrations proved, that both concerning scriptures, faith, the law, sacraments, prayer, the worship of God, and divers points of faith they have determined contrary to the rule of saith, as shall hereafter more particularly appear. Thirdly it were plain impudency to say, that the Apostles instituted the consecration of the Paschal Lambs, the form of hallowing of churches, salt, water, and all Popish trinkets, the form of praying upon beads, and the rest of the Romish traditions. neither shall Kellison ever be able to justify all those reports, which his teachers have received by tradition, and publicly heretofore set forth, and now read out of their legends. Fourthly divers of those 84. canons, which go under the names of the Apostles are disclaimed by the Papists themselves, and the rest cannot be proved, that they were made by the Apostles. of the acts of the Nicene Council the Papists themselves have no certainty. Most confess 20. as Ruffian, and Pope Stephen, & others in c. vigint. dist. 16. Gratian under the testimony of Athanasius telleth us of 70. c. septuaginta dist. 16. now one Alphonsus a pisa a jebusite hath published 80. canons. the acts of the council supposed to be held under Silvester Bishop of Rome are all counterfeit, as the barbarous style, and strange form of government represented in those acts, and divers barbarous names and other arguments do signify. sometimes Peter Crabbe the collector of counsels doth set down divers acts of counsels not only differing, but also repugnant one to another. fifthly divers books are set forth under the name of fathers, that no man can certainly say were written by the fathers, whose names they carry. Nay some of them do contain doctrine contrary to the faith professed by the fathers. sixtly they are not certain either what is the sense of the Roman church, divers doctors yielding divers interpretations of scriptures, or what is the old Latin translation. for Sixtus Quintus setteth out the old vulgar Latin translation after one sort, and Clement the eight after another. and he that alloweth the translation of Sixtus Quintus must needs condemn that of Clement the eight, & contrariwise. finally seeing divers Papists assign divers grounds of their faith, and scarce two of many do agree in all points concerning their foundations and the assurance of them; how can they pretend either unity, or certainty in their religion?  
Thirdly the foundations of Popery being laid upon false decretals, and lying legends, hardly shall our adversaries be able to deny their religion to be false, and full of lies. that the Popes do in their decretales report notorious lies it is apparent by the decretal set out under the name of Innocentius. c. quis nesciat. dist. 11. where he denieth, that any taught or gathered churches in France, Spain, Africa, Italy beside S. Peter, and those which were sent by him and his successors. and likewise by the decretal of Gregory the 4. c. in praeceptis, dist. 12. where it is said, that all causes are to be referred to the church of Rome, as to the head, and from thence to receive direction, from whence it received his beginning. and by the chapter in novo. dist. 21. where it is said, that the rest of the Apostles made Peter their Prince, and infinite others. that the legends, which are the ground and receptacle of many traditions, are full of lies I have showed else where. if Kellison the Survey or deny this, let him prove unto us, that S. George killed a dragon ready to devour the king's daughter of Silena, and conquered Palestine; that Catharine overcame 50. Philosophers, and converted the Empress and the general of the emperor's army, and broke a wheel with her prayers, that with turning killed 4000 pagans. that S. Nicholas being an infant fasted Wednesdays and Fridays. that Bernacus yoked hearts. that Saint Brendan sailed into Paradise. that a crucifix of wood resaluted Bartilmew a monk of Durrham, that the blessed Virgin's body was carried into heaven by Angels, that her house was carried over the seas first into Dalmatia, and then into Italy, and lastly to Loreto, and the rest of those tales.  
Fourthly, the Pope being the foundation of the church, it followeth, that as oft as the Pope dieth, the church is without foundation. it followeth also that the Pope going to hell, as it appeareth by the chap. Sipapa. dist. 40. that he may, the foundation of the Church should lie in hell. that the Pope falling into heresy, as Liberius, Honorius 1. john the 22. and divers others have done, that the Church should fail; which be matters absurd, and impious to affirm.  
Fifthly, seeing divers old traditions are now out of use, as for example, that of celebrating baptism at Easter, and praying standing betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide, and of praying with our faces turned to the East, and such like, it must needs be granted, that the foundations of Popery are ruinous. for why may not the like happen to other traditions, as to these? and if traditions be temporary and ruinous, which they make equal to holy scriptures, what can they allege for the continuance and perpetuity of the Pope's decretales, which are not only contrary to holy Scriptures, but also repugnant one to another?  
Sixthly, the old translation differing from itself in the editions of Sixtus Quintus and Clement the eight and others set out at Colein, Louvain and Antwerp, and much more from the original books of the old Testament in Hebrew, and new in Greek, and the interpretations of the scriptures being so divers in the chief doctors of the Romish church, and so repugnant to the meaning of the holy Ghost, it doth necessarily follow, that Popish religion is composed of contrary pieces, and cannot be the faith of Christ, which is one, and hath only one firm foundation.  
Finally, there can be no consent or unity in the points of Popish doctrine, for that the same consisteth of contrary opinions of Popes, and is grounded upon contrary traditions, contrary legends, contrary interpretations of fathers and schoolmen, and either of traditions or decretales contrary to scriptures, or of sentences of father's contrary to decretales, and Romish traditions.   

CHAP. III. Of the wicked doctrine of Papists concerning the law of God, and the performance thereof.  
LOng it were to relate all the wicked and false doctrines of Popery in every point of Christian faith. beside that the same is performed largely by divers learned men in divers ample volumes. we will therefore here speak only of some principal points of religion, and show how they have been by our adversaries most notoriously abused and corrupted, and so proceed to entreat of the beginnings, proceed, impieties, falsities, contradictions, and other abuses and defects, that are generally found in Popery.  
First, than we find, that they have not only taught impiously of God's law, but also rejected the same for their own traditions. generally they hold that the Pope's laws bind in conscience, and that it is sin to transgress them. but if this were so, then were not the knowledge of sin by the law, as the Apostle teacheth us, neither were the law of God perfect, nor a certain rule of Christian life, nor were God the only lawgiver, that could save and destroy.  
Bellarmine lib. 1. de stat. peccat. c. 3. saith that there are certain sins, or transgressions of the law, so light and little, that they deserve not eternal death. but this doth frustrate the sanction or vigour of the law, that pronounceth them accursed, which continue not in all things, which are written in the book of the law to do them, as we read Galat. 3.  
The Scotists and most Papists now hold, that the Virgin Mary was neither conceived in sin, nor ever committed sin. but the Apostle Rom. 5, saith, that by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin went over all. and Galat. 3. he showeth how the scripture hath concluded all under sin.  
All of them hold, that in the regenerate concupiscence is no sin. yet can they not deny, but that concupiscence is forbidden by the law of God. and thereupon the jebusites in their censure of Colein deny all to be sin, that is repugnant to the law of God. Let Christians therefore imagine whether they will follow the Apostle, that showeth sin to be known by the law, and that concupiscence is sin, or the jebusites denying the same.  
The jebusites of Collein fol. 194. affirm, that what the law commandeth concerning the love of God with our whole heart, mind & soul, pertaineth not to us in this life. as if God had given a law to souls in the life to come, and not to men in this life. this error our Saviour confuteth Matth. 22. where he assoileth the Scribes question concerning the greatest commandment in the law.  
The same fellows fol. 48. affirm that a regenerate man is able to perform the law of God perfectly. but if this be so; then they are deep plunged in the heresy of the Pelagians, who were condemned for holding, that Christians are able to live without all sin.  
The Papists teach, that we are to be justified and saved by the works of the law. but the Apostle 2. Cor. 3. teacheth contrary, that the law is the minister of death.  
The law of God forbiddeth us the having of other gods beside him, in which commandment we are also forbidden to give the honour of God to creatures. but Papists beside God in heaven have a God on earth, as appeareth evidently by the chap. satis dist. 96. and divers glosses of canonists, and glozing flatteries of Papists. they worship the sacrament also as God, and Bellarmine lib. de monachis c. 14. doth call Saints Gods by participation. the honour of God they give to Saints and Angels, yea to the images of Christ, of the Cross, and of the Trinity. in the honour of Angels and Saints they say masses, and offices, they erect churches, altars, and images, and burn incense unto them. they call upon them, swear by them, make vows, and confess their sins unto them.  
The second law of the first table prohibiteth the making of graven images. to the intent to bow unto them, and to worship them. but Papists do both make them, and pray and crouch before them. they do also offer gifts, and burn incense unto them, as the heathen did to their idols. nay, which the heathen did never, they give the same honour to a picture of Christ, or of the Cross, or of the Trinity, which they give to God himself. praying to the Cross they say, o Cross of Christ protect me, o Cross of Christ defend me from all evil.  
The third law forbidden death perjury, the vain use of swearing, and all abuses of Gods holy name and word. but little is the same regarded by the Pope and his complices. for they do not only break their oaths, but also lightly dispense with perjured persons. Gregory the seventh, as in his life appeareth, forswore the papacy, and yet regarded not his oath. the like we find related of Pope Formosus. commonly they lose and assoil subjects from the bond of their oath to Princes. absoluit Gregorius 7. omnes a juramento, quos fidei tenuit obligatio, saith he that wrote the life of Henry the fourth. Paschal the second having solemnly sworn to the Emperor presently broke his oath, as we may see in Otho Frisingensis, and divers other historiographers. Gregory the twelsth, as Theodoric. à Niem testifieth tract. union 6. c. 29. was publicly accounted a perjured person, periurus publicus. Charles the French King, as Theodoric. à Niem tract. union. 6. c. 14. testifieth, chargerh Gregory the twelfth and Peter de luna with perjury. violaverunt sidem, fregerunt votum, promissum non tenuerunt. and again o magnum & scelestum facinus! saith he speaking of their perjuries. Innocent the seventh having vowed and sworn to unite the papacy, would not do it. notwithstanding his oath, as we read tract. union 6. c. 39 quam vovit, & iuravit facere noluit unionem. in the conventicle of Constance it was decreed by this wicked synagogue, that oaths and promises were not to be holden being made to heretics. the perjury of Ladislaus, which Eugenius the fourth induced him unto, cost the loss of many men's lives. Gulcciardine histor. lib. 8. doth testify, that the Pope decreed, that it should be lawful, to recall all covenants and promises made by the Pope's predecessors. that impious fellow Pius the 5. in his Bull against Queen Elizabeth of pious memory did excommunicate such, as would not take arms against her. and yet her subjects were sworn to obey her. all Papists commonly are great swearers and forswearers. in the Roman Catechism in 2. mandat. they complain that their people were given to swearing and cursing. Quis non videat, say they, omnia jure iurando assirmari, omnia imprecationibus & execrationibus referta esse? they swear by saints, bread, salt, and other creatures, infringing God's commandment Deut. 6. that requireth men to swear by his name. Finally the Popes and their complices most shamefully wrest and turn scriptures, making them serve to their humours and pleasures.  
The fourth commandment concerneth the sanctifying of the Sabbath. but the Papists profane it by worshipping Idols, and frequenting the idolatrous mass. julius the second upon the solemn day of Easter fought a bloody battle with the French at Ravenna, and the Duke of Guise upon the sabbath massacred the Saints of God at Vassi. and so little do they respect the Lords honour, that they make more account of our ladies festivals, and of the days of Francis, Dominicke, and Thomas Becket, then of the Lords day.  
The fifth commandment requireth obedience of children to parents, and of subjects to princes. yet Gregory the seventh, Paschall the second, Alexander the third and divers Popes by their decretales have armed the son against the father, and the subject against his prince. neither was the late league of the French rebels against Henry the third and Henry the fourth set forward and confirmed by other more, then by the Pope. the Popes of Rome stirred up rebellion against Henry the eight in England, and against Queen Elizabeth both in England and Ireland. Allen and Parsons in their wicked libel against Queen Elizabeth directed to the nobility and people of England and Ireland endeavour by all means to persuade her subjects to rebellion, and to lay violent hands upon her. Cardinal Como in his letters to Parry, that came into England with a full resolution to murder the Queen, doth promise in the Pope's name not only indulgence and pardon for his sins, but also reward on earth and merit in heaven.  
The sixth commandment forbiddeth murder. But Papists think they do God good service, when they murder true Christians. from this fountain have proceeded all their cruel executions in England, France, Italy, Germany, Spain and other countries. Natalis Come; in his history testifieth that in the massacre of France An. D. 1572. they murdered above sixty thousand of all sorts of persons. their garments are died in the blood of innocentes. nay they cruelly poison and murder those of their own religion, if they be opposite unto them in faction. Gregory the seventh caused not only bloody wars to be stirred up against the Emperor, but tormented, and murdered such, as he pleased at Rome. Alexander the sixth for every word put men to death. julius the second promised reward to him, that could kill a Frenchman, as Budaeus de Ass testifieth. but as Lactantius saith massacring and piety cannot stand together. longè diversa sunt carni ficina & pietas, nec potest aut veritas cum vi, aut justitia cum crudelitate coniungi.  
The seventh commandment as it forbiddeth adultery, fornication, Just, and all uncleanness; so it requireth purity of life, and chaste and undefiled behaviour. but among Papists adultery and fornication is reckoned among lesser sins, as appeareth by the Chapter, & si clerici. de judicijs. the Pope permitteth whores in Rome and exacteth tribute of them, as is notoriously known to the world. the same is also testified by the gloss of the constitution provincial beginning with the word licet. de concubine. cleric. removendis. by Agrippa de vanit. scient. c. de lenocinio. by Sansonino lib. dei governi. c. corte de Roma and divers others. of late in the castle of Wisbich among the jebusites and mass-priests one defended, that whores were in Rome cum approbatione, and with as good authority as any citizen, or as the Pope of Romc. the Popes and their complices disallow honest wedlock of priests, and yet allow, or at the least wink at such, as keep concubines and whores. Theodoric à Niem tract. v. nemoris unionis c. 33. showeth that in Gascoigne, Spain, Portugal and other countries it was lawful for Popish Bishops and Priests to keep concubines.  
The commandment against theft as Canisius in his catechism confesseth c. de decalogo forbiddeth also usury, simony, rapine, sacrilege and all unjust gain. yet usury and simony yield no small revenues to the Pope's coffers. the history of Matthew Paris doth in every king's reign declare infinite pillages what by usury, what by simony committed in England by the Popes. speaking of Gregory the ninth his factors he saith, they vexed England by usury, per Caursinos & usurarios Angliam vexarunt. he saith also how they held usury for a little fault, and simony for none. usuram pro parvo, simoniam pro nullo inconueniente reputavit, saith he speaking of the Pope's agent. Felin showeth, that without the rent of Simony the church of Rome would come to contempt. in Rome of late times the Popes have erected divers banks of usury, called monti di pieta, as appeareth in Onuphrius in the lives of julius the third, Paul the fourth, and Pius the fourth, and there money was to be had for ten or twelve in the hundred, and sometime for less. Urban the sixth, as Theodoric à Niem lib. 1. de schism. c. 22. testifieth, sold chalices, crosses and images. the same man doth make strange reports of the practices of Boniface the ninth to get money. omnia benesicia vendidit. si non potuit habere pecunias, accepit porcos, sues etc. lib. 2. de schism. c. 10. he saith he sold all benefices, and when he could not have money he took pigs, cattle, and such wares. the merchants of Babylon now take money for masses, sacraments, and indulgences, and extort both from quick and dead. the secular Priests charge the jebusites to be most cunning fellows in extorting of money. in Spain they have a rhyme showing, that they have turned all God's commandments into practices of gain, es el primero ganar dinero, that is, the first commandment is to get money. all God's commandments they have turned into these two, Todo para mi, nada para vos. all for me, nought for you.  
The ninth commandment doth directly forbid false witness, and whatsoever is under that contained, as lying, detraction, and all lewd speeches tending to the hurt or disgrace of our neighbour. but the Papists, as if lying, slandering, and bearing false witness had been commanded, so forge and falsify scriptures, fathers, counsels, histories and all good authors, as their expurgatory tables, sergeant decretal epistles, and false allegations of bastard authors and others do testify, and shall more at large be declared hereafter. their late books also are full of execrable lies and slanders against M. Wickliff, M. Husse, Hierome of prague, Luther, Caluin, Zuinglius, Melancthon, and all the professors of truth. the Pope he hireth men to speak lies & slanders, and his complices delight to hear them. Allen and Parsons in their resolutions of cases of conscience teach their disciples, how to dissemble, lie, and forswear themselves cunningly. the canonists and other the Pope's parasites call him a god on the earth, the head and spouse of the church, and bear him in hand, that he cannot err.  
Finally where the last law saith, thou shalt not covet, the conventicle of Trent teacheth, that concupiscence is no sin. the Papists hold also, that it is less sin for Friars & mass-priests to lust, and commit fornication in thought, than to marry. the Popes of Rome, have not only coveted, but also usurped divers parts of the Empire. and thus hoping to be saved by the law, the Papists not only by their practice, but also by their doctrine overthrow the law. the Pope by his dispensations annuleth and frustrateth the law. his complices more regard the Pope's decretales, than the eternal law of the living God.  
This law of God they say may be perfectly performed by the assistance of God's grace. and as touching the substance of the action, they hold that it may be performed without grace, ex quo efficitur saith Bellarmine lib. 5. de lib. arbit. c. 9 totam Dei legem absque auxilio gratiae quoad substant iam actionis ab hominibus recte servari posse. in the same book c. 2. he saith that without any special help of God man may know veritatem moralem or the moral law, with the circumstances thereof. which is not only contrary to scriptures, declaring man's weakness and blindness, but also overthroweth the necessity of God's grace. for if man without grace both knoweth the truth, and is able according to the substance of the action to perform the law, then is he not dead in trespasses and sins, as the Apostle saith, nor do the Papists believe in Christ, which saith, without me you can do nothing. doth it not then appear that popery is false, erroneous, and repugnant to God's law, & the ancient faith, in the doctrine of the law?   

CHAP. FOUR Of the damnable doctrine of Papists concerning faith and justification.  
THe Apostle teacheth us, that the just shall live by faith. but the Papists do so handle the doctrine of faith, that the same cannot quicken any, but is like rather to be the occasion of the fall and death of many. first they teach that justifying faith is nothing else, but a firm assent to the word of God. but if a firm assent to every word of God do justify, then are Christians justified by believing that there is a Devil, as well as believing that there is a God, and as well are they justified by believing the curses of the law, as believing that grace and mercy is offered them in jesus Christ. nay as well may the Devils have justifying saith, as faithful Christians. for they do give their assent to the word of God, and believe, that he is truth. but these are most damnable doctrines.  
Secondly they say, that Christians are as well to believe the traditions of the church not written, as the holy scriptures. the doctors of Trent will have both received, with equal affection. the authors of the censure of Colleinsol. 91. teach Christians to believe, not only such things as are revealed in scriptures, but also such points as are delivered from hand to hand. but if this be granted, then will it follow, that Christians are as well to believe the Pope, or the Church of Rome, as God himself. and that faith is built upon man's word, and not only upon the word of God. and lastly that faith is built not only upon uncertainties, but also upon falsehood. for such are the traditions of the church of Rome. many are uncertain, and some very false and erroneous; as is particularly showed in divers treatises, against Romish traditions.  
Thirdly they teach, that faith is a gift and light, by which a man being illustrated doth firmly assent & adhere to those things, which are revealed by God, and proposed to us by the Church. est Dei donum & lumen saith Canisius Cathechismi c. 1. quo illustrate us homo firmiter assentitur atque adhaeret ijs, quae ut credantur sunt divinitus revelata, & ab Ecclesiae nobis proposita. now by the church they understand the Pope, and church of Rome. but of this it followeth first, that the Church of Rome hath no faith. for how can a Church propose and teach matters to itself? this doth utterly destroy the nature of relations, and therefore I think the learned Romanists will hardly confess this to be true. it followeth next, that Christians are neither to believe in Christ, nor to profess the articles of the faith, unless the Pope and Church of Rome propose them unto us. but this is most absurd and impious. for we believe in God, and not in the Pope, nor in the Church adhering to him. that these consequents are good it is evident, because they no less require that the articles of faith be proposed to us by the Church of Rome, than that they be revealed by God.  
Fourthly as well doth Canisius require, that Christians believe, that the whole body of Christ be contained in the eucharist, as Papists do hold it, as the article of the Trinity, the creation of the world, and Christ's incarnation. for all these articles he joineth together Catech. c. 1. §. 4. but he could not say worse, if he meant to overthrow the whole Christian faith. for the Popish real presence of Christ's body & blood in the sacrament is contrary to Christ's meaning, to words of scriptures, exposition of fathers, the nature of sacraments, and to human reason and fence, as at large is justified in my books de missa against Bellarmine.  
Fifthly they teach, that the wicked and reprobate, nay that the devils of hell may have true faith. but our Saviour Christ saith john 3. that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. so it followeth by the doctrine of Papists, that the reprobate, and the devils of hell may be saved.  
Sixthly they affirm, that charity is the form of faith. but the Apostle teacheth us, that the just do live by faith; of which it followeth that faith hath a form of itself, whereby it quickeneth us. furthermore it is an absurd thing to make one virtue or habit the form of another. and if this were tolerable, that one quality were the form of another, yet would it seem far more probable, that faith should be the form and life of charity and works, for that without faith it is not possible to please God, than that charity should be the form of faith, which doth follow of faith.  
Seventhly the jebusites of Collein fol. 122. teach that faith is only of general propositions, and hope of particulars. so it followeth of their doctrine, that no Christian ought to believe, that he or any other particular person hath his sins forgiven, or is of the body of the church, or shall be saved. but if this were true, then do not the jebusites believe, that themselves shall rise again, or appear in judgement. further, then can they not believe that Pope Clement, or Leo, or Paul is the head of the church, or that they are to subject themselves unto him, or that this particular Church of Rome is the true Church, and such other particular propositions.  
Eightly they teach, that we are not justified by the remission of sins, or by imputation of Christ's righteousness. but the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. showeth, that Christ is made to us justice, wisdom, sanctification and redemption. and that Abraham, believing it was imputed to him for righteousness. the Prophet Isaias cap. 53. showeth that by his stripes we are healed.  
9 They say that we are justified by the law, and by the works there of. but the Apostle Gal. 3. saith it is manifest that no man is justified by the law before God. and Rom. 4. he showeth, that Abraham was not justified by the works of the law. doth it not then manifestly appear, that these false Apostles of Antichrist teach doctrine contrary to the Apostle, and are not the children of Abraham, or partakers of his faith?  
10 Thomas Aquinas 2.2. q. 4. art. 3. teacheth that Christians are not bound to confess their faith at all times. and this his followers diligently practise, that by their wicked teachers are taught to aequiuocate and dissemble their faith and profession. but true Christians are always boldly to profess their faith, and to yield a reason of the same. for this is the doctrine of the Apostle S. Peter, whom we are rather to credit, than these false Apostles.  
11 For a lay man to dispute of matters of faith they count it mortal sin, especially knowing that the Pope hath forbid the same under pain of excommunication, as Navarrus teacheth enchirid. c. 11. but this showeth, that Papists do rather seek to suppress the faith then to teach matters of faith. the same also appeareth, for that they commend ignorance, and Thomas Aquinas 2.2. q. 2. art. 6. saith, that all are not bound to have explicit faith. Linwood in his gloss upon the constitution beginning ignorantia de summa Trinit. holdeth that it is sufficient for lay men and simple people to believe the articles of the Creed implicitly, or to believe as the Catholic Church believeth. and this is the faith that Hosius commended in the collier. but it showeth, that our adversaries seek to entertain the people in ignorance of matters of faith, while the mass-priests sport and entertain themselves with all delights, and living idly reap the fruits of poor men's labours.  
12 Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 7. art. 3. denieth that Christ hath faith. which is as much, as if he should make Christ the author of our faith a Pagan and an Infidel. further the same overthroweth the Popish definition of faith. for either Christ did not firmly believe God's word, or else he had faith. now to say that is, plain blasphemy. neither is that defence material, that Christ knew all things by reason of the hypostatical union of two natures in one person. for that did not overthrow his human nature, nor hinder him for having faith without all imperfection.  
Finally they teach, that the Pope only is to order, and to publish the Creed. for that is the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas 2. 2. q. 1. art. 10. and the rest, no question, believe it. but it is sufficient to overthrow not only the Nicene and Constantinopolitan confession, but also the Apostles Creed and faith of Christ. for whatsoever face our adversaries do set on matters, they shall never show, that these ancient Creeds did either depend upon the authority of the Pope, or were by him ordered, published, or confirmed. nay many Popes we read of, which, for any thing we can understand, did not believe the Apostles Creed. upon this weak foundation of infidel Popes the miserable Papists do build their windshaken faith. we do not therefore marvel, if they rely more upon works, than this faith, and if they trust rather to be justified by good works, than the Pope's erroneous faith. but if they would consider what true faith is, and how the same apply Christ unto us, and uniteth us unto him, than would they abandon the errors of Popery, of which we have given a taste in this article of justification by faith in Christ.   

CHAP. V What Papists do mean by the Gospel.  
THe preaching of the Gospel to Christians is the gladsome declaration of God's favour offered to us through Christ jesus. and therefore the Angel Luc. 2. speaking of the Saviour of the world, declared, that he brought them tidings of great joy that should be to all people. but the Papists by their new and strange doctrine do so confound the law and the gospel, as if they sought to deprive Christians of this joy, and meant to alter the title of Christ's most joyful Gospel. for first, as if Christ had not been a Saviour, or a Redeemer, but a lawgiver, that was to propound a new law, wherewith Christians were to be newly charged, they call the Gospel the new law. but neither is the law of Moses contained in the two tables abolished, nor was it Christ's intention to surcharge his people with new laws and new bonds, but to free them from the curse of the law, and to redeem them. as for the orders concerning sacraments we may not repute them to be properly laws, but means and directions for the right applying of God's graces unto Christians. further the new law that God speaketh of was written in men's hearts, as we read Hierem. 31. and Heb. 8. but the laws of the new Testament, which the Papists speak of, are partly written in scriptures, and partly in decretales. the Papists therefore making Christ a new lawgiver do overthrow his covenant of grace.  
Secondly this new Law or Testament, as they say, is the love of God shed into our hearts. for so doth Bellarmine teach lib. 1. de verb. dei. c. 3. but grant this, and then the new testament doth not include remission of sins. for love is one thing, and remission of sins another. but that the new testament doth include remission of sins, first our Saviour doth signify, where he calleth the cup of thanksgiving, the cup of the new testament for remission of sins; and Chrysostome in 2. Cor. 3. and Theodoret, Oecumenius, and Theophylact upon the same place directly affirm.  
Thirdly, Thomas Aquinas 1.2. q. 107. art. 4. saith, that the precepts of the new law (or of the Gospel) as touching the inward works of virtue, are more grievous than the precepts of the law of Moses. quantum ad opera virtutum, saith he in actibus interioribus etc. praeceptanovae legis sunt graviora. this is directly contrary to the words of our Saviour Math 11. my yoke saith he, is easy, and my burden light. furthermore the same maketh the Gospel not to be a doctrine of Christian liberty and redemption, but of bondage and grievance.  
Fourthly, the censurers of Collein fol. 204. say, that this is the proper doctrine of the Gospel, if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. and with them in effect doth Bellarmine lib. 1. de verb. dei. c. 3. consent, where he saith, that the new testament is nothing, but Charity shed into our hearts by the holy Ghost. but this confoundeth the law and the Gospel. for no man can deny, but that Charity is required by the law. further the same is contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles. the law, saith the Apostle Rom. 4. worketh wrath. and ephes. 2. he saith we are saved by faith, and that not of ourselves, for that it is the work of God, not of works, lest any should boast. but our adversaries confess that Charity is a work, and not without the cooperation of free-will. the fathers also teach otherwise. Hierome dial. adverse. Pelag. opposing the law to the Gospel, showeth that the foundation of works is laid on the law, but that the building of faith and grace is laid upon the same in the Gospel. Theophylact. in praefat. evangel. showeth us, that the Gospel doth declare to us good things, as remission of sins etc. and that we obtain them without our labour. sinally herein the Papists descent from their master Peter Lombard sent 3. dist. 40. for he saith, the decalogue is a kill letter, but the decalogue requireth performance of all things commanded.  
Fifthly, Peter Lombard saith, that only earthly things were promised in the old testament, and only heavenly things in the new, as we read sent. 3. d. 40. but our Saviour Christ teacheth us to ask for our daily sustenance in the Gospel. and to those that performed Gods eternal law, eternal life was promised in the old testament. or else the reward had not been correspondent to the work.  
Sixthly, they teach generally, that there are three evangelical Counsels, to wit, of chastity, poverty, and obedience. as if these were the principal points of the Gospel, or as if the obedience to monkish rules, and forswearing of marriage, and giving all to monks were required of us in the Gospel. further it is absurd to think, that chastity, and renouncing all for God's sake, and perfect obedience is not commanded in the law of God.  
Seventhly the Friars purposing to overthrow Christ's Gospel, about the year of our Lord 1256. published another new Gospel, which they called evangelium aeternum. as if Christ's Gospel should continue but for a time, and their Gospel were to continue for ever. Of this Gospel thus writeth Matth. Paris in his collection for that year. Fratres noita quaedam praedicabant, legebant, & docebant deliramenta ex libris joachimi abbatis, incipitque eorum liber, evangelium aeternum etc. that is the Friars did preach, read & teach certain new fooleries out of the books of abbot joachim, and their book began thus, The eternal Gospel. so it appeareth what respect these fellows Faue of the Gospel of Christ. Nay albeit the book was most blasphemous; yet did not the Pope punish the authors, but only commanded the same to be abolished secretly.  
Finally all the comfort, that the Papists give their followers out of the Gospel is this, that Christ is the meritorious cause of our salvation, but the rest they assign to men's own labours and works, teaching them how to merit heaven by giving to Monks, and putting on friars cowls, and how they are to go on pilgrimage, and to buy indulgences, and how to pass through Purgatory. and this is the Gospel of Papists. of saith they talk only as of a disposition to justification, and little do they trust in Christ's mercy, flying to Angels, to our Lady, and Saints: and to Christ's justice, remitting our sins, and accepting us freely through faith in him, they give nothing.   

CHAP. VI Of the impious doctrine of Papists concerning Christ our Saviour.  
AS Christ is made unto us by God wisdom, justice, sanctification and redemption, so those which teach false doctrine concerning him do go about to turn our wisdom into foolishness, and to deprive us of true righteousness, holiness and redemption. but whether the Papists have done so or no, that resteth now to be discussed. we doubt not to challenge them, as infinitely guilty herein for first they say, that Christ was vir perfectus, a perfect man from the first instant of his conception. but this destroyeth not only the distinction of ages, but overthroweth Christ's human nature. for rules of reason teach us to distinguish children from men, and this is the course of nature. man is first conceived, then borne, than a child, and so in time he groweth a man of perfect years. the same is also contrary to scriptures, that show how Christ was conceived and borne, and was first an infant, and then a man of perfect age. this error proceeded of the false understanding of these words of the Prophet, mulier eircumdabit virum.  
Secondly Peter Lombard lib. 3. sent. 10. dist. teacheth that Christ as he is man, is not any thing, but in respect of the unity of the person. quidam dicunt, saith he, Christum secundum hominem non esse personam, nec aliquid, nisi forte secundum sit expressiwm unitatis personae. and this opinion he alloweth, and would have the distinction to be remembered. but all Christians that profess the faith of Christ, and rehearse the Creed of Athanasius confess, that he is not only somewhat as man, but also a perfect man. they also know, that the opinion of the master of schoolmen followed by divers overthroweth Christ's humanity.  
Thirdly, they take from Christ, both faith and hope, and all upon their vain conceit, that Christ was not viator, but comprehensor, that is, was not in the way, but always as man was glorified and enjoyed the vision of the Godhead. in Christo non fuit sides saith Thomas Aquinas. 3. p. q. 7. art. 4. ergo nec spes; that is, Christ had neither faith nor hope. he speaketh of Christ according to his human nature. and this opinion is commonly followed of others. so that which they falsely objected to Caluin, concerning the uttering of certain words of desperation, that doth rightly fall upon the Papists, who blasphemously make him not only a desperate man without hope, but also an infidel without faith.  
Fourthly the master of sentences lib. 3. dist. 1. determineth, that the Father and the holy Ghost might have been made man, and yet may. sicut filius homo factus est, ita puter vel spiritus sanctus potuit, & potest. as the son was made man, so likewise the father and holy ghost might and yet may. which is not far from the heresy of the Patripassians. for they held that the father did suffer death for us: these hold that he might have taken our nature upon him, and have suffered death for us.  
Fiftly, Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 3. art. 6. teacheth that the three persons in the Trinity might assume one human nature. tres personae divinae subsistunt uni naturae divinae, saith he, ergo possunt etiam uni naturae humanae subsistere. so he showeth that the Patripassians held no incommodious opinion, and introduceth an absurd heresy of the passion of the holy Ghost.  
Sixtly they hold, that the body of Christ may be in many, yea almost in insinit places at one time, and that the same is wont so to be. Multis adeoque ferè insinitis simul locis adesse potest & solet, saith Bellarmine lib. 3. de Christo c. 11. and so it must needs be, if his body be really present in every Popish altar, and consecrated host. but it implieth a contradiction to be continued, and not to be continued: both which do follow if a body, which is continua substantia, be discontinued in place.  
Seventhly, denying Christ to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and affirming that his divine essence had a beginning from some other, they fall within the compass of the error of the Tritheits, affirming that there is one essence not begotten, another begotten, another proceeding: which heresy doth tear the unity of the Godhead into pieces, and plainly make more Gods then one. so running with violence upon Caluin without cause, they run themselves out of breath, and fall headlong into most gross heresies.  
Eighthly, the schoolmen determine, that the son of God might have assumed any other nature beside that of man. of which it followeth, that as God was made man, so he might have been made a stone, or other creature. which is an opinion most blasphemous, and derogateth from the mystery of Christ his incarnation.  
9 They deny resolutely, that Christ as man profited in wisdom. but that is contrary to the words of the holy ghost, to the doctrine of the fathers and overthroweth his human nature. Ambrose in his book the incarnate. dom. sacrament. c. 7. saith that Christ did profit in human understanding. habet & in Christo scientia aetates suas, saith Tertullian lib. de pudicitia. that is, Christ's wisdom was divers according to divers ages. Maxentius in profess. fid. cath. saith, he profited in years and wisdom according to his human nature, and not according to his divinity.  
10 Generally they hold, that Christ's soul was omniscient, and not ignorant of any thing. but the scriptures show, that Christ according to his human nature was ignorant of the day of judgement, as we read Marc. 13. Nazianzen. lib. 2. de filio saith, he knew it as God, but was ignorant of it as man. neither doth this imply any imperfection, or defect. for than is ignorance a fault, and an imperfection, when we are ignorant of things, which we ought to know.  
11 The master of sentences lib. 3. dist. 6. saith that Christ as man by grace hath both all knowledge, and all power. sola gratia habuit ille homo, non meritis vel natura, ut osset Deus sive Dei silius, ut haberet omnem scientiam & potentiam, quam habet verbum, cum quo est una persona. now if Christ as man have all knowledge, and all power transfused into his human nature, why should the Papists condemn the Ubiquitaries, or how can they deny his presence in all places?  
12 By reason of their opinion of Christ's fruition of the vision of the Godhead, and his glorification, they affirm, that Christ was never troubled in soul with any perturbation or sadus. Christi anima iaminde ab initio, saith Bellarmine, omnibus alijs spiritus sancti donis ita repleta fuit, ut nulla unquam vera perturbatio aut tristitia locum in cahabuerit. lib. 4. de Christo. c. 2. but this doth cross the plain text of scripture. nunc anima mea perturbata est, that is, now my soul is troubled saith Christ. john 12. and Matth. 26. my soul is sad unto the death. and it taketh from Christ all human affection. Ambrose de fide ad Gratianum, sicut susceperat voluntatem meam, suscepit & tristitiam meam. as he hath taken our will, so he hath taken on him our sadness.  
13. Bonaventure in 3. sentent. dist. 15. saith that Christ in the time of his most bitter passion was in the greatest joy, that might be, in summo gaudio. but the scriptures do with divers words of great dolour express his passion. the Prophet saith he was broken for our iniquities, and that he was a man full of sorrows, and the fathers are full in describing of the bitterness of his sorrow. Thomas Aquinas also 3. q. 15. art. 6. holdeth, that there was in Christ true dolour, and true sadness. and the ordinary gloss in Psal. 87. ex persona Christi dicitur, repleta est malis anima mea. 1. doloribus. that is in the person of Christ it is said my soul is filled full of evils, that is of griefs. neither will the distinction of the sensitive, and reasonable soul serve for any cover of this error. for man's soul according to the essence thereof cannot be divided.  
14. That Christ hath satisfied the wrath of God for our sins the words both of the Prophets and Apostles do assure us, verè languores nostros ipse tulit saith the Prophet Isay c. 53. he hath truly borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows. the Apostle also saith, that we are reconciled to God by the death of his son. but the Papists do diminish the merit of Christ his satisfaction, and deny, that he hath satisfied for the temporal pains of our sins.  
15. Bellarmine lib. 4. de Christo c. 11. holdeth that the fathers before Christ were not freed from hell before he came from limbus patrum. but both scriptures and fathers teach us, that all the faithful were redeemed and delivered out of the hands of our enemies by the death of Christ upon the cross, and not by his harrowing of hell or limbus patrum. so it appeareth that they do eneruat, as much as in them lieth, the cross of Christ and the effect of his death and passion.  
16 Bellarmine lib. 4. de Christo c. 16. saith that Christ's soul for three days passed the place of the damned, and the receptacle of heathenish children. but neither do scriptures, nor fathers speak of any, that came out of the place of the damned, but rather the contrary. for the Prophet saith, that out of hell there is no redemption: and Origen is therefore placed among heretics, because he believed, that the devils and the damned should in the end be saved. are not these fellows then damned teachers, that place the Saviour of the world among the damned?  
17. the master of the sentences lib. 3. dist. 12. §. 3. doth ask the question, whether the man Christ could sin, and so be damned. non immerito quaeritur saith he, utrum homo ille potuerit peccare, vel non esse deus. and if he could sin, than he doubteth not, but he might also be damned, si potuit peccare, potuit damnari. in the end he concludeth wisely, that if the soul of Christ had not been united to the God head, he might have sinned. est sine ambiguitate verum, saith he, candem, si esset & non unita verbo, posse peccare. nay Durandus in 3. sent. dist. 12. saith in a certain case Christ might be damned, and that it is no more inconvenient to say, that Christ is damned, then to say, that Christ hath suffered and is dead. non est magis inconueniens dicere Christum esse damnatum, quàm passum & mortuum. here therefore Kellison and Parsons and their consorts may find those blasphemies in their good masters, which they seek greedily in Caluin, but find not.  
18. Certain Papists, as the Master of the sentences showeth lib. 3. dist. 12. §. 5. suppose that the son of God might have assumed our nature in the sex of a woman. quidam arbitrantur, saith he, deum potuisse assumere hominem in foemineo sexu, ut assumsit in virili. and he doth not deny it. but this inconvenience would have followed, that the son of God should have been the daughter, and not the son of man. such absurdities are they, which have sounded in time passed in Christian men's ears.  
19 Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 49. art. 1. assigneth three means, by which Christ hath wrought our salvation, whereof the first is, for that by his example he hath provoked us to charity. tribus modis, saith he, causavit nostram salutem, primùm per modum provocationis ad charitatem. but the scriptures show, that he is therefore called a Saviour, because he hath saved his people from their sins. and if for this cause he might be called a Saviour, than every one, that provoketh us to charity, might be a Saviour.  
20. Commonly they teach, that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our justification, salvation, and redemption. and Kellison p. 261. assigneth this for a reason, because he deserved grace for us at God's hands, by which together with our cooperation we may be saved and redeemed. but if he be the meritorious cause only of our justification, salvation, and redemption, then is he not properly our Saviour, and redeemer, nor doth he justify us. for not he that meriteth at our friends hands, that we should be ransomed out of the hands of our enemies, but our friend that payeth our ransom is our redeemer. so this blasphemous wretch denieth Christ to be properly our redeemer, and Saviour, and next he maketh every man his own Saviour and redeemer.  
21. Likewise the same surueior pag. 262. telleth his followers, that Christ hath therefore freed us from the tyranny of the devil, and captivity of hell, because he hath procured us grace, by the which, when the devil by himself, or the world, or the flesh provoketh us, we may resist maugre all the force of hell. which is as much, as if he should say, that Christ hath not overthrown or triumphed over our enemies, but hath procured us grace to overthrow the devil, and to triumph over him, ourselves. that he is not the strong man, that hath bound up the Devil, that had us in possession, but that he hath made us strong, and able to bind the Devil. of the deliverance from sin, and from the curse of the law by Christ he maketh no mention. and if you ask him what he meaneth by grace, he will tell you of charity, or a habit not distinct from charity. such is the blasphemous doctrine of these impostors. they ascribe the work of their redemption immediately to themselves, and a far off to Christ.  
22. He telleth us further pag. 336. that Christ's death was sufficient to have redeemed the Devils and damned also. but this assertion supposeth a contradiction, viz. that the same Persons may be both saved and damned. it supposeth also, that the Devils and the damned may be saved, which is an assertion direct contrary to the decree of God concerning their damnation. would not then such impostors with their vain supposals be chased from among Christians, and placed among the damned crew, of which he himself sometime talketh? I do the rather make mention of his contemptible fellow, albeit he deserve no place among the learned, because he gave us the first occasion to make this survey.  
22. Clement the sixth in the chapter unigenitus. extr. come. de poenit. & remiss. doth apply these words from the sole of the foot unto the head there is nothing whole: unto Christ, as if Christ had nothing whole in him: whereas the Prophet Isay c. 1. doth speak of the sinful people of the jews. for a little before he said. ah sinful nation. is not then this a proper comparison, to match the immaculate lamb of God, with an impure and sinful people, and is not this a plain abuse of scripture?  
23. The same man in the same place saith, that the shedding of one drop of Christ's blood would have been sufficient for the redemption of all mankind. his words are, pro redemtione totius humani generis suffecisset. but Kellison in his survey pag. 256. goeth much further, and saith, that Christ with one tear, or one word, and not only with one drop of blood, might have redeemed us. thus these impudent wretches evacuate the cross of Christ, and make his death superfluous. which we would the rather marvel at, but that they are teachers of Antichrist, and opposite to Christ, and enemies of his cross.  
24. For the most part they join the merits of Christ and his mother, and other Saints together, and of them they make a treasure, out of which the Pope may bestow indulgences to such as need them or desire them. but it is absurd to think, that the Pope or any mortal man hath power to dispose or dispense Christ's merits. For he himself hath formerly disposed of them. beside that it is a great disparagement to Christ's merits, either to supply them with the merits of Saints, or to make Saints and mortal men redeemers, and saviours and deliverers from sin.  
25. Bellarmine lib. 1. de indulgentijs affirmeth, that Christ had superfluous merits. as if Christ had not known how much was sufficient, or left others to discern of his merits, better than he did himself.  
26. The scriptures teach us, that by the merits of Christ's death only we have remission of sins. but Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 49. art. 1. saith, that by charity we obtain remission of sins. Caritate consequimur veniam peccatorum, saith Aquinas.  
27. Of the virgin Mary most of them say, that she was conceived without original sin, and of Hieremy and S. john Baptist that they were sanctified in their mother's womb. of which it followeth that Christ is not the redeemer of all mankind. for what needed they a redeemer that were not borne sinners, nor subject to the curse of the law?  
28. But nothing is more blasphemous, then that they teach that dogs and hogs, mice and birds and other brute beasts do eat the true body of Christ, when they eat the Sacrament: nay that such beasts do eat their God. but this is the opinion of Alexander Hales, of Thomas Aquinas, and the schoolmen best reputed of. and the master of sentences holding the contrary lib. 4. sent. dist. 13. is therefore censured. now herein they pass the idolatrous gentiles. for the Egyptians did not eat those creatures, which they adored as Gods. these devour their God and Saviour, like bread.  
29. They say that Christ's true body is in the sacrament. and yet he hath neither flesh nor bone, that can be felt or seen there. this therefore is not far from the heresy of Valentinus, and destroyeth the verity of Christ's human nature, as Aquinas 3. q. 5. art. 2. confesseth. if he had taken a heavenly body, as Valentine believed (saith Aquinas) then could not the truth of Christ's human nature have been saved, which requireth, flesh and bones. In the 24. of Luke our Saviour showeth, that he had a body, that both had flesh and bones, and was to be felt and seen.  
31. In their abominable mass they make their polshorne Priests mediators for Christ, making them to pray, that God would look upon the body and blood of Christ with a propitious and serene countenance. supra quae, saith the Priest looking upon the sacrifice, as they call it, of Christ's body and blood, propitio ac sereno vultu respacere digneris, & accepta habere etc.  
32. They compare also the sacrifice of the body & blood of Christ to the sacrifice of brute beasts offered by Abel, and to the sacrifice of Melchisedech; praying that God would accept Christ's body and blood, as he accepted the sacrifices of Melchisedech and Abel: which is a most blasphemous comparison.  
33. In the mass also they confess their sins to God, to Angels and Saints jointly, and not to Christ. nay they use the mediation of Christ, in their confession of sins to Angels, and Saints, preferring them as much before Christ, as a Prince is to be preferred before mediators and hushiers.  
34. In a certain provincial constitution beginning authoritate. de sentent. excom. they excommunicate by the authority of God Almighty, and of Saints, and leave out Christ.  
35. They say Masses in honour of Angels and Saints. but he in whose honour a sacrifice is offered is greater than the sacrifice. doth it not then appear, that while they pretend to offer Christ's body and blood in honour of Angels and Saints, that they make him inferior to Angels and Saints?  
36. They call the Pope the head, king, spouse and foundation of the church. but this cannot be without extreme wrong to Christ. for one king doom cannot admit two kings, nor a viceking while the king is present, nor can one woman have two spouses, or one body two heads, or one house two divers foundations. the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. showeth that no man can lay other foundation then that which is already laid. Ephes. 5. he saith Christ is the head of the church, & the Saviour of his body. the synagogue of Rome therefore showeth herself a strange beast, that will needs have two heads, and two foundations being altogether so divers.  
37. S. james showeth, that there is but one lawgiver of the Church, that is able to save and destroy. the do therefore spoil Christ of his honour, that give this title of lawgiver to the Pope.  
38. They do also prefer the Pope before Christ. for Christ's body when the Pope goeth on progress is sent before with the baggage, and when the Pope is near goeth out to meet him, while all the gallants of room attend on the Pope.  
39 They give authority to the Pope to draw souls out of purgatory by his indulgences, and to make portsale of Christ's merits. but he that is sold is never equal to the seller. neither can the Papists show, that ever Christ delivered one soul out of Purgatory.  
40. Papists believe that the Pope hath often times created his creator, or at the least made Christ's body and blood. but that Christ made the Pope it cannot be showed. doth it not then appear, that by many degrees the Pope excelleth Christ in the opinion of Papists?  
41. Nay they make S. Francis and Dominicke equal to Christ in divers things, and in some things superior, as their books of conformities and legends do testify. they call S. Francis jesum typicum. that is, a figurative jesus, and say that Dominicke and Francis did more miracles than Christ. but the Pope gave both these two all their credit. he must therefore needs surpass Christ in account of Papists.  
42. In the conventicle of Trent, Cornelius Bishop of Bitonto said, papa lux venit in mundum, the Pope the light came into the world. and Simon Begnius in the council of Lateran called Leo the tenth, the lion of the tribe of juda: and cried out, Te Leo beatissime salvatorem expectavimus, that is, we, blessed Leo, have looked for thee our Saviour.  
43. Beno the Cardinal showeth, that Gregory the seventh, cast Christ's body into the fire, burning the Saviour of Papists. Pius the fifth also is said to have cast an agnus Dei into the fire, as Catena in his life reporteth. into this contempt have the Pupists brought their Gods.  
44 Theodorie. à Niem lib. primo de schismate showeth, that Urban the Pope melted crosses and images of silver to pay soldiers. thus that which they pretend to honour as God, they sell and give away in service of the Devil.  
45 They give equal honour to a cross of wood and metal, and to Christ. and looking on a wooden crucifixo they say, thou hast redeemed us. who then seethe not, what little account they make of Christ?  
46 A trental of Masses the mass-priests sell for less sometimes than six pence; and yet they say Christ's body is offered in every Mass. are they not therefore more wicked traitors than judas, who would not fallen Christ for less than 30. pence?  
47 The Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech is proper to Christ by the Apostles doctrine. but the Papists make every piled pated companion a Priest after the order of Melchisedech.  
Finally the office of mediator properly belonging to Christ, they communicate with the virgin Mary, whom they suppose to be more merciful than Christ. they give it also to Angels, and Saints and mass-priests. Turrecremata summae lib. 1. c. 40. speaking of Priests saith, they are mediators reconciling sinners to God. ministerium peragunt mediatoris omnipotenti Deo, qui offensus fuerat, peccatores reconciliando. the schoolmen say also that Saints may be called redeemers, and that is confessed by Bellarmine lib. 1. de indulgentijs.  
Infinite it were to report all the blasphemous speeches and practices of Papists against the honour of Christ jesus. but this may serve to show, that they rather blaspheme than honour Christ, speaking so wickedly of his person, so blasphemously of his body, so falsely of his actions, and taking away his honour, and giving the same to others.   

CHAP. VII. The strange, contradictory and false opinions of Papists concerning the sacraments.  
AS Sacraments are seals of God's grace, and holy mysteries, by the which God worketh our sanctification; so are they enemies of God's grace and the sanctification of Christians, that pervert the Apostles doctrine, and Christ's institution concerning sacraments. how then the doctors of the synagogue of Rome shallbe able to excuse themselves, and to prove themselves not to be envious of the good of Christians, I report me to their common doctrine, and practise concerning this argument. for first they deny that the sacraments of the law of Moses did open heaven, and thereupon thrust all the ancient fathers down to hell, and place Abraham's bosom there, as appeareth by the doctrine of Francis a victoria art. 1. de sacrament. in come. but this argueth first, that God worketh diversly by the sacraments of the law and gospel, and is changeable in his operation, which is absurd: and next that Christ is not one yesterday and to day, as the Apostle teacheth. and thirdly placeth the father of all faithful people in hell, damning all that believed in Christ before his coming to hell. and four denieth that their sins were remitted that believed in Christ before his coming. and lastly ascribeth more to sacraments devised by men, such as is extreme unction, and other Popish sacraments, than to circumcision, and the Paschal lamb, and other sacrifices and sacraments instituted by God.  
2. The master of the sentences dist. 1. lib. 4. holdeth, that all that died before circumcision under the law were damned. but others contradict their master.  
3. The synod of Trent pronounceth them anathema, which shall say that there are either more, or fewer sacraments of the new law than seven: to wit, baptism, confirmation, the eucharist, penance, extreme unction, order, and matrimony. but this curse falleth first upon the old Latin interpreter, that Apocalyps. 17. calleth the mystery of the great whore sacramentum mulieris. the same also falleth upon Saint Augustine and most of the ancient fathers, that never knew, nor acknowledged more than two sacraments properly and truly so called, to wit, baptisine and the Lords supper. de latere dormientis prosluxerunt sanguis & aqua, quae sunt nostrae redemptionis sacramenta. that is, out of Christ's side (sleeping on the cross) flowed water and blood, which are the sacraments of our redemption, as saith Augustine in gloss. in 4. ad Ephes. & super Psal. 40. justin in his 2. apology, Ambrose de sacramentis, Tertullian, Dionysius called Areopagita, Chrysostom, Cyril, Gregory, Cyprian, Rahanus, Paschasius, wheresoever they talk of the number of the sacraments of our redemption, mention only baptism and the eucharist, and where they speak in general 〈◊〉 of holy mysteries mention divers more, and others than the seven popish sacraments. beside that it is absurd to think, that marriage and Priesthood and penance were of one nature under the law, and of another under the gospel.  
4 The same synod doth curse them also, that shall say, that all the above named 7. Sacraments were not instituted by jesus Christ. where it is apparent, that marriage was instituted in paradise, and priesthood under the law. it is certain also, that the fathers before Christ did rise by repentance from their falls. furthermore what man among the Papists is able to show, where the determinat words, and the external signs and rites of popish sacraments were instituted by Christ? if than Canisius in his catechism c. de sacramentis. teach truly, that Sacraments have certain determinat words, and set rites: then is it certain, that neither Popish confirmation, nor Popish orders, nor Popish penance, nor matrimony, nor extreme unction was instituted by Christ. and therefore Francis à victoria de Sacramentis in con. deriveth the determination concerning seven sacraments from the Florentine council under Eugenius the 4. hoc determinatum est saith he speaking of seven sacraments, in concilio Florentino sub Eugenio 4. and there indeed we find first, that the matter of Popish confirmation is chrism made of oil and balm, and the form set down in these words, signo te signo crucis & confirmo te Chrismate etc. and yet now the Papists have left off balm. the matter of extreme unction is oil, and that for a strange medicine the Priests put in the eyes and other organs of senses. the form of extreme unction is this, per istam sanctam unctionem & suam pijssimam misericordiam indulgeat tibi dominus etc. The matter of priesthood is the Chalice, and the host: and the form, take power to offer Sacrifice in the church for living and dead, and so forth. but no man will affirm, that Christ instituted the form and matter of these Sacraments, unless he be either stark mad, or madlike desperate. in matrimony they are neither able to afrigne certain form, nor certain matter.  
5. All Papists hold, that the Sacraments of the new law both contain grace, and confer grace ex opere operato, that is by the work wrought, as may appear by the canons of the seventh session of Trent, & by the common proctor's of the Pope's cause. Sacramentum confert gratiam ex opere operato, saith Navarrus in his enchiridion, and Bellarmine lib. 1. de sacrament. c. 14. saith they justify. and this is the common opinion of all. but first it is absurd to attribute as much to matrimony, confirmation and extreme unction, as to baptism and the lords supper. secondly it is absurd to make Priests forswear matrimony, seeing it contemeth grace, and worketh it, as they say. for of this grace the mass-priests have extreme need. thirdly if grace be nothing else but charity, or a habit not distinct from it; it will be a hard matter to show, how charity may be contained in oil, or the rites of matrimony, or external signs. four no Papist can show, that such as receive their popish confirmation, or order, or extreme unction, or are married, are more just, than they were before. finally God worketh by Sacraments that which he promiseth. but we do not read, that ever he promised justification, or grace to married folks, or to such as are greased in order, or extreme unction. the master of the sentences lib. 4. dist. 2. §. 1. saith, that some Sacraments give remedies against sins, and helpful grace, others only give a remedy, as wedlock. alia in remedium tantùm sunt. saith he, ut coniugium.  
6. Bellarmine lib. 1. de sacramentis, and Canisius in the Catechism teach, that sacraments are external signs. and yet the inward contrition of penitent sinners, and the consent of the parties married appeareth not externally. further, this being granted, it will follow, that the body and blood of Christ in the eucharist are no sacrament, because they appear not to the eyes, nor can be discerned with other senses. so the Papists whatsoever they brag of their mass, give no sacrament to their followers, but only bare accidents, shows and shadows.  
7. In the seventh session of the conventicle of Trent they curse such, as shall say, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic church may be contemned, omitted or changed. but this curse falleth upon their own pates. for themselves have omitted love feasts frequented at the time of the Communion, & the old rite of Christians then kissing one another, and the use of milk and honey in baptism, of which Tertullian speaketh lib. de coron. milit. and of milk and wine mentioned by Hierome in Isaiae c. 55. and the forms of dipping in baptism.  
8. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 64. art. 8. saith, that the intention of the minister is required in the administering of the sacrament. intentio ministri, saith he, requiritur ad perfectionem sacramenti. and this is so necessarily required by all Papists in consecration of the eucharist, that without the same, they say, there is no consecration. the being then and perfection of sacraments depending upon the priest's intention, it followeth, that the state of things in the Roman church will be brought to very great uncerteinty. for neither can it be proved, that he that ordered the Pope, had an intention to order him, or that the Romish priests have an intention always to baptise and consecrate, or the parties among them, that do mary do intend any such matter. how then can the Papists be assured that the Romish church is the true church, or that the Pope's judgement is infallible, or whether they be idolaters or no, when they worship the sacrament, when they are uncertain, whether the Pope be either well ordered, or baptised, or whether their Priests be well ordered, and have truly consecrated the eucharist?  
9 The master of the sentences lib. 4. dist. 3. §. ex his. determineth, that true baptism is administered in the name of Christ only, or the father only, or the holy Ghost only. ex his apertè intellexisti, saith he, in nomine Christs verum baptisma tradi. unde nihilominus insinuari videtur verum baptisma dari posse in nomine Patris tantùm, vel Spiritus sancti tantùm, si tamen ille qui baptizat sidem Trinitatis teneat. But this is as much as if he should say, that every Priest may alter Christ's institution, and that their own orders and rites are not to be altered. Thomas Aquinas. 3. p. q. 66. art. 6. doth condemn his master's opinion.  
10. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 66. art. 4. determineth, that Christians may be baptised in lie, or in beef broth, or porridge. in lixivio & aquis sulphureis sieri potest baptismus. he saith also, the water is not changed by boiling flesh in it. do we then marvel, if mass-priests be so fat Christians, seeing they allow baptism in lie and beef broth? this certes is far from the decency, that is required in the administration of holy mysteries, and savoureth of strange curiosity. hereto also may be added, that they baptise bells, and give them names, and this the Germans touch in their grievances.  
11. Urban the Pope c. super quo. 30. q. 3. giveth that authority to women, which all Papists allow not the fathers certes neither knew it, nor allowed it.  
12. The conventicle of Trent sess. 7. pronounceth him anathema, that shall say, that baptism is not necessary to salvation. but this falleth on Thomas Aquinas, 3. q. 68 art. 2. that supposeth it sufficient to have baptism in voto, & those which allow baptism as well of blood and the holy ghost, as of water. the conventicle of Trent thinketh it all one to say, that baptism is not necessary, and that baptism is free. as if man not sinning necessarily had not free will to commit sin.  
13. Martin ab Aspilcueta in enchir. c. de baptismo, saith, he doth sin, that anointeth him, that is baptized with chrism kept over the year. of which sin neither the Apostles nor ancient fathers ever heard any thing.  
14. Kellison in his Survey doth not take them to be perfect Christians, that are not confirmed after his popish fashion. but this fashion of greasing was never known to the ancient fathers. furthermore this being granted the Papists in England should be very imperfect Christians, the most of them wanting this supposed unctuous consignation.  
15. The sacrament of baptism they say may be administered not only by Priests, but also by lay-men and women. but they do not permit any to consign men with chrism but their Prelates. and for that they bring forth the testimony of Euscbius a bishop of Rome de consecrat. dist. 5. manus. so far do they prefer their own inventions before Christ's institution: and so little are they ashamed to allege counter fait writings.  
16. Whether the sacrament of the cucharist be one or more sacraments, they stand in doubt, because in a certain collect the same is both called sacramentum and sacramenta. and Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 73. art. 2. resolveth, that it is one formally, and two materially: so that materially he maketh more than seven sacraments.  
17. In this sacrament of the eucharist they require bread of wheat, and wine of the grape as the matter of the sacrament. and yet they say neither bread nor wine remaineth therein after consecration.  
18. They say Christ's body is truly in the host, and his blood in the chalice after consecration. and yet is he neither felt, nor seen there, nor can a body of that quantity be contained in so little room.  
19 Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 75. art. 3. will not grant, that bread and wine is annihilated after consecration. as if there could at one time be no bread nor wine in the sacrament, and yet no annihilation of the bread and wine; or as if no part of bread and wine remaining, it might not be said properly to be brought to nothing.  
20. Franciscus a victoria in his book of sacraments c. de eucharistia, will not yield, that the Priest may consecrate barley bread, because barley, as he saith, is meat for horses. but he saith that rye bread may well be consecrated, forasmuch as that is bread for men. yet others think otherwise.  
21. The accidents of bread and wine we see remain in the sacrament. but they cannot tell, how they should subsist, where there is neither bread nor wine.  
22. Christ ordained this sacrament to be eaten and drunken, but the Papists oftentimes neither eat nor drink the sacrament, but carry it about, or hang it upon the altar.  
23. If a mouse or other living creature take away the consecrated host, they will have the same to be taken, if it be possible, and to be burned, and the ashes to be kept for relics, as we read in the treatise de defect. in celebrat. miss.  
24. They beleene that Christ's body is in the eucharist, because Christ said, this is my body. why then do they believe, that his soul and blood is there, seeing he spoke there of neither?  
25. In the sacrament they tell, how sometime there hath appeared true flesh, true blond, and Christ in the form of a child. but if this be true, then is he not there, as they hold, sub specie aliena, that is, under another kind.  
26. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 77. art. 2. will have other accidents to be sounded in quantity, as in their subject. but it is absurd, to make one accident the subject of another, and yet doth this absurdity being granted little relieve them. for they cannot show how the accident of quantity should subsist without subject.  
27. They say that accidents in the sacraments due nourish. but of that it followeth, that accidents are turned into substance: which is more than alchymisticall tran●… 〈◊〉.  
28. In the sacrament they see by experience worms to be engendied if it be long kept, and that both the kinds are corrupted. but it is blasphemous to say, that either Christ's body and blood are corrupted, or that worms can issue and be engendered thereof. to avoid this inconvenience they say, they are engendered of the accidents, or of the bread and wine returning again. For the engendering of worms of mere accidents is absurd. and for the return of bread and wine they can bring forth no words of scripture.  
29. Thomas Aquinas p. 3, q. 77. art. 7. confesseth, that Christ's body is not broken in the Sacrament. and gladly would he show, how the accidents there may be broken. but he traveleth with vanity, and bringeth forth nothing but foolery.  
30. Commonly mass-priests say that Christ at his last supper did eat himself, and drink his own blood before it was shed. matters that imply manifest contradiction, and dissolve rules of reason.  
31. Now the spaniards will not deny, but they are cannibals and eaters of men's flesh, that eat the same whether roasted, broiled, baked or otherwise dressed. why then should not the mass-priests be avoided as eaters of man's flesh, and drinkers of man's blood, as they say themselves, albeit they eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood prepared under other forms?  
32. The fathers say, that Christ's body is meat for the soul, and not to be eaten with the teeth. but Nicholas the second will have it torn with teeth, as his words import c. ego Berengarius. de consecrat. dist. 2. others will have it swallowed into the belly.  
33. Christians abhor to hear, that Christ's body should be eaten and his blood drunken of brute beasts. but Papists teach and confess both.  
34. Christ gave his disciples the cup of the new testament. the Pope and his complices sacrilegiously take the same from God's people.  
35. Christ said, take and eat. the mass-priests suffer them that have them to gape and gaze, and give them often nothing to eat.  
36. Christians believe, that they receive the same Sacrament, that Christ's disciples received at his last supper. but Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 81. art. 3. saith the disciples received it passable, and such as it then was. but now no man can receive his true body but he must receive it as it is in heaven, that is, as it is glorified and impassable.  
37. They say that the eucharist is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice, and for those two ends instituted. but that implieth a plain contradiction. for as the sacrifice is offered to God, so the Sacrament is ordained and given to men.  
38. If poison after consecration be mingled in the Sacrament, Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 83. art 6. will have the same kept among Saints relics. but what Christian will reserve poison for a relic?  
39 The Apostle saith Christ was once offered the mass-priests say he is offered continually, and that for quick and dead: a matter unknown to Christ's Apostles.  
40. Our Saviour instituted this Sacrament for a remembrance of his death and passion. but the mass-priests offer the Sacrifice of his body and blood for quick & dead, for sick, for hole, for sailors, for travelers, in the honour of saint and Angels, for peace and good success in all things. which be matters never thought upon in the institution of this Sacrament.  
Finally they have no less strange, false and contrary positions in their doctrine of matrimony, order, penance and extreme unction: which they make Sacraments. but by this it may appear sufficiently, how little they regard either the institution of Christ, or the doctrine of the ancient catholic church in the matter of Sacraments. I shall also have occasion otherwhere to touch these points particularly.   

CHAP. VIII. That popery is a mixture of old and new heresies.  
IT were long to insist upon every article of Popish doctrine. I will therefore rather in a generality show the qualities, proceed, and practices thereof, running through the whole, then dilate the absurdities and falsities of every particular, standing upon every small point. now than that I have touched the grounds, and certain principal doctrines of Popery, I have thought good to show, that the rest is nothing but either old or later heresies. They glory in their works, and hope to be justified by the law, as may be gathered out of Bellarmine's disputes de justificatione, and also out of divers of their treatises of good works. the jebusites of Collein censur. fol. 22. say, that all their life and salvation consisteth in the precepts of the law, whose fullness is love. they do also extol the merits of their works. but the Apostle Rom. 2. taxeth them that glory in the law, and Galat. 3. condemned those false Apostles, that taught justification by the law.  
2. They make God's law void by their traditions of worshipping images, maintaining public stews, banks of usury and such like practices. the which is noted as an error in the scribes and pharisees, reprobastis mandatum Dei, saith our Saviour Marc. 7. per seniorum vestrorum traditionem. and as they had their Talmud, so have the Papists their decrees and decretales, which they follow as the law of God.  
3. The Monks and jebusites are also like to pharisees. dicebantur pharisaei, saith Epiphanius haeres. 16. ante Christum, co quod separati essent ab alijs, propter spontaneam superfluam religionem apud ipsos receptam. the pharisees were so called, for that they were separated from others for voluntary and superfluous religion received by them. they compassed also sea and land to make Proselytes, and when they had won them, they made them twice more the children of hell, than they were themselves, as our Saviour Matth. 23. teacheth us. so likewise for a spontaneous and superfluous show of religion these irreligious jebusites and Monks do separate themselves from others, and take great pains to win Proselytes to the synagogue of Rome, and in the end abuse many, and make them much worse than themselves.  
4. In their supersophisticall exposition of the law, and their often washings and affectate holiness they imitate the scribes, who for this cause by Epiphanius haeres. 15. ante Christum, are enroled in the catalogue of heretics.  
5. By their often washing in holy water, the Papists hope to wash away sins, as the Hemerobaptists among the jews, which for this were reputed heretics, as Epiphanius showeth, haeres. 17. ante Christum. but there he telleth them, that neither drops nor rivers of water, nor the whole ocean can wash away sins.  
6. The Dositheans were reputed heretics for their affectation of virginity, and abstinence from marriage, and punishing their bodies. why then should not the like account be made of those Papists, that run into the same errors not sparing their bodies, more than they did whom the Apostle Coloss. 2. reprehendeth?  
7. john the 23. was condemned in the council of Constance for denying the immortality of the soul. the like opinion, as Zegedinus in spec. pontiff. and others report, had Alexander the sixth, Leo the tenth, Clement the seventh, and divers other Popes. this heresy therefore they seem to borrow from the Sadduces, or rather from the Epicures.  
8. Among the followers of Christ the first heretics were the Capernaites, that believed that Christ's flesh was to be eaten, and his blood to be drunken really: and that both were to be received into the mouth and swallowed down into the belly. the same notwithstanding is taught by Pope Nicolas c. ego Berengarius de consecrat. dist. 2. and generally is believed among the Papists. his words are, sensualiter tractari, and dentibus sidelium atteri. as if Christ's body were handled with hands sensually, and torn with teeth of the faithful grossly.  
9 With Simon Magus the Pope and his mates think it no sin, either to buy or to sell the gifts of the holy ghost. thereof cometh the mart of Masses, the portsale of indulgences, the chaffering for benefices and all spiritual linings and dignities. Mantuan Calamit. lib. 3. saith they sell churches, altars, sacraments, yea heaven and God himself. the bishop of Chems' onus eccles. c. 23. saith, that Priests did sell Christ more execrably than did judas. Furthermore both Simon Magus, and the Papists count it a small sin to use common women. Finally both the followers of Simon Magus and the Monks and Friars worship the images of their founders. this Augustine de haeres. c. 1. accounted heresy in Simon and his followers. docebat detestandam turpitudinem indifferenter utendi foeminis. and again, imagines & suam & Helenes praebebat discipulis adorandas.  
10. Irenaeus lib. 1. adversus haeres. c. 23. reputeth the Basilidians, heretics in regard of their use of images, enchantments and divers superstitious exorcizations. What is this then but a sentence against the Papists, that conjure water, and salt, and other creatures, saying, exorcizo te creaturasalis, and exorcizo te creatura aquae, and so forth. they do also abuse the name of God in their exorcisms, and yet make exorcists an order, & that order a Sacrament of the church. lastly they do follow Simon Magus in magical enchantments, and use images most superstitiously to divers purposes.  
11. Carpocrates also worshipped images, and for that was put into the catalogue of heretics by Ireney lib. 1. adverse. haeres. c. 24. Marcellina one of his followers adored the images of jesus, Paul, Pythogoras and Homer. colebat imagines jesus, & Pauli, & Homeri, & Pythagorae, adorando, incensumque ponendo, saith Augustine haeres. c. 7. so likewise Papists adore and burn incense to the images of Saints, yea sometime to the images of heretics and no Saints; as for example, to the images of George the dragon killer, of Catherine, of Papias and such like.  
12. The Carpocratians and Basilidians did conceal and hide the mysteries of their religion, lest holy things should be cast to dogs, as we read in Ireney lib. 1. c. 23. and Epiphanius in haeres. 24. and 27. and what do Papists? do they not likewise abuse the same words of casting holy things to dogs against God's people, to exclude them from talking of the mysteries of religion, and reading scriptures?  
13. Epiphanius haeres. 34. testifieth, that the Marcosians did baptize in an unknown language, and Ireney lib. 1. c. 18. showeth, that they anointed with Chrism such as they baptised, and that they had a kind of extreme unction for the dead. Epiphanius saith also, that Marcus in the eucharist brought in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or transubstantiation, & that his followers accounted themselves perfect. in their steps therefore the Papists tread, using tongues in administering Sacraments not understood of the vulgar sort, greasing their sick, and them whom they baptise, believing transubstantiation, and accounting Monks and Friars in the state of perfection. but as Ireney saith, perfectus apud eos nemo, nisi qui maxima mendacia apud eos fructificat. both old and new heretics tell abominable lies, and for proof allege forged and apocryphal writings.  
14. The Papists consecrate every year paschal lambs, and observe the jewish jubiley, and in their massing sacrifice use jewish apparel and ceremonies, as Durand confesseth. Innocentius in c. per venerabilem. qui filii sunt legitimi. determineth that Deuteronomy is now to be observed. quod ibi decernitur in novo testamento debet observari, saith he. if then the Nazarites were justly condemned for heretics for mingling jewish ceremonies with Christian religion, as Augustine de haeres. c. 9 and Epiphanius in haeres. 29. testify; then we do the Pope and his poleshorne flock no wrong to call them heretics. both Papists and Nazarites brag much of their revelations and miracles. this is therefore another point of heresy wherein both concur.  
15. The Heracleonites gave their followers departing out of this life extreme unction, and murmured words in an uncouth language over them. feruntur, saith S. Augustine de haeres. c. 16. suos morientes novo modo quasi redimere, id est, per oleum, balsamum & aquam, & invocationes, quas Hebraicis verbis dicunt super capita eorum. this is also in part testified by Epiphanius in haeres. 36. this practice therefore is common to the Papists with them. and both of them abuse the words of S. james c. 5. where he talketh of anointing the sick, and draw them to their purpose.  
16. The followers of Helzai, and heretics called Osseni, as Epiphanius haeres. 19 ante Christum tostifieth, used to swear by bread and salt and other creatures, and worshipped the spittle and relics of two of their sect. the same Helzai taught his disciples also to pray in a tongue not understood, saying to them: let no man ask the interpretation, but only say these words: and then followed certain barbarous terms. the Papists therefore swearing by bread and salt and other creatures, and worshipping the rags and excrements of their Saints, and praying in Latin, that is not understood of the vulgar sort, do herein rather imitate heretics, then true Christians or catholics.  
17. Martion extolled virginity. A Marcione saith Epiphanius haers. 42. virginitas praedicatur. yet did he corrupt a maiden. he gave also women power to baptize, as Damascene de haeres. testifieth. Irenaeus lib. 1. c. 30. saith, that he & Saturninus began first to teach abstinence from living creatures. he taught also, that by Christ's descending into hell divers men's souls were thence delivered, as Epiphanius witnesseth. finally he separated marriages for religion. so likewise mass-priests and votaries praise virginity, wallow in fornication. allow women to baptize. believe that eating of fruit & roots is better, than eating of flesh. separate married couples entering by consent into monasteries: and believe that not only the patriarchs were delivered out of limbus patrum, but that Traian's & Falconillaes' souls, and divers others were by their saints fetched out of hell. as for purgatory, that is a part of hell, it is the Pope's inheritance, and from thence, they say, he may deliver whom, and as many as he list.  
18. The Messalians believed, that baptism was only available to cut away former sins. so likewise do Papists teach. against them both, Theodoret de divin. decret. c. de baptismo, teacheth, that baptism is the earnest of future graces, and the communication of Christ's passion. and again, non ut dicunt amentes Messaliani baptismus novaculam imitatur, quae praecesserunt peccata auferens. hoc enim ex superabundanti largitur. likewise both Papists and Messalians mumbled over their prayers, and thought to be heard for their much babbling. the Papists for saying the lady's rosary, and certain number of creeds, and pater nosters have many indulgences given them by their holy father.  
19 The Angelikes were condemned for worshipping and praying to Angels. Synodus quae convenit Laodiceae saith Theodoret. in Coloss. 3. lege prohibuit, ne precarentur angelos. this is also testified by S. Augustine de haeres. c. 39 Epiphanius haeres. 38. condemneth the Caians for invocating Angels. and Tertullian de prescript. adverse. haeret. showeth that this heresy proceeded from Simon Magus. this condemnation of the Angelikes therefore serveth against the Papists, that invocat, worship, and say Masses in the honour of Angels.  
20. S. Augustine taxeth the Severians for their forged miracles. Philumena one of that sect, as he testifieth, de haeres. c. 24. did work a strange miracle drawing a loaf of bread out of a narrow mouthed glass. but all their miracles are nothing to the popish miracles reported in legends. Bellarmine maketh miracles a mark of the Church. herein therefore they resemble heretics.  
21. The Tatians and Encratites condemned marriage, as not so pure, as single life. so likewise Papists think that it cannot stand with the perfection of orders. in the chap. proposuisti. dist. 82. they call marriages fleshly pollutions. and in their legends account them corruptions.  
22. As the Manichees condemned marriage in their Priests called electi, so do the Papists. they abstained from the cup in the eucharist as Leo ser. 4. de quadrages. doth testify, and as it may be gathered out of the chap. relatum. and comperimus, dist. 2. the consecrat. and so do the Papists. the Manichees give Christ no  body, and place it in divers places. this heresy therefore is also common with them to the Papists. lastly both Manichees and Papists abstain from flesh in their fasts, but use other delicate and banqueting dishes.  
23. From Montanus the Papists have received their laws of fastings, and learned to advance their unwritten traditions. from him also they have borrowed their sacrifices for the dead, and their doctrine of purging small sins after this life. S. Augustine epist. 86. ad Casulanum showeth, that he found not in any commandment of Christ or his Apostles what days we are to fast, and what not. as Apollonius, & Eusebius writ li. hist. 5. c. 57 he did first appoint laws for fasting. Tertullian montanizing in his book de corona militis, derineth sacrifices for the dead from tradition, and from his Paraclet. and in his book de anima, teacheth that small sins are done away after this life. Epiphanius in haeres. 48. showeth, that Montanus disputed, that the scriptures were not perfect. and with him in this point do Papists concur.  
24. The Papists take Rome to be their Jerusalem, as the Pepuzians did the town of Pepuza. and both of them admit women to baptise. nay among the Papists we read of a woman that was Pope, which was a degree above the Pepuzians, that never made a woman chief priest.  
25. With the Catharists the Papists brag of their merits, purity and perfection. further they will not admit heretics relapsed. lastly as the Catharists, so Papists sometime use rebaptisation, as the histories of France and Flanders testify against Papists.  
26. The jacobites and Armenians were condemned for heretics for making the images of God the father, and God the holy ghost. Imagines, saith Nicephorus lib. hist. 18. c. 52. patris & spiritus sancti effigiant, quod est perquam absurdum. yet do the Papists offend therein, and give these images divine honour; which is more than those heretics did.  
27. The worshippers of the cross called Chazinzarij were reputed heretics, as Nicephorus hist. lib. 18. c. 54. testifieth. crucem tantum, saith he, adorare & colere dicuntur. yet is either tantum added, or else he meaneth they worshipped no images, but the cross. for if he should say they worshipped not God, then had they been pagans. with them also the Papists concur. for they adore the cross and pray to it, which I doubt, whether those foolish heretics did.  
28. The Collyridian heretics worshipped the Virgin Mary and offered cakes in her honour. how then can the Papists shift their hands of this heresy, that worship the Virgin, and more deify her then they did, offering their consecrated cakes; nay offering Christ himself, as they say, in her honour. some say they worshipped her as a God. but that doth not appear by any presumption. some say they offered triangular cakes. as if Epiphanius did allow round cakes, and only condemn triangular cakes, whose whole purpose was to show, that she was not to be adored. she was a virgin, saith he, and honourable, but not to be adored. he showeth that to give adoration to creatures is idolatry, and gentilism. non dominabitur nobis, saith he, haeres. 79. antiquus error, ut relinquamus viventem, & adoremus ea, quae ab ipso facta sunt.  
29. The council of Frank ford under Charles the great condemned the second Nicene council under Irene, and all that worshipped images set up in churches; which is a plain condemnation of the error of the Papists in this behalf. they pretend that this council was disallowed by Adrian the Pope. but what if Liberius should have condemned the council of Nice, when he joined with the Arians? and what if Marcellinus, when he sacrificed to idols, should have condemned Christian religion? shall all Christianity depend upon one man's pleasure?  
30. S. Augustine de haeres. c. 68 telleth us of an heresy of certain fellows, that went barefooted. est alia haeresis, saith he, nudis pedibus semper ambulantium. the barefooted friars therefore and such as go on pilgrimage barefooted, are to take his report, as a sentence pronounced against themselves.  
31. The apostolics were condemned as heretics, for that they received none into their communion, that had wives, or possessed goods in propriety. for Clergy men and Monks in those days had both wives and goods in property, as S. Augustine de haeres. c. 40. showeth: Apostolici, qui isto nomine arrogantissime vocaverunt, saith he, non receperunt in suam communionem utentes coniugibus, & res proprias possidentes, quales habet Ecclesia Catholica & monachos & clericos plurimos. see therefore I pray you, how he excludeth Papists with the apostolics out of the Catholic Church.  
32. The Heraclites saith Isidore orig. lib. 8. c. de haeres. were heretics that received only Monks, and excluded married folks out of their company. monachos tantum recipiunt, coniugia respuunt. they believed not also, that children dying young should possess the kingdom of heaven. and do not all sects of Monks and Friars among the Papists exclude married folks out of their cloisters? do not the mass-priests also exclude all children dying before baptism, yea where it was much desired, out of the kingdom of heaven?  
33. Priscillian saith Augustine haeres. 70. disjoined married folks. his words are, coniuges disiungens. his followers to hide their filthy opinions and beastliness make no account to forswear themselves. propter occultandas contaminationes & turpitudines suas habent in suis dogmatibus, iura, periura, secretum prodere noli. they refuse also to eat flesh, as unclean meat. and come not the Papists near them in these points, that separate Monks and Priests that do marry from their wives, and teach their scholars to forswear themselves? the Rhemistes in Act. 23. say that oaths taken against Papists, which they falsely call Catholics, may and must be broken under pain of damnation. this perjury is also allowed by 2. rinegued English traitors Allen and Parsons in their resolutions of cases of conscience, wherein they teach their scholars to play the villains, and to perjure themselves with a good popish conscience. the Carthusians also and divers Monks forswear eating flesh, which they cannot do in reason, but that they think it less clean than fish.  
34. The Helcesaites make Christ in heaven to differ from Christ on earth, as Theodoret. de haeret. fab. c. de Helcesaeis doth testify. Christum non unum dicunt, saith he, said hune quidem supernè, illum infernè. so Papists above make Christ visible and palpable. but in the Sacrament neither visible nor palpable.  
35. The Eutychianistes deny, that Christ after the union of the two natures had a true body, but as Leo signifieth ser. 6. de teiumo 7. mensis, a body without shape, dimensions or circumscription. they said also that Christ was both in heaven and earth, at one time: against whom Vigilius disputing lib. 4. contr. Eutych. c. 4. saith, that the flesh of Christ, when it was on earth, was not in heaven, and being now in heaven, is not on earth. and these points of Eutychianisme the Papists have retained. for they say, Christ's body is really in the eucharist, where no shape nor dimensions of a body do appear. they say also that Christ's body is both in heaven and earth at one time, which taketh away all circumscription from Christ's body, and is contrary to the doctrine of Vigilius. Theodoret also Dial. 2. doth refute this heresy by similitude of the eucharist; for that the substance of bread remaineth in the Sacrament after consecration.  
36. The Papists also in many points conspire with the enemies of God's grace the Pelagians. Augustine de haeres. c. 88 saith that they hold, that without grace a man may perform all God's commandments. and Bellarmine de great. & lib. arb. lib. 5. c. 5. & 9 hath these words, solis naturae viribus posse aliquem ad breuissi●ū tempus omnia sernare, scilicet, divina mandata. he shifteth off the matter by adding, quoad substantiam operis. but the Pelagiani no doubt being pressed would say so much. nay if man have free-will, as well to observe the law, as to break the same; then must he needs be able always to perform all the law by force of his free-will.  
The Pelagians believe, that a man may be without all sin; so likewise do the Papists in effect. for they say, that every man hath free-will to abstain from all sin, and Bellarmme lib. 4. de iustific. c. 11. saith that man is able to perform the law of God perfectly: of which it followeth necessarily, that he may be without sin. for he that performeth the law of God perfectly, is without all sin.  
They teach that concupiscence by baptism is sanctified, and being before evil, doth afterward begin not to be evil, as may be collected out of S. Augustine lib. 6. contr. Inlianum c. 6. and their argument is, for that the guilt of concupiscence is removed by baptism. the Papists also hold, that concupiscence after baptisine is no sin, and of this it followeth, that concupiscence is sanctified by baptism.  
The Pelagians say, that we have a strong and firm free-will not to sin, and the censurers of Colein and Bellarmine in divers places affirm, that sin is subject to our will, and that man by free-will hath power to do good, and to abstain from evil. he that list to fee divers other points of concordance between Papists and Pelagians, let him read my last challenge. Andradius handling the point of free-will saith, that Philosophers by force of their free-will were able to attain true faith and justice, by which they might be saved. do not then Papists come near Pelagians?  
37. The Donatists, as S. Augustine saith haeres. 69. believed, that Christ's church was confined in Africa, and remained in the faction of Donatus. quod ecclesia Christian Africa, & Donati part remanserit. they rebaptized also catholic Christians. the Papists likewise confine the church within the jurisdiction of Rome, and saction of the Pope. they presume also to rebaptize better Christians then themselves.  
38. As the Circumcellions, so the Papists think it meritorious to kill all that are opposite to their sect, as the practices of Pius the fifth, Sixtus the fifth, and other Popes against Queen Elizabeth, the French King Henry the third and fourth, Prince Maurice and divers other Christian Kings and Princes, the massacres of France and Flanders do show. Sixtus Quintus did commend the execrable murder committed by james Clement a Dominican Friar. john Ghineard a jebusite was hanged for maintaining the bloody doctrine of murdering Princes excommunicate by the Pope.  
39 Sigebertus Gemblacensis doth account it an heresy to believe, that the Pope can assoil subjects from their obedience, or excommunicate such as will not rebel against Princes. haresis saith he, pestilentissima populum percellit. yet this heresy do Papists maintain both by their doctrine, and practise.  
40. The Audeans or Anthropomorphites did imagine God to have a shape and figure like to a man. which if the Papists do not believe, then why do they worship God the father in the similitude of an old man? and if this be not the likeness of God, but of an apparition, why do they give God's honour to their own fancies?  
41. Origens' heresy was, that he believed, that the damned might in the end be saved, as Augustine de haeres. c. 43. showeth. from this they digress not far, that believe that Traiaus soul was fetched out of hell by the prayers of Gregory. furthermore if Purgarorie be in hell; why may not souls as well be fetched out of other parts, as that part of hell?  
42. Eunomius taught, that so a man were of his religion, it skilled not greatly what sins he committed. asseverabat, saith S. Augustine de haeres. c. 54. quod nihl cuiquam obesset quorumlibet perpetratio ac perseverantia peccatorum, si huius, quae ab ipso docebatur, fidei particeps esset. so likewise the Popes grant indulgences to all those, that fight for their sect, whatsoever outrages and villainies they have committed. neither do Priests refuse absolution to any of their sect, if they be ruled by them. Bellarmine lib. 2. de eccles. c. 2. requireth neither faith, nor virtue in a Christian, if he profess outwardly the Romish faith.  
43. The Apostle 1. Tim. 4. doth condemn them as heretics, that forbade men to marry, & entoined them abstinence from certain meats. recte posuit prohibentium nubere, saith Theodoret in 1. Tim. 4. neque enim caelibatum, aut continentiam vituperat, sed eos accusat, qui lege lata ea sequi compellunt. but Papists by laws forbidden the marriage of Priests, and of such as have vowed single life, and have made divers laws against eating flesh, burning all that teach otherwise.  
44. The heretics called Anomi were condemned for corrupting the law of God. but I have showed that the Papists by their irregular doctrines and traditions have not only corrupted it, but also disannulled it for the most part.  
45. Irenaeus adverse. haeres. c. 2. rangeth them among heretics, that accuse scriptures, as if they were not right, or not of authority, or diversly to be understood, or not sufficient without tradition. quasi non rectè habeant, neque sint ex authoritate, & quia variè sunt dictae, & quia non possit ex his inveniri veritas ab his, qui nesciant traditionem. all which qualities are incident to the Papists. for they complain of their flexibility and insufficiency, and without the church's determination make them to us of no authority. Tertullian lib. de praescrip. adverse. haeret. saith some heretics by their hand, others by expositions pervert scriptures; alius saith he, mancel scripturas, alius sensu expositiones interuertit. the Papists excel in both. for by their additions and false versions they have falsified scriptures, and their commentaries in cases controversed are nothing but perversions and false expositions of scriptures. Turrian writing against that worthy servant of God Master Sadeel, doth call the scriptures delphicum gladium, or an instrument serving to divers purposes. others call them a nose of wax, or a shipman's hose: some esteem them a matter of strife.  
46. Isidore lib. 8. orig. c. de haeres. doth declare them to be heretics, that do otherwise understand the scriptures, than the meaning of the holy ghost requireth. quicunque aliter scripturam sacram intelligit, saith he, quàm sensus spiritus san●●i flagitat, licet de Ecclesia non recesserit: tamen haereticus potest appellari. but this is a common fault of Papists throughout all their books of controversies and commentaries.  
47. As the Herodians did give the title and honour of Christ to Herode, and were therefore reputed heretics by Damascene lib. de haeres. so the Papists do give Christ's titles and honour to the Pope, calling him the head, and foundation, and spouse of the Church: yea the king of kings, and Christ. why then should they not be called papal heretics, aswell as the other Herodian heretics?  
48. Damascene accounteth them heretics, that were enemies to the knowledge of Christians, and misliked their study of scriptures. Gnosimachis, saith he, omni Christianorum cognitioni ac scientiae ita adversantur, ut vanum & minus necessarium laborem esse dicant corum, qui in diumis scripturis aliquam exquirunt scientiam. the Papists likewise condemn laymen, that read & study scriptures especially in vulgar tongues, and commend ignorance. they do also speak high commendations of a collier's faith, and think it sufficient, without more ado, that they believe, as the Church doth.  
49. The Ethnophromans are likewise put in the role of heretics, for that they brought in divers heathenish dustomes into the church, as we may read in Damascene de haeresibus. if then the Papists have their right; they are there also for their carnenal, candle bearing, holy water, censing of images and infinite such tricks to be calendred among heretics.  
50. The dislike of second marriages expressed c. de his. 31. q. 1. and for that they debar such from Priesthood, is borrowed from the Montanists.  
51. In the Roman catechism part. 1. in exposit. 3. art. fid.. they teach, that our Saviour passed out of his mother's womb, as the rays of the sun do pierce through the substance of glass. quomodo solis radij concretam vitri substantiam penetrant. but this heresy doth quite overthrow the article of the nativity of our Saviour.  
52. The conventicle of 
a sect. 6.  Trent teacheth us always in this life to doubt of God's favour towards us, and of our own salvation. but this heresy showeth that the Papists teach infidelity, rather than true faith.  
53. Finally if heresy be an opinion contrary to faith as Ocham saith, or to scriptures, as Robert Grosthed affirmeth, apud Matth. Paris in Henrico 3. or to conclusions deduced out of scriptures, as the council of Basil signifieth apud Aen. Sylu. de gest. council. Basil. lib. 1. then are all the opinions of Papists condemned by the church of England for heresies, as being repugnant to canonical scriptures, and the faith deduced out of them.  
And these heresies albeit anciently condemned are yet generally holden by the Papists. but if I should rehearse the particular heresies of Popes and their chief doctors, there would be no end of the rehearsal. Gelasius the Pope in his epistle to the Bishops of Picenum saith, that the substance of man is depratied by original sin. which importeth rather the destruction of nature, than the loss of grace, according to his opinion.  
The master of sentences lib. 2. dist. 31. teacheth, that the flesh only, and not the soul is made unclean by original sin.  
Likewise lib. 1. dist. 24. he saith that names of number put nothing in the Trinity, which overthroweth the real distinction of the three persons in the Trinity.  
Again lib. 1. dist. 17. he saith, that the holy ghost is nothing but charity, whereby we love God. his addendum, saith he, quòd ipse idem spiritus sanctus est amor, sive charitas, qua nos diligimus Deum & proximum. which overthroweth the subsistence of the holy ghost.  
john the 22. as we read in the letters of Michael Cesenas placed after the works of Occam, denied the personal distinction of the father, the son, and the holy ghost. he denied also that the souls of the faithful do see God before the day of judgement.  
The abbot joachim, as we read in the chap. damnamus. de sum. trin. & sid. cath. saith, that the father, the son, and the holy ghost are one, non unitate essentiae, sed collectionis tantum, not by unity of essence, but by unity of collections as divers citizens make one people: which overthroweth the unity of the divine essence.  
Albert upon the first book of sentences dist. 9 and Thomas Aquinas in scripto confess, that speaking of the persons of the Trinity, we may say three eternals adiectively; which is direct against the Creed of Athanasius.  
The Friars of the order of Dominicke and Francis, anno D. 1243. as Matth. Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. p. 593. taught, that the divine essence is not formally the same in the holy ghost, that is in the father and the son: which may not stand with the deity of the holy ghost.  
Augustine Steuchus in princip. genes. saith, that coelum empyreum was coeternal with God. he might as well have made two Gods.  
The same man in Genes. 2. saith, that Adam should have died, although he had never sinned. he denieth also that sin is the cause of death, opposing his opinion to the Apostles doctrine Rom. 5.  
Hector Pintus in Danielis 12. denieth the resurrection of infants dying not baptized.  
To let others pass for this time, and to talk only of the rubicundious Cardinal Bellarmine, whom our chatemiticall mass-priests, call master, first lib. 2. de Christo. c. 26. he saith, that it is not repugnant to one person, to be both the son and the holy ghost; as if there could be three persons, there being but two only.  
Secondly every act, whereby virginity is lost, he calleth coinquination and turpitude, lib. 1. de matrimonio c. 5. as if the marriage bed were not truly undefiled, as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.  
Thirdly he saith, that Christ never had, but the Christian church for his spouse, de cleric. lib. 1. c. 24. which excludeth the church of God before Christ from his espousals, and from the right of the Catholic church, which is truly his spouse.  
Fourthly in his book de bonis operibus he seemeth to allow community of wives.  
In his second book de amiss. great. c. 18. he teacheth, that the magistrate sinneth not, in appointing a several place of the city to common whores, like a lusty Cardinal allowing whores, but like a false Apostle condemning marriage.  
In his book de monachis c. 14. he saith the Saints do participate the nature of God. but better divines than he define, that God's essence is incommunicable.  
In his first book de purgatorio c. 10. he confesseth, that a man may be called his own Saviour and Redeemer. thus he hath brought his scholars to a fair pass. for diminishing and denying the merit of Christ in our formal justification, and redemption, he would make them believe, that every man may redeem and save himself.  
And thus you have seen a large pack of popish heresies at the first survey. but we shall add more, if need be, at our next.   

CHAP. IX. A catalogue of divers notorious impicties and blasphemies contained not only in Popish books, but also in the corpse of Popish religion.  
IF it be no small sin to take the name of God in vain, how heinous a sin is it to blaspheme the holy name of God? all sins compared to blasphemy saith Strabus in Isaiae c. 18. may seem light. so grievous it is, that the scriptures sometime avoid the naming of it, and in lieu thereof use the word of 
a job. 1.  Benediction. yei is blasphemy so common in the mouths and writings of Papists, that all the rest of their impieties, though otherwise intolerable, seem small in comparison. hardly can they speak without blaspheming. the Roman catechism in the exposition of the third commandment, or the second as the Papists reckon, confesseth against them this abuse. quis non videat, say the authors of the catechism, omnia iurevirando affirmari, omnia imprecationibus & execrationibus referta esse? that is, who seethe not that all things are affirmed with oaths, and that all men's mouths are full of cursings and execrations? whosoever hath been conversant among Papists knoweth this to be true. they tear God in pieces, and neither respect the laws of God nor man; albeit the emperor in the law ne quis luxurietur etc. calleth this tearing and blaspheming unnatural luxury.  
They teach, that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament blood, flesh, and bone, and call it their Lord and God, and yet like Cannibals, they eat and swallow down their Lord and God, and make no bones of it.  
Blasphemously also they affirm, that a dog or a hog eating a consecrated host, doth eat Christ's true body. If a dog or hog, 
b p. 4. q. 45.  saith Alexander Hales, should eat a consecrated host, I see no cause, but the lords body should go therewithal into to that dogs or hogs belly. and Thomas Aquinas 3. p. sum. where some of his fellows were ashamed of this error, reprehendeth them for it, allowing this beastly devouring of Christ's body.  
Gregory the seventh, as we read in Beno Cardinalis, consulted with this God of paste; & when he could receive no answer threw him into the fire. joannes Portuensis, as he reporteth, disclosed the matter. tale quid fecit Hildebrandus, unde deberemus viut incendi, saith he. this fact, saith Beno, was, that he threw the sacrament of the lords body into the fire, because he could receive no answer of it against the emperor.  
Pius the fist cast one agnus Dei into the water of Tiber, another into the fire, as saith Hierome Catena in Pius his life. Cresciuto il Tevere. saith he, pio vi gittò un agnus dei, & il fuoco appreso in una casa piena di fieno, vi si git to un altero. if then latria be due to the images of Christ; then did Pius cast that into the fire and the water, that he worshipped as God.  
Clement the sixth in the chapter unigenitus ext. come. de poenit. & remiss. maketh the Romanistes thus to cry to the Pope, domine aperi eis thesanrum tuum fontem aquae vive. Lord open to them thy treasure, the fountain of living water. as if the Pope had with him a treasure of graces, and as if his indulgences were the water of life. The mass-priests every day sell Christ, and that for mere trifles. Brigit therefore, as one reporteth in a treatise called onus ecclesiae. c. 23. saith they are worse than judas, for he sold Christ for good money: these sell him for every commodity. pro omni mercimonio.  
The honour of God they ascribe to the Virgin Marie, and to Saints. Confessing their sins they join Mary with God, and leave out Christ, saying consiteor deo omnipotenti B. Mariae semper virgini etc.  
Likewise in a certain provincial constitution beginning authoritate dei omnipotentis de sent. exc. they pronounce excommunication by the authority of God and our lady, and vouchfase not once to name Christ.  
Against the breakers of their laws they denounce the anger of Peter and Paul, as appeareth commonly in late decretales. Christ they quite forget.  
Horatius Tursellinus in an epistle to Peter Aldobrandini prefixed before the history of our Lady of Loreto, and allowed much by the jebusites, saith, that God made the Virgin Mary, as much as could be companion and partaker of his power and Majesty, and gave to her the rule both of heavenly things, and of men on earth; and that God himself, as far as is requisite for man's defence, doth at her pleasure govern the earth, the sea, the heavens, and nature, and at her beck giveth divine treasures and heavenly gifts. matrem suam praepotens ille dens divinae maiestatis potestatisque sociam, quatenus licuit, ascivit. huic olim caelestium mortaliumque principatum detulit, ad huius arbitrium, quoad hominum tutela postulat, terras, maria, coelum, naturamque moderatur. hac annuente, & per hanc diumos the sauros mortalibus, & coelestia dona largitur.  
Bernardinus likewise in Mariali doth say, that all graces come down from God by Mary, as sense and vigour descend from the head to the other members of the body.  
Bonaventure, or rather some wicked falsary under his name, hath transformed the praises and honour of God set out by the Prophet David to the Virgin Mary.  
Commonly they give power to the Virgin Mary over her son. iure matris, say they, impera redemptori.  
In the Roman Breviary she is called dulcis amica dei, and the happy gate of heaven, and to her they pray, to have their bands loosed. In the missal of Sarum they pray thus, per te matter aboleri filiorum slagitamus crimina, nosque omnes introduci insempiterna paradisi gaudia, as if she were the saviour of the world.  
The missals and breviaries are full of impieties. for beside the confession of sins made jointly to Angels and Saints with God, first they offer the Masse-cake, as they say; for the redemption of their souls, pro redemptione animarum suarum. secondly, they make the Priest a mediator to God for the body and blood of Christ, as if by his prayers God did accept his own and only begotten son. supraquae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris, say the mass-priests speaking of Christ's body and blood. thirdly, they compare Christ to brute beasts, and the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood to the sacrifice of Abel, that offered brute beasts. digneris accepta habere, say they, sicut accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui justi Abel. fourthly they desire God that Angels may carry Christ's body into Heaven. fifthly they make God oftentimes a mediator or intercessor to Saints, as appeareth by this prayer, praesta quaesumus, ut quem doctorem vitae habuimus in terris, intercessorem habere mereamur in coelis. the same is also proved, for that Saints know nothing done in earth, as some of them suppose, unless it please God to reveal matters unto them; which if he do, then is God a mediator betwixt the Papists and Saints. sixthly they pray to the cross for increase of justice, and pardon for sin, augepijs justitiam, reisque dona veniam. seventhly in conjuring salt, they pray it may be salt exorcized for the salvation of them that believe, ut essiciaris sal exorcisatnm in salutem credentium. it were infinite to report all their blasphemies, and these may serve for a taste. only this may not be forgotten how praying before a certain counterfeit picture of Christ's face given, as they say, by Christ to Veronica, they pray thus, salve sancta facies impressa panniculo, nos ab omni macula purga vitiorum, atque nos consortio coniunge beatorum. hail holy face, printed in a clout, purge us from all blot of sin, and icine us to the company of blessed spirits in heaven.  
Bellarmine alloweth this common saying of Friars speaking to the crucifix, thou hast redeemed us, thou hast reconciled us to thy father, as we may read lib. 1. de cult. sanct. c. 23.  
That the Gospel is a rule of perfection they deny. but they doubt not to give that honour to the rules of Benet, Brendan, Francis, Dominicke and such authors of sects. of the holy scriptures they speak more blasphemously, than the Turks and Saracens. for they honour the books of the old testament, albeit they oppugn the Christian faith: whereas the papists profess the faith, but speak evil of scriptures. some call them a nose of wax, others a dead letter, the Rhemists call them a kill letter. Stapleton in his doctrinal principles end enoureth to prove that all heresies proceed from scriptures. the surveying Kellison p. 158. of his survey, saith the devil doth wrap himself from top to toe in scriptures: as if scriptures were the habit of the devil. pag. 41. he saith the letter of scripture with a false meaning is the word of the devil. Turrian writing against Sadeel doth call scriptures Delphicum gladium, or an instrument to all purposes. Bellarmine de verbo Dei accuseth them as imperfect and insufficient. neither is there any swad amongst them, but he hath somewhat to say against scriptures.  
To the images of the cross and crucifix, they give as much honour as they give to God. they give the same also to the images of the Trinity, teaching their followers, that it is but one honour, that is given to the image & the thing represented by the image. but the things being two, and that so different, as there is no proportion betwixt them, they must needs blaspheme giving the name and honour of God to these base creatures  
The Pope advanceth himself above all that is worshipped, and refuseth not the name and titles of God. in the chap. satis, dist. 96. he is called God. and hereupon Steuchus in his treatise for defence of Constantine's donation: audis, saith he, summum pontisicem à Constantino Deum appellatum & habitum pro Deo? In the chap. quoniam. de immunitate in 6. he calleth himself the spouse of the church. in the chap. inter corporalia. de transla. praelat. we read these words, quando Papa dissoluit matrimonium, unletur quod Deus solus dissoluit matrimonium. he is called a God in the earth by Felin. in c. ego N. de jure iurando. and by Baldus m l●g. vlt. C. sententi●e reseindendae. Abbas Panormitanus expressly saith, that Christ and the Pope have but one consistory. the gloss in c. cum interextr. joan. 22. de verb. signif. doth call the Pope our Lord and God.  
Further he maketh a scorn of Christian religion. julius the second, upon Easter day sought with the French at Ravenna. Gregory the seventh his army upon their good Friday fought with Henry the 4. in S. maries church he sought to murder the Emperor by throwing down a stone upon his head from a vault. Sixtus the fourth his agents at the elevation of the sacrament endeavoured to murder Laurence and julian de medicis, as Volaterran Geograph. lib. 5. testifieth. that of Gregory is written by him that wrote the emperors life, and by Beno Cardinalis. Leo the tenth called the gospel a fable. commonly the Popes send the sacrament before them, together with their baggage and the scullery.  
And as if Christ had given us no sufficient rules of religion, so he inventeth and confirmeth daily new religions, as for example of late the religion of the jebusites, and in former times the rules of Benet, Francis, and Dominike.  
His followers fall down like beasts before him and worship him as God. Paulus Aemilius lib. 2. telleth how the Ambassadors of Sicily cried thus to the Pope, thou which takest away the sins of the world have mercy upon us, thou which takest away the sins of the world give unto us peace. and Simon Begnius bishop of Modrusa in the Council of Lateran ses. 6. calleth Leo the 10. his saviour. te beatissim● Leo salvatorem exspectavimus, saith he. Stapleton writing to Gregory the 13. calleth him, supremum numen in terris. his epistle is extant before his doctrinal principles. they call him the vicar of Christ, the monarch of the church, the head, the spouse and foundation of the church, most blasphemously ascribing to him the honour due to Christ.  
Most shamefully also they rack scriptures to apply them to the Pope. Thomas Waldensis that fleering friar in his prologue before the first tome of his works; turneth the words which the apostle spoke to Christ, to Martin the fift. Domine saith he, salva nos, perimus. Lord save us, we perish. declaring that the Pope is the saviour of friars. Cornelius' bishop of Bitonto in the conventicle of Trent, uttereth these blasphemous speeches, the Pope the light is come into the world, but men loved the darkness more than light.  
Antoninus' part. 3. doth compare Dominike with Christ, and saith he wrought more miracles than Christ. dominus Christus, saith he, est dominus absolutè & authoritatiuè, Dominicus possessiuè. that is, Dominicke is Lord of the world by possession, Christ by authority and absolutely. likewise the book of conformities of Christ and Francis doth contain nothing, but blasphemous comparisons betwixt them two. Francis they call the figurative jesus, and in heaven they say, he and his company is kept in Christ's side. To S. Dominike & his company they give a place under our Lady's gown. Fulbertus bishop of Charters saith Radulphus niger, was nourished with our Lady's milk. they tell also blasphemous tales of Alane de rupe the author of our Lady's Rosary, and say that he was very familiar with the blessed virgin.  
Finally it is no marvel, if Romish religion be full of impieties and blasphemies, seeing the same was devised by Popes, that were most impious and great blasphemers. Benet the 9 and Sylvester the second, gave themselves to the devil, as Beno testifieth. Gregory the 7. in a solemn Council was condemned for a sotthsayer, a necromancer and a wicked fellow. the Council of Pisa, as Theodoric à Niem lib. 3. c. 44. reporteth, condemned Gregory the 12. and Benet the 13. as notorious wicked men. Alexander the 6. as is said, believed not that there was a God. john the 23. in the Council of Constance was convinced, that he believed not the resurrection. Leo the 10. and Clement the 7, by Papists themselves were reputed atheists. Paul the 3. was a great magician, and very familiar with Cecco d'ascoli. julius the 3. called for his gambon of bacon all dispet to di dio, that is, in despite of God, and said that he had more reason to be angry for a peacock, than God for an apple. Boccace in his second novel bringeth in a jew marveling, how Reme could stand, in which there was no religion at all.  
If I should report all the blasphemies of particular authors, I should fill up a whole volume with them. only thus much I thought good to say, for to give you an assay of greater matters. Faber in his book adverse. anatomen missae fol. 25. compareth Christ to the drunken Silenus. anon saith he, mirisi●us Silenus suit Christus? in another place he calleth Christ an iuchanter. Bellarmine lib. 1. de sanct. beat. c. 13. alleging a place out of justine martyr, but most falsely, placeth angels before the holy ghost, and would have them worshipped together with the holy Trinity. to the Pope also in his Preface before his books the Pontif. Rom. and in his book de Pontif. Rom. c. 31. he giveth the proper titles of Christ. but I cannot in this short treatise report all. he that list to see divers examples of Parsons his impieties and blasphemies, let him read my answer to his warn-word, and 3. conversions. Kellison is convinced of the same crime in my answer to his Survey.   

CHAP. X. That Popery is a sink of heathenish idolatry.  
OF this argument I have spoken at large in my last challenge. much therefore I shall not need to say in this brief survey. yet for that we perceive, that by the secret and cunning practice of the Devil, the idolatry of the heathen nations, overthrown by the preaching of the Gospel, is brought back again under colour of Christianity, briefly we are to say somewhat of the former argument. It may please God percase to open the eyes of some Papists, and to work a detestation in them of popery, if they may see, that as a sink it hath together with heresy received into itself most gross and heathenish idolatry. but this is proved first by these words of the law Exod. 20. thou shalt have no other Gods before me. for this being directed principally against the heathenish worship of more Gods than one, certain it is, that whosoever doth worship more Gods than one, or giveth the honour of God to creatures, is an idolater. but this fault is diversly incurred by the Papists. for first they call the Pope their Lord and God, in gloss. in c. cum inter. extrau. joan. 22. de verb. signific.. and both Felm, and Baldus, as I showed in the last chapter, do call him a God on the earth. absolutely also he is called God in the chap. satis, dist. 96. and divers other places. secondly they call the sacrament their Lord and God, as appeareth by Allens treatise de sacrsic. eucharist. c. 41. and Bristol in his 26. motive. neither will they deny, but they give unto it divine honour, as to God. thirdly Bellarmine lib. 1. de cult. sanct. c. 9 doth call Saints Gods by participation. but whosoever is God by participation, he is absolutely God. for the deity is not communicable to any creature. lastly to the sacrament, and to the cross they give divine honour saying to the cross, o crux, ave spes unica, and falling down like beasts before the pyx. they do also make vows to Saints, swear by Saints, and confess their sins jointly to them, and to God. therefore plainly are they idolaters. for these are honours not due to any but to God, as at large I have showed in my treatise against Bellarmine's disputes de culiu sanctorum.  
My second argument is drawn from the second commandment directed against the heathenish idolatry of those, which worshipped God in graven images. for that forbiddeth the making either of graven image, or likeness to the intent to adore it or worship it. but the Papists both make such images and pictures, and fall down before them, and worship them. to the cross they pray, 
a In breuiar. Rom.  auge pijs justitiam, reisque dona veniam. that is, increase righteousness in the godly, and grant pardon to sinners. to these images they burn incense, as did the heathen to their idols. nay Alexander Hales p. 3. q. 30. art. vlt. and Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 25. art. 3. and other schoolmen affirm, that what honour is due to the original, the same is also due to the image. which is more than the heathen ever supposed. lastly they kiss these images, touch them with their beads, and because they are blind, set up light before them.  
Thirdly we read Deut. 4. that God to repress the idolatry of his people told them, that when they heard him speak out of the fire in mount Horeb, yet they saw no likeness of any thing. do they not then run into this sin, that make the likeness of God, and represent God the father in the image of an old man, and God the holy ghost in the figure of a dove? if this be not idolatry, yet it is certainly idolatry to give the same honour to one of these images, which they give to God. neither will they deny, that it is idolatry to give God's honour to creatures. they must therefore either deny these images to be creatures, or confess themselves to be idolaters.  
Fourthly, where God by the Prophet Psal. 81. forbiddeth the having of new Gods, or worshipping strange Gods, saying, non erit in te Deus recens, neque adorabis Deum alienum, we are taught, that it is idolatry to have new Gods, or to worship strange Gods. but the Papists every day make new crucifixes, and new Gods of the altar, and the Pope also canonizeth new Saints, which every one of his followers is bound to worship. these are also most strange Gods. for neither were they known to the people of God before Christ, nor were any such things worshipped by the ancient catholic Church. finally some crucifixes are so evilfavoured, and some saints so huge and monstrous, that they are more fit to scare crows, than to be worshipped of Christians.  
The holy scriptures Amos. 5. and Act. 7. condemn them for idolaters, that worshipped and served the host of heaven. but the Papists deny not, but that Dulia and service is due to Angels, and Saints, and all the host of heaven, and accordingly they do them service in most ample manner.  
The gentiles are condemned Psal. 114. for that they worshipped images of silver and gold, and the work of men's hands. images I say, that had mouths & spoke not, eyes & saw not, noses and smelled not, hands and handled not, feet, but walked not, and that were not able to viter one word out of their throat. now gladly would I have any Papist to show me, that their images are of other matter and form, and that they have more perfect senses, than the images of the gentiles. the lady of Loreto, notwithstanding the report of her great miracles, neither seethe, nor speaketh one word.  
The gentiles did think they offered sacrifices pleasing to God. yet the Apostle 1. Cor. 10. because they were offered without warrant, saith, they offered them to devils. if then the Papists have no warrant for their sacrifices in the honour of Angels and Saints, then are they to be reputed as idolaters and sacrificers to devils.  
The Prophet Hicremie c. 7. declareth them to be idolaters, that built high places never commanded by God, and made vows to the Queen of heaven, and served her. but this is just the case of mass-priests, that in every great church have high altars, and that without commandment of God, or precedent of ancient Catholics. they do also make vows to our lady, whom they call the Queen of heaven, and serve her most diligently, saying more ave Maria's, than prayers to God.  
In the book of Baruch c. 6. the Babylonians are reputed to beidolaters, for that they carried their Gods of gold, silver, wood, and stone upon their shoulders, adorned them with costly apparel and jewels, worshipped them, albeit their faces were dusty, and they unable to guard themselves from rust, corruption, and thieves. why then should not the Papists be so reputed likewise, seeing they adorn dumb idols, and worship them, that cannot guard themselves from corruption and rust, and are often stolen away by thieves, or molten to serve base uses? is it more ridiculous in the heathen to carry about their images, then for the Papists?  
The idolatrous jews were condemned for saying to a stock, thou art my father, and to a stone thou hast begotten me; as we read Hieremy 2. and yet the Papists before stocks and stones say pater noster, and the babbling Friars in their chairs turning to a little crucifix of wood or metal set by them, say, thou hast redeemed us, thou hast reconciled us. and this Bellarmine lib. 2. de cult. sanct. c. 23. is not ashamed to allow. but all of them together must be thrust into the roll of idolaters.  
S. john giveth Christians warning to keep themselves from graven images 1. john. 5. but why so, if there were no idolatry in worshipping them? either must the Papists deny their images to be simulachra, and themselves to worship them, or confess themselves to be idolaters.  
The Israelites judges 10. confess their service of Baalim or other Lords, to be lewd and idolatrous, and God taxeth them there for serving and invocating other Gods. if then the Papists call upon their volto santo, or their crosses, or the Queen and host of heaven, and serve them; they cannot clear themselves from the faults of the idolatrous Israelites.  
The worship of Angels both by scriptures and fathers is condemned as idolatrous. the Apostle Coloss. 2. exhorteh Christians to beware, lest they be seduced by humility and religion of Angels. the Angel Apocalyps. 22. forbade john to worship him, and addeth this reason, for that he was his fellow servant. the worship of Angels by the council of Laodicea c. 35. is declared to be idolatrous. Christian's must not leave the church saith the council, and make meetings for the idolatrous worship of Angels. Theodoret in Coloss. 2. saith that by this council those were condemned, that prayed to Angels. S. Hierom. in epist. ad Riparium saith, that Christians neither adore Angels nor Archangels. we honour them with love saith S. Augustine de ver. relig. c. 55. and not with service, nor do we build temples to them. God will not have us to adore Angels saith Epiphanius haeres. 79. finally Tertullian de prescript. adverse. haeret. showeth, that the service of Angels was accounted to be idolatry, and that it descended from Simon Magus. but the Papists cannot deny, but they serve Angels. they also pray unto them in their public litanies saying, sancte Michael, sancte Gabriel, sancte Raphael, omnes Angeli & Archangeli orate pro nobis. in their Mass they confess their sins to Angels, saying, confiteor Beato Michaeli Archangelo. in their breviaries they pray to an Angel unknown, whom they call their guardian. but praying to them, and serving them they show themselves to have a tack of heathenish idolatry.  
It appeareth both by scriptures, and practise of the church, that to burn incense to graven images hath been reputed idolatrous. the idolatrous Iewes 2. Paral p. 30. are noted as burning incense to their idols. Marcellina burned incense to the images of jesus, Paul, Homer and Pythagoras, and is therefore taxed by S. Augustine de haeres. neither did the heathen Emperors require more at the hands of Christians, than that they should offer certain grains of incense to their Gods. but every man knoweth how the Papists place images on their altars, and continually offer incense unto them. they burn also incense in the honour of Angels and Saints, and set up lights before their images.  
They that offer sacrifice to creatures are idolaters. for sacrifice is the highest honour, that is done to God. and this the Papists themselves confess. but the mass-priests offer the sacrifice of prayers and praises to Angels and Saints, and incense to their images. they offer also the body and blood of Christ, as they say, in honour of them. neither can they excuse themselves by saying. that they offer not the sacrifice of the Mass to Angels or Saints. for in the time of the law no sacrifices were offered in the honour of any creature. neither is there any difference betwixt offering to God, and in the honour of God.  
Saint Ambrose teacheth us, that to worship the cross or crucifix is plain idolatry and paganism. invenit Helena crucem Domini, saith he, 
a De obitu Theodosijs.  regem adoravit: non lignum vitque, quia hic gentilis error, sed adoravit illum, qui pependit in cruse. Helena found the Lords cross, and adored her king; not the wood; for that is the error of the gentiles. but she adored him, that hung upon the cross. the Papists therefore adoring the wooden cross, nay adoring every stick put a cross, are gross idolaters, and like the gentiles, if Ambrose may sit judge.  
Epiphanius haeres. 79. showeth that the diabolical invention of images hath adulterated the service of God, and brought in spiritual fornications.  
The council of Francford, under Charles the great showeth, that images being worshipped in Churches, are idols, as may be gathered out of these words that are in his book de imaginibus. non nos imagines in basilicis positas idola nuncupamus, sedne idola nuncupentur, adorare & colere eas recusamus. we do not call images placed in great Churches, idols, but we refuse to worship and adore them, lest they should be called idols.  
Hierome in Abacuc. 2. writeth, that all perverse opinions, which of the inventors thereof are adored, are graven images. and by that he meaneth idols. but I have showed, that Papists maintain many heretical opinions.  
Finally their own confession doth testify against them. for Bellarmine doth confess lib. 2. de imaginib. c. 5. that an idol is a false similitude, and representeth that, which is not. but Papists worshipping S. George that killed the dragon, and S. Catherine that broke the wheel, and the image of God the father, worship false images. for neither shall they prove, that God is like an old man, or that the images of George & Catherine express any truth. they say also, that it is idolatry to give divine honour to creatures. but they give divine honour to the sacrament, to the crosses and to the images of the Trinity: which I hope they will not deny to be creatures.  
Neither do they bring any better excuses, than the heathen idolaters. Bellarmine lib. 2. de imaginibus c. 24. saith, that images are not worshipped by them per se & propriè, that is for themselves, and properly. but well could the gentiles say as much.  
Again he saith, they worship not images as Gods. so likewise did the gentiles answer, as Lactantius showeth instit. lib. 2. c. 2. non ipsa, inquit, timemus etc. we do not fear them, say the idolaters speaking of images, but them, to whose likeness they were made, and for whose sakes they were consecrated. the same may be proved by the testimony of S. Augustine in psal. 113.  
Lastly they say, they put no trust in images. but never did the gentiles trust so much in the images of jupiter or juno, as the Papists trust in the images of our Lady of Loreto, james of Compostella, the Rood of Mantua, and such like.   

CHAP. XI. That Popish religion never came from Jerusalem.  
TRue Christian religion was first preached in Jerusalem, and from thence was derived throughout all nations unto the ends of the world. ye shall be witnesses unto me saith our saviour to his Apostles Act. 1. both in Jerusalem, & in all judaea, and in Samaria, and to the ends of the world. and herein was the prophesy of Isay. c. 2. fulfilled, that told us long before, how the law should go forth out of Zion, and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem. neither need we insist much upon this point. for Stapleton in his relection of doctrinal principles contr. 1. q. 5. confesseth so much, and every odd masspriest, that taketh upon him to handle these matters, is still talking of the beginning of religion at Jerusalem. but little wots they poor souls how little advantage this bringeth to their cause. for if they be not either impudent or desperate, they will never say, that these grounds, these doctrines, these heresies and idolatries which before are mentioned, came from Jerusalem. but should they run beside themselves with fury, yet will they never be able to prove their assertion.  
To give them further particular instances, gladly would I have Kellison the surueior, or (because he is bu● a kettler newly come forth with the droppings of Divinity, out of Stapletons' tubs, and Aquinas his water barrels) the stoutest champion of the Pope to prove the principal pillars of Popery to have come from Jerusalem. Petrus Fontidonius in a Sermon of his in the conventicle of Trent told his auditory, that the two principal pillars of the Roman church were the Mass, and the Pope. let us then see, whether any of them can show, that these two came from Jerusalem. we have invincible reasons to the contrary. for first Missa is a Latin word, as Bellarmine de missa, and the lernedst of the adversaries confess. but it is not likely that Latin Masses should come from Jerusalem. secondly the Latin Mass doth differ much from that of S. james, both in the canon, and other parts. thirdly Gregory saith, the Apostles consecrated, saying only the Lords prayer. four the massmonger Priests confess, that Celestine made the introit, and Gelasius & Gregory other parts: which were no bishops of Jerusalem, but of Rome. fifthly the Eastern church to this day defieth the Latin Mass, which it is not like it would have done, if it had come from Jerusalem. sixthly there is no probability, that in Jerusalem these words & aeterni, and mysterium fidei were added in the consecration of the cup. for Christ used them not, neither are they Hebrew but Latin. seventhly in Jerusalem it was never believed, that Christ either did eat up himself, or offer himself to his father at his last supper, or that he offered himself twice, or that there was any priest after the order of Melchisedech, but Christ. for the Apostle to the Hebrews teacheth contrary. finally we never read that the Christians in Jerusalem believed, that some Masses were wet, some dry, some in the honour of Angels, some in the honour of Saints, some in the honour of confessors, some good for pigs, others for horses, some for quick, some for dead; or that all those tricks and skips are commendable, which the mass-priests use at the altar; or that Christ ordained either the consecration of Churches with the alphabet in Greek; or that Priests were to use those ceremonies, which now are frequented in the church of Rome in the celebration of the Mass.  
That the Pope came not from Jerusalem, it appeareth first, for that among all the ministers of the church described Eph. 4. and 1. Cor. 12. there is no Pope, nor monarch of the church expressed. we read of Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and others: but the Pope is quite forgotten. which is most unlikely, especially considering that he is by the Papists supposed to be the head and foundation of the church. secondly the name is rather Latin, than Hebrew, or Syriake. for some derive it from papè, because the Pope is the wonderment of the world. some from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, some from the 2. syllables of pater patrum. Thirdly at Hierissalem never was there any termed by the name of Christ's vicar's general, or that wore a triple crown, and had a guard of Switzars' attending upon him. four Saint Peter never took upon him to depose kings, or to translate kingdoms from one to another, which the Pope now usurpeth. fifthly the Pope's decretales and decrees, which contain the Pope's office and authority, and the marrow of his religion, have proceeded from Rome, and not from Jerusalem. sixthly we read, that the law of God, and not the Pope's laws came from Jerusalem. finally the faith and doctrine of the Pope for the most part hath been invented and published since Jerusalem came to be subject to the Saracens and Turks. if then it came from the Turkey Jerusalem, it must needs be rather Turkish, than Christian. the decretales are rather like the Alcoran, than the new testament. the force that the Pope useth against Christians proceedeth rather from Mahomet, then from S. Peter. The pilgrimages to Rome are like the pilgrimages to Mecha. lastly both Turks and Papists worship Saints, and pray for the dead alike.  
To proceed a little further, the Romish fine Sacraments added to the Sacrament of baptism and the Lords supper, had never allowance by the Apostles remaining at Jerusalem. for albeit marriage, Priesthood and repentance were always practised by the people of God under the law, yet were they not used as Sacraments. neither in these matters did either the people of God under the law, or the first Christians use the Popish orders and forms or Sacraments now at Rome frequented. in time past neither were Priests prohibited to marry, nor were there any times limited for marriage, nor was it deemed unlawful for gossips to marry.  
In Jerusalem never was any such form of ordering of Priests known, as is used in popery, where they say receive power to offer sacrifice for quick and dead. Nor did the Christians of Jerusalem believe, that there were seven orders, and every one a Sacrament, and yet but one Sacrament in all, or that Priests were to have shaven crowns.  
To think, that the first Christians at Jerusalem confessed their sins every year at the least in the Priest's care, is most absurd. likewise to say that the form of absolution that is now used, was then known. thirdly Christians than did neither lash themselves, nor think to satisfy for sins by eating saltfish or going barefoot. lastly they neither believed, that Christians were to satisfy for their sins in purgatory, nor that the Pope carried the keys of purgatory, and could deliver souls from thence by indulgences.  
This form of Confirmation, signo te signo crucis, & confirmo te Chrismate salutis etc. was by authority first established in the conventicle of Florence under Eugenius the 4. a Venetian, and not by any, that came from Jerusalem. he also ordered that oil and balm should be the matter of this Sacrament. Bonaventure and Alexander Hales affirm, that Confirmation was instituted at Melda. popish confirmation is far degenerated from that Confirmation that was used in the primitive church, and which we retain in England.  
The form also & matter of extreme unction was there appointed by Eugenius. the doctrine of the character, and effects of extreme unction are not to be found, but in the frapling schoolmen.  
Now he that should seek for the original of holy water, and holy salt, and holy candles at Jerusalem, he should but seek to draw water out of a flint, and as well might he light a candle in the sea water. in the Roman missal we find these words, I exorcize or conjure thee thou creature of water, and exorcizo te creatura salis, and such like. but Stapleton should show these things out of some Hebrew or Syriake missal.  
The eating of Paschal lambs, I confess, was used at Jerusalem: but not by Christians, but by jews, observing the ceremonies of Moses his law.  
The Romish missals, breviaries, our lady's Psalters, the rosaries and such like books and ceremonies came out of the closet of the Pope's breast, and not from Jerusalem, as I think our adversaries will confess, if they be put to the question.  
In Rome upon good Friday they make agnus Dei, of holy wax, and holy chrism, and these, they say, do defend Christians from lightning and tempest. hiagnia fulgure & tempestate fideles & credentes defendunt, saith Durand. rational. diumor. lib. 6. c. 79. but this ceremony came never from Jerusalem. neither did the Christians there believe any such doctrine.  
When a church is consecrated the bishop sprinkleth the walls with holy water, knocketh at the door, and saith, attollite principes portas vestras. than he maketh crosses on the pavement, and describeth all the Greek and Latin alphabet, as Durand showeth lib. 1. rat. divin. c. 6. but if popery had come from Jerusalem, it is more likely, he should describe the Hebrew alphabet. such abuses of scripture and foolish ceremonies, certes, never came from the Christians of Hicrusalem, but from the followers of Antichrist at Rome.  
The conventicle of Trent maketh the old Latin vulgar translation authentical. but if the same had hoped to prove the Romish religion by the practice of the Church of Jerusalem, the same would never have neglected the Hebrew text.  
The Church of Jerusalem diligently observed God's commandment concerning the making and worshipping of granen images, and the whole worship of God. we may not therefore think, that either the Christians there made the images of God the father, and the holy ghost, or else worshipped and burnt incense to them: and very absurd it were, if any man should suppose, that the Popish invocation and worship of Saints and Angels is to be proved by their practice. Philo in legate. ad Caium saith, the jews thought it impious, either in picture, or graven work to represent God, that is invisible. invisibilem Deum pingere aut singere nefas duxerunt maiores nostri, saith he. neither if we run through the Bible shall we find any precedent of the popish invocation and worship of Saints used in the Romish church.  
Finally if the Church of Jerusalem had known or suspected, that S. Peter or his successors had been designed Christ's vicar's general, and monarches of the Church, and appointed to give laws to the whole world; then would they never have suffered him to departed from Jerusalem.  
The Pope and his complices therefore must seek some other place, than Jerusalem, whence to derive their doctrine, laws, ceremonies, and forms of government, or else they will never find out the true descent of their church. In Babylon, certes, they shall rather find out these matters, than in Jerusalem.   

CHAP. XII. That popish religion was never taught either by the old Prophets, or by the Apostles of Christ jesus.  
Faithful Christians, as the Apostle teacheth us, Ephes. 2. are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. and this the Papists must needs confess, although much to their grief, unless they will deny the words of the Apostle. but popery is built upon the Pope and upon his decretales and determinations, and supported stoutly by his purple Cardinals, and the merchants of Babylon the mass-priests, and neither upon Christ nor the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets.  
The Apostle 2. Tim. 3. showeth, that the scriptures are able to make us wise to salvation, and are given of God, that the man of God may be absolute, and made perfect unto all good works. but Papists teach, that they are an imperfect rule, and without traditions unsufficient. for that is the doctrine of Bellarmine, and all his consorts. they do also rail against holy scriptures, and call them a dead and kill letter.  
The holy Prophets brought no message to those nations, to whom they were sent, but they confirmed the same by the testimony of God, that sent them, saying, thus saith the Lord. and the Lord hath spoken it. but the conventicle of Trent confirmed their doctrine by their own pleasures for the most part. and albeit sometime the same allegeth scriptures, yet their best and common argument was, placet nobis. their school doctors also for matters controversed do more commonly allege the Pope's decretales, than holy scriptures.  
Rom. 10. we read that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. but Camsius in his catechism de sid. & symb. signifieth that we are not to believe God's word revealed, unless the same be also propounded by the church. and by the church he understandeth the Pope and his adherents.  
Peter and john Act. 4. show, that God is rather to be obeyed then man. but the Romish church doth excommunicate all that hearken not to the Pope, whatsoever is contained in the scriptures to the contrary.  
The conventicle of Trent Sess. 4. teacheth us that we are to embrace traditions not written, with equal affection to traditions and holy scriptures. but this doctrine was not known either to the Apostles or Prophets. nay Moses doth teach quite contrary. ye shall put nothing to the word, which I command you, nor shall ye take aught therefrom, saith he, Deut. 4. and S. Paul Galat. 1. if any man preach unto you otherwise, than that ye have received, saith he, let him be accursed. this curse therefore doth fall on the Friars and Mass priests, that preach the Pope's doctrines, which they shall never prove to have been received from the Apostles, though they read until their eyes drop out of their heads.  
The religion of Papists doth for the most part consist in prayers to Saints, Masses and offices in the honour of Angels, the Virgin Mary, martyrs, confessors, and the Pope's canonised creatures, in erecting of crosses and crucifixes, and other images, in burning incense before images. nay they give divine honour to creatures, which themselves cannot deny to be idolatrous. cum Christus adoretur adoratione latriae, consequens est, quòd cius imago sit adoratione latriae adoranda. seeing Christ, saith Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 25. art. 3. is worshipped with latria (or honour properly belonging to God) it followeth, that his image is also to be worshipped with the adoration of latria, or divine worship. either therefore must our adversaries show, that the Prophets and Apostles offered sacrifices in honour of Angels and Saints, and made prayers unto them, and set up images to be worshipped in temples, and used to burn incense unto them, and to honour them after the manner of Papists, or else they must confess that their religion proceedeth not from the Prophets and Apostles. how hard this proof will be, it may appear in this, that God's laws Deut. 4. and Exod. 20. directly forbidden the making of graven images after the likeness of God, and the worship of idols, and Christ ordained the eucharist to be received in commemoration of his death and passion, and never so much as mentioned the offering of his own body and blood or other sacrifices in the honour of Saints and Angels.  
The mass-priests that plotted the ruin of religion at Trent sess. 6. ascribe man's justification to his works, and exclude justification both by Christ's justice, and by faith apprehending Christ and believing in him. but both the Prophet Abacuc chap. 2. and S. Paul Rom. 1. affirm, that the just do live by faith. the Apostle also 1. Cor. 1. saith, that our Saour Christ is made wisdom and righteousness unto us. which if it were wrought by our works, than should we have been made wisdom and righteousness unto ourselves. nay the Apostle Rom. 3. saith, if Abraham were justified by works, that then he had wherein to rejoice, but not with God.  
Popish religion consisteth most in external ceremonies, as for example in salt, holy water, holy candles, incense, ringing of sacring bells, adoring crosses and images, greasing of sick men and mass-priests, shaving of crowns, vows, Monkish rules and such like toys. but these fooleries were never known either to the Apostles or Prophets. Nay our Saviour Matth. 15. teacheth that in vain they seek to worship God, that teach for doctrines the precepts of men. he showeth also john 4. that true worshippers worship God in spirit and truth. and the Apostle Coloss. 2. condemneth such as put religion in touching, fasting and such like vain ceremonies.  
The mass-priests call the Pope the spouse and head of the church. but if he mean to derive his authority from the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, he shall declare himself to want both head and brain. for in the Canticles c. 2. and Ephes. 5. the title of spouse of the church is declared to belong to Christ, and him only the scriptures declare to be head of the Church. Gregory lib. 4. ep. 38. ad joan. Constantinopol. showeth that neither Paul, nor Andrew, nor john, nor Peter was the head of the universal church, but all members of the church under one head.  
The Prophets and Apostles do teach us, that the church of God consisteth of sheep and lambs. and such was Peter commanded to feed. God saith by his Prophet Isay c. 11. that there shall be no hurting nor killing in all his holy mountain, and that the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the pard he with the kid. but the Romish Church is full of blood, and wholly upholden by cruelty. in France the Pope and his complices have caused above two hundred thousand persons to be murdered for the profession of the true faith. the fires and butchers axes of their executioners have consumed also infinite Christians in Italy, Spain, England, Scotland, Germany, and the Low countries. very ignorant therefore he is of the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, that supposeth, that the massacring Romish church is founded upon the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets.  
The Prophet Daniel doth prophecy how a certain king shall arise, that shall speak words of blasphemy against the most high, and consume his Saints, and that shall think that he may change times and laws. the Apostle also 2. Thess. 2. showeth, that there shall come a departing, and that the man of sin shall be disclosed, and exalt himself against all that is called God, and that he shall sit in the temple of God. S. john also in his Apocalypse showeth, that Antichrist shall rise after the decay of the Roman Empire, and give life to that state, and that the great whore shall sit upon the seven hills, and have her garments died red in the blood of Saints. but this argueth that the Pope is Antichrist, and that Popish religion is not Christian religion grounded upon the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets, but rather Antichristian heresy founded upon the Pope's decretales, and schoolemens fond and foolish inventions.  
Finally it is not only desperate ignorance, but also mere madness to affirm, that the grounds, doctrines, heresies and blasphemies, which before we have spoken of, are derived out of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles. would Kellison the Pope's grand surveyor undertake to prove unto us all the Pope's traditions concerning the Mass, the dirges and offices for the dead, purgatory, indulgences, holy water, holy candles, paschal lambs, rascal Friars and Monks and such like trash by the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, he should but lose his labour, and percase his wits too. for in their divine writings such fond, superstitious and impious doctrines have no defence nor shelter. but if he mean to find their true beginning, then must he search the Pope's decretales, the writings of schoolmen and canonists and other the Pope's adherents, and there he shall not only find out the first authors, but also the rest of the novelties, fooleries and impieties of the synagogue of Satan.   

CHAP. XIII. That popery was either condemned, or not known by Kings and Princes professing Christian religion in old time.  
THe Pope's Agents, when they are upon their own dunghills, and among their own disciples and favourers, do make great cracks, as if the Popish religion, which is now taught at Rome, were the only religion professed by ancient kings, princes and emperors of Rome, that made profession of the Christian faith. but who so list to read the ancient confessions of Christian kings, and the laws made by them, both for maintenance of the Christian faith, and for the repressing of diverse errors, shall find, that the grounds, doctrines, impieties & absurdities of Popery were either disallowed by them, or unknown unto them.  
The first Christian king of Britain, if we may believe Bede, and others of latter times (for in more ancient histories there is no record of such a king or such matters, as then passed) was Lucius. but we do not find, that the Popish Mass was then hatched. or that Eleutherius bishop of Rome pretended the universal monarchy of the Church. nay we read, that Irenaeus doth make as great account of other churches, as of Rome, albeit the same be first placed in regard of the splendour and authority of that city. furthermore Lucius neither had images nor worshipped them, nor did he give Latria to the cross. of Purgat one and indulgences he could not hear any thing, for that Eleutherius as yet took not upon him to deliver souls out of Purgatory, nor to grant pardons a poena & culpa. finally if Kellison seek to prove the articles of Popery before mentioned by the testimony of Lucius; you shall soon see, that the man will be at a stand.  
The first Christian Emperor of Rome was Constantine the great. but many acts of his declare, that he was neither a slave of the bishop of Rome, nor a professor of Popery. for first by his authority both was the council of Nice assembled, and the acts thereof established, as Enschius in vita Constantini, and other ecclesiastical writers do testify. secondly that faith, which the council of Nice published, he professed. but therein is not one article of Popery established, but rather divers refuted, as namely the doctrine of Papists concerning Christ's humanity, and the Popish real presence, and dissolving priests marriages. for if Christ be true man, then is not his body invisible and impalpable in the Sacrament. again if Christ's body be ascended into heaven, than is not the same in every pyx. if the same be to come from heaven, than is not the same to creep out of a pyx. if marriage of Priests be honourable, and not to be dissolved, as was decreed in the council of Nice by the advice of Paphnutius: then do the Papists teach doctrines of devils, that condemn such marriages, and separate Priests from their wives. thirdly all the acts of that council were confirmed, and not only received by Constantine. but that showeth that the Bishop of Rome then had no more authority in his province, than the Bishop of Alexandria in his, as the sixth canon of the Nicene council testifieth. the 4. canon showeth that the Bishop of Rome had no greater authority in ordaining bishops, than other metropolitans. the fifth canon equalleth his power in excommunication to that, which other Bishops had. to abridge this matter, we find, that the Bishops of Rome. were as well subject to the canons of the council of Nice, as other Bishops. finally we find, that Constantine made laws for church government in his time, and not the Bishops of Rome. Nay the bishops of Rome, as is said in the counterfeit donation of Constantine, had their privileges from Constantine, and not contrariwise. privilegium Romanae ecclesiae pontifici contulit, saith the author of that donation, ut in toto orb Romani pontifices vel●saecendotes ita hun● caput habeant, sicut judices regem. so it appeareth, that the pre-eminence of Roman bishops over all Priests proceeded from the emperors grant, and not from any ordinance of Christ, or divine authority.  
Likewise we read, that the counsels of Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon were called by the authority of Emperors, and that their acts and decrees were ratified by them, and not by the bishops of Rome, more than other bishops, as is pretended.  
Further in the confessions of faith published by those counsels, and received by Theodosius, Martian●●s and other Christian Emperors, there is not one article of popery so much as mentioned. nay albeit the bishops of Rome oppugned the decree of the council of Chalcedon concerning the privilege of the Church of Constantinople; yet prevailed they not. lastly the condemnation of Eutyches in the council of Chalcedon doth overthrow the popish real presence of Christ's body in the sacrament, and transubstantiation. for if Christ have a true body, that is circumscriptible & , then is not Christ's body really in every consecrated host. and if that, according as after the union of the natures both remain, so the bread and wine remain after consecration, as the fathers of that council pretend; then away flieth the fancy of popish transubstantiation.  
Recaredus King of Spain, assembled the third council of Toledo, chased Arianisme out of his dominions, published a confession of the faith, which all Christian bishops of that country received, and governed and confirmed the council. publico regis edicto confirmatum est concilium. the council was confirmed by public proclamation of the king, saith the compiler of the acts of that council. finally in all the acts there is not one article of popery confirmed. but the 21. canon, that alloweth Psalms to be sung at burials, doth utterly overthrow dirges and masses for the dead, and the doctrine of purgatory. for how can they choose but sorrow for the dead, that believe their friends souls to be in purgatory? the 22. canon forbiddeth dances and immodest songs on holy days. the 16. canon is directed against the worship of idols. the 11. canon reproveth Priests, that absolve public sinners without due acts of repentance. which is an abuse very common in the mass-priests. finally in this synod the Spaniard followed the rules of the Church of Constantinople, and not of Rome, as appeareth by the second canon.  
justinian the Emperor, as is reported in the law inter claras. Cod. de sum. Trin. published a confession of faith, which he commanded to be received throughout his dominions. but therein is not any article of popery mentioned. nay divers of his laws concerning the ordination of bishops, the ordering of Churches and other ecclesiastical matters declare, that unto his time the government of the Church belonged to kings and princes, and that yet the Pope had not usurped his general authority, nor excluded temporal Princes. he decreed that the sacraments should be administered contrary to the Popish form in an audible voice, and in atongue that might be understood.  
Gregory the first acknowledged himself subject to the Emperor, and willing to execute his commandments: which showeth, that the Emperor as yet held his authority and would not yield it to the bishop of Rome. his faith also was the same, which other Emperors professed. for as yet Antichrist had not gained the primacy. Gregory himself in his epistle to Serenus of Massilia praiseth him, for that he suffered not images to be adored: and no man needeth to doubt, but that Maurice the Emperor concurred with him in matters of faith.  
Leo the fourth in the chapter de capitulis. dist. 11. professeth, that he will see the emperors orders by all means kept. de capitulis vel praeceptis imperialibus vestris etc. irrefragabiliter custodiendis, saith he, quantum valuimus, & valemus, Christ propitio & nunc & in aewm nos conseruaturos modis omnibus profitemur. this therefore is an argument, that the christian faith as yet was maintained by the authority of the Emperors, & that the bishops of Rome had then made no alteration by their decretales, as not having as yet settled their supreme and tyrannical authority in the Church. in the time of this Leo neither was transubstantiation, nor the necessity of auricular confession in the Priest's ear for all sins, nor communion under one kind heard of.  
Beda in the Preface of his Ecclesiastical history praiseth king Ceolulphus, for that he heard the words of holy Scriptures diligently. but now among papists laymen are not commended for hearing scriptures. at that time neither were the 7. sacraments confirmed, nor the Pope's doctrine of Purgatory and indulgences once delivered.  
Irene though a semipagan Empress, and a worshipper of images, yet did not give divine worship to the crucifix or images of the Trinity.  
Charles the great in a synod at Francford condemned the idolatrous decrees of the 2. Nicene synod assembled under Irene. Ansegisus lib. 2. c. 19 showeth, that he decreed, that nothing should be read in the church beside canonical scriptures. the same author reporteth divers laws made by him and his son Ludovic contrary to the practice of the modern Romish church. Kellison therefore should work a wonder, if he could prove, that either of these Emperors believed, that the bishop of Rome was head of the church, and had both the sword, and ruled both on earth and in Purgatory. neither shall he be able to show, that they believed that public service and sacraments were to be celebrated in a tongue not understood, or that those were the Apostles successors, that neither preached nor administered the Sacraments.  
Before the conventicle of Laterane Christian kings and princes knew now what transubstantiation meant. neither did they receive the doctrine of the communion under one kind before the synod at Constance. in the conventicle of Florence under Eugenues the 4. the doctrine of the seven Sacraments, of Purgatory, of the Pope's supremacy began to be in more reputution. the rest of their heresies the Pope and his complices could not procure to be authorized before the conventicle of Trent. and yet the French refused to admit the acts of that conventicle, and the Emperor Charles the fift by his agents protested against them. the Queen of England, king of Denmark, Princes of Germany and many other States resolutely rejected and contemned them.  
So we see that the doctrine of the Romish church was never received by many Christian princes, especially this form of doctrine, that is prescribed by the conventicle of Trent. the Pope's excommunications, provisions, rapines, violence and tyranny we find to have been of most Christian kings resisted. when the Popes of Rome began to lift up their heels against the Eastern Emperors Leo Isauricus; and others, and to excommunicate them; they neglected their censures, and in the Eastern parts were obeyed as before. Henry the 4. emperor of Rome drove Gregory the 7. out of his seat, and appointed another in his place. Henry the 5. his son took Paschalis prisoner, and made him swear to certain articles. he broke them afterward, I confess, but that is rather an argument of the Pope's perfidiousness, than a proof against the emperors authority. neither did the Emperors succeeding for many years cease to defend their right against the Pope's encroachments and usurpation, until such time as the Popes by force of arms and rebellion of subjects had prevailed against them. and when they could not by force resist, yet did they often publish their complaints, as appeareth by the message of Maximilian the first, to the Pope, by certain memorial of Charles the fift concerning wrongs offered by the Pope, by the greenances collected by the princes of Germany presented to Adrian the 6. by the apologies of the Bohemians, English, French, and other nations.  
Philip the French king writing to Boniface the 8. used these words. Sciat tua maxima fatuitas, nos in temporalibus nulli subesse. I do thy great foolery, saith he writing to him, to wit, that for temporal matters we are subject to none. the same king did also handle the Pope's nuntioes according to their deserving.  
Henry the 2. as Matthew Paris testifieth, forbade the payment of Peter pence; and such as appealed to the court of Rome he committed to prison. appellantes ad curiam Rom. mandavit custodiae. afterward writing to the bishop of Colein he threatueth to impugn the Pope, and to thrust out of his kingdom all his favourers. Papam & omnes suos, saith he, manifestè impugnabimus, & quicunque in terra mea inventus fuerit, qui Papae posthac adhaerere volverit, expelletur è regno. happy had he been, if he had always persisted in this purpose. the kings of England afterward by their laws against provisions restrained the Pope's authority: and in the end that famous and worthy Prince King Henry the eight did utterly exclude the Pope and his Agents from all jurisdiction within his kingdom.  
Furthermore albeit some princes were so senseless, that they felt not the wrongs offered them by the Pope; yet did such as loved the honour of their country, never cease to complain thereof. Alan Chartier showeth that Priests in the eyes of the people were become most vile, and that the hearts of men were alienated from the Pope's obedience. corda hominum ab obedientia (scilicet Papae) alienata. julian the cardinal writing to Eugenius the fourth showeth it was to be feared, lest the laity should fall upon the clergy. ne irruerent in ecclesiasticos laici. The Germans in the end of their grievances, say, that they neither would suffer, nor could endure the wrongs offered them by the Pope. Dixerunt Germani Principes, saith he that reported their grievances, se onera Papae nec perferre velle, nec tolerare posse. Nicholas de Clemangis showeth, that both Princes and others murmured against the Pope's exactions. Charles the French king inveighing against Benet the 13. signifieth, that God would displace the Popes out of their seats for oppressing and spoiling Christ's sheep. facti sunt greges mei in rapinam etc. propterea cessare eos faciam, ut non pascant ulterius gregem meum. these words Charles applied against the Pope. the English being excommunicated in king john's time, called the Pope's agents marcidos ribaldoes, that is rotten rascals, and signified, that they would not endure their tyranny. Petrus de Ferrarijs in form. resp. rei conventi. bewaileth the misery of Christian princes. that endured so many wrongs at the Pope's hands, and made themselves his slaves, and yet provided no remedy for it. heu miseri imperatores & principes seculares, saith he, qui haec & alia sustinetis, & vos servos Pontificum facitis, & mundum per eos infinity modis usurpari videtis, nec de remedio cogitatis! Christian Princes and Kings therefore have always abhorred the Pope's tyranny, & refused his religion, and the more christian they have showed themselves, the more resistance they have made both against his corruptions in doctrine, and his usurpations and abuses in government. Vlrichus Vttenus in his preface to Laurentius Vallaes' treatise against the counterfeit donation of Constantine doth thus exclaim against the Popes, as enemies and spoilers of all Christians. anon fuerunt Christianorum hostes illi pontifices, qui omnium ad se opes attraxerunt, onmibus liberis servitutem moliti sunt? qui imper to reges, pe● unia ci●es de●l aliabant? were not the Pope's enemies of Christians, which drew unto themselves the wealth of all, and endeavoured to oppress all free men? which spoilt kings of their government, and the subjects of their money?   

CHAP. XIIII. That the ancient Britan's and English were not first converted to Popish religion.  
LEt that abide in you, saith S. john 1. epist. 2. which you have heard from the beginning. so likewise we say, let us abide in that faith, and let that faith abide in us, that was first preached by the Apostles scholars and successors in this Island, and let us not be carried away by the poleshorne crew of the Pope to believe popish novelties and fables. that the ancient Christians of this land whether Britan's, English or Scots, were not converted to popish religion, that is now predominant in the kingdom of antichrist, we have three most evident demonstrations to assure us.  
Frst those doctrines and grounds of Popery, which before I have mentioned, will never be proved to have been taught by the first planters of Christian religion in this land. and very absurd it were to suppose them to have been the authors of those heresies, impieties and blasphemies, which are so rife in Popery. If S. Peter or S. Paul, or any of their scholars did plant religion here, we must not think, that they taught one thing, and wrote another, or that the scholars preached otherwise then they had learned from their masters. If joseph of Arimathaea did first convert the Britan's, and Fugatius and Damianus confirm them in the faith, or if Austen the Monk and his fellows did first convert the Saxons or English; yet can it not be showed, that any one of these did teach, that the traditions of the church of Rome and holy scriptures were with equal affection to be received, or that the doctrine of Popish holy water, paschal lambs, tosaries, images and such like traditions, is the word of God, or that Christ's true body is torn with teeth and received down into the belly, and may be eaten of dogs and hogs, or that Christians are justified by extreme unction, or eating saltfish and redherrings upon fridays and fasting days, or that incense is to be burnt to images, or the Sacrament adored for God, and carried about in procession, or the rest of the points of Popery before mentioned. either therefore let Parsons show us, that the several points of Popery before touched were taught by S. Peter the Apostle, and Eleutherus, and Gregory Bishops of Rome; or else he must know, that whatsoever he fableth of his three supposed conversions, the same will make for the destruction of Popery, and the overthrow of the cause, which he maintaineth.  
Secondly we are able to prove, that all these corruptions of doctrine, superstitious devices, impieties, & blasphemies, which we refuse, have been received and established in the synagogue of Rome, not only since the Apostles times, but also since the time of Eleutherius and Gregory the first. the idolatrous worship of images was first confirmed by the second council of Nice under the Empire of Irene, and by little and little brought into the Western church, being long oppugned by the bishops of France, Germany and Britain.  
That the images of the cross and Trinity should be worshipped with latria, was not allowed in that idolatrous council, but first taught by Thomas Aquinas and his followers, and grounded not upon God's word, but upon this rule of Philosophy, that the same motion is directed to the image, and the thing imagined. which rule by him is mistaken, being meant of the species or representation of things in our understanding, and not of material images, that come not within our understanding.  
The Pope's authority began to be established first by the rebellion of Gregory the second, and Gregory the third, that caused Italy to revolt from the Emperor under pretence of worship of images. and afterward the same was confirmed by Gregory the seventh and his successors, that by force and violence overthrew the empire, and made way by the divisious of Christendom to the victories and conquests of the Turks and Saracens. Boniface the third obtained of Phocas, that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches. Boniface the 9 as Theodoric à Niem in his book of schism testifieth, by fraud usurped first the temporal government over the City and territory of Rome, which before that belonged either to the emperor, or to the citizens. and thus by fraud and violence the Pope made himself great, and by little and little exalted himself in the church, and erected the kingdom of Antichrist.  
The carnal eating and presence of Christ's body in the sacrament was first decreed by Nicolas the second in the Chap. ego Berengarius. dist. 2. the consecrat. for there we read first, that Christ's true body is handled with the hands of Priests, broken and torn with the teeth of the faithful. his words prescribed to Berengarius are, verum corpus & sanguinem domini nostri jesu Christi esse & sensualiter non solum sacramentum, sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari, frangi, & fidelium dentibus atteri.  
Transubstantiation got reputation first by the decree of Innocent the 3. as we read in the chapter Firmiter. de sum. Trin. & fid. cath. for there he decreeth, that the bread is transubstantiate into the body, and the wine into blood, by the power of God. but yet two inconveniences will here fall out, if we yield to his words. for there he saith, that Christ is both the priest and the sacrifice, and that this transubstantiation is wrought by the power of God. whereof the first overthroweth the priesthood of the polshorne priests of Baal, the second doth take away the efficacy from these words, hoc est enim corpus meum, and hic est sanguis meus, and ascribeth all to the power of God absolutely.  
In the conventicle of Constance we find it first resolved, that the accidents of bread and wine do remain without subject, and that the Pope is Christ's immediate vicar. and sess. 13. that although Christ did institute the eucharist in bread and wine, yet laymen were only to receive it under one kind.  
Auricular confession was established by Innocent the 3. in the chap. omnis utriusque sexus. de poenit. & remiss. for before that it was free to confess, or not to confess. the doctrine of confession was enlarged by the canonists and schoolmen.  
In the conventicle of Florence we read, that the form of ordering massepriestes, of popish confirmation and extreme unction, and of other popish sacraments was then first settled by law. there also Purgatory and the Pope's supremacy was first enacted by force of law.  
Clement the 6. in the chapter unigenitus. extr. de poenit. & remis. did first devise the treasure of indulgences. Boniface the 8. and Sixtus the 4. ordered the Popish jubiley.  
That the Pope is above the Council, it was first decreed in the council of Lateran under Leo the 10. who also begun first to thunder out his excommunications against M. Luther.  
Finally the conventicle of Trent gave final complement to the Popish doctrine of Traditions, of the Latin vulgar translation, of concupiscence, of formal justification by charity and works, of seven sacraments, of the sacrifice of the mass, of purgatory and indulgences, of framing the images of God the Father and the holy Ghost, and the rest of their heresies and abuses. for what before the schoolmen had taught vainly, that began now by the decrees of the Pope and his complices to be established, and held for law. then also the missals, breviaries, offices and other ritual books began to be confirmed by the Pope's authority.  
Thirdly it is an easy matter to prove, that the doctrine of S. Peter and of the times, wherein joseph of Arimathaea, Eleutherius and Gregory the first lived, is direct contrary in divers points to popish religion. S. Peter 1. ep. 2. exhorted all Christians to submit themselves to kings and governors. but the Pope commandeth subjects to rebel and take arms against princes, and excommunicateth such as refuse so to do, as appeareth by the excommunication of Paul the 3. against king Henry the 8. and of Pius the fift against Queen Elizabeth: both which are extant in Sanders his libel de schismate. S. Peter 1. ep. 1. would have Christians to trust perfectly on god's grace. the Papists teach their disciples to distrust gods grace, and to doubt of their salvation, and to trust rather in their own works and merits. he saith we are not redeemed with corruptible things, but with Christ's most precious blood. these teach, that men are redeemed after a sort by indulgences, and by the satisfaction and merits of Saints, to whom Bellarmine in his book of indulgences doubteth not to give the title of redeemers. S. Peter exhorteth Christians to desire the sincere milk of God's word, that they may grow thereby. the papists bar men from hearing God's word in tongues which they understand, and send them to believe the traditions of the church of Rome, and the impure trash of the schoolmen, and the Pope's decretales. he excludeth the lordship of Popes over God's inheritance: these false teachers enforce it. he exhorteth us to make our election sure: these fellows teach, that Christians cannot be assured of their election or make it sure.  
joseph of Arimathaea and the godly bishops, that lived in his time, and divers hundred years after him, continued, we doubt not, in the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets. and therefore we may not think, that they taught, that Christ had a body invisible or inpalpable, or that his body was in heaven and earth at one time, and yet not continued to itself, or that his soul was omnipotent or omniscient, or that Christians were to believe that dogs and hogs did eat Christ's body, and yet that all the communicants, save the Priest, were to be excluded from the cup of the new Testament, or that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our justification and salvation, and that formally we are justified and saved by our own works, or that remission of sins cannot be obtained unless we come to auricular confession, and have the mass-priests absolution, or that the Pope by his indulgences out of superfluous merits of Saints is able to deliver souls from purgatory, or other popish heresies and wicked doctrines before mentioned. for these doctrines are contrary to the holy scriptures, in which the sum of the Apostles preaching is contained.  
Gregory the first lib. 4. epist. 32. doth dislike the title of universal bishop, and calleth it sacrilegious and profane. he doth also condemn the worship of images lib. 7. epist. 109. and lib. 9 epist. 9 and commendeth Serenus the bishop of Massilia for reproving the adoration of images. neither doth he allow any more than the historical use of them. that Purgatory which Gregory the Dialogist speaketh of, differeth much from popish purgatory being rather designed for venial sins, than for satisfaction for temporal pains after the fault remitted. lib. moral. 19 c. 16. he showeth that the books of the Maccabees are not canonical scriptures. and lib. 14. moral. c. 32. that Christ's body is , and not like a spirit, and lib. 4. dial. c. 55. that things above in the eucharist are united to things below, summa imis consociantur. of which it followeth, that there is no such presence, as the Papists imagine, nor any transubstantiation. for if the body of Christ residing above be united to things below, then is not Christ's body included within the accidents of the host, nor is the bread and wine abolished.  
Augustine the Monk brought with him a cross, and the image of our saviour in a table, and did sing litanies, as Bede testifieth lib. 1. hist. Angl. c. 25. but we do not read, that ho filled Churches with images, or that he worshipped Christ's image, or the cross with latria, or that in his litanies he called upon Saints or Angels. Bede saith they prayed to God, litanias canentes etc. domino supplicabant.  
If then we cannot find the points of popery, which we refuse, in the writings of the Apostles, or in any record mentioning the doctrine of joseph of Arimathaea, Eleutherius, Gregory or Austen, but rather find them to be opposite to their doctrine, and denised afterwards, then unless we mean to remove the ancient limits and bounds set down to us by our fathers, and to refuse the counsel of the holy ghost Proverb. 22. we may not return to popery. forasmuch as the first converters of the inhabitants of this land were no authors nor favourers of popish superstition, heresies, impieties and blasphemies.   

CHAP. XV. That popish religion is most falsely termed Catholic religion, and Papists Catholics.  
Catholic religion, as Vincentius Lirinensis in his commonitory chap. 3. doth teach us, is that, which always hath been believed, and of all Christians. we are to hold, saith he, that which always hath been believed of all Christians. for that is properly Catholic. but the faith of the Romish church contained in the Pope's decretales and disputes of the canonists and schoolmen hath not always been believed of all Christians. their faith therefore is not catholic, the assumption is proved not only by the novelties of the decretales, glosses of Canonists and sums and resolutions of the school divines, but also by the falsehood and contrarieties of the doctrine therein contained. Nicholas in his decretale ego Berengarius. de consecrat. dist. 2. teacheth, that Christ's body sensually is handled with the hands of Priests and torn with teeth. but this is contrary to scriptures, fathers and truth. Innocent in the chapter firmiter. de sum. trinit. & fid. cath. saith, that the bread is transubstantiat into Christ's body. which is false, for Christ said of bread which he took, this is my body. The Canonists honour the Pope as a God on earth, as the head, foundationmonah, rcand spouse of the Church. the schoolmen brabble one with another, and sometimes change their own opinions. Bellarmine lib. 2. de purgat. c. 3. confesseth that Thomas Aquinas changed his opinion concerning the merit of souls in Purgatory. most schoolmen build doctrines of faith upon Philosophical grounds, and vary both from scriptures and fathers in their doctrine of the divine attributes, of Christ's body and soul, of merits, of sacraments, and divers other points. how then can we repute these doctrines to be catholic?  
It is the Property of Catholics, saith Vincentius Lirinensis commonit. c. 34. to keep the doctrine committed to them, and left with them by the ancient fathers, and to avoid profane novelties. but the doctrine of schoolmen concerning the divine attributes, concerning the examples of the persons of the Trinity brought by the master of sentences, the eating of Christ's body by brute beasts, and divers other points is full of profaneness and novelties. their reasons also are more philosophical and sophistical, then Apostolical. all the points in controversy betwixt us and them are mere novelties, as the decretales, whereon they depend, declare.  
Leo epist. 81. saith, that there is one true, only, perfect and inviolable faith, whereto nothing can be added, and from which nothing can be taken. but unto this faith the Popes have added their determinations concerning traditions, the carnal real presence of Christ's body and blood in the sacrament of the Lords supper, transubstantiation, the communion under one kind, the Pope's vicarship general, and universal power, purgatory, indulgences, the worship of images, and divers other points of doctrine. doth it not then appear, that popery is nothing else but a corruption of doctrine coming in after the publication of the Christian Catholic faith, and added unto it?  
Furthermore as the Apostolic doctrine is catholic and universal, so heretical opinions are particular, and peculiar to certain sects, and persons, and times. but we have showed, that Popery is nothing else, but a pack of old and new heresies.  
Lastly by many particulars it may be proved, that the doctrine of Papists hath neither been taught at all times, nor embraced of all christians, nor spread over all the world. which doth plainly declare, that neither the doctrine is catholic, nor the professors thereof truly termed Catholics.  
First they teach that the scriptures are an imperfect rule, and unsufficient without traditions, and speak lewdly of them calling them a nose of wax, a kill and dead letter, a matter of strife, and what else they list to devise in their reproachful humours. but never did Catholics so teach. the Apostle 2. Tim. 3. saith, they are able to make us wise to salvation. and that they are given of God to make the man of God perfect. S. Augustine lib. 2. de doct. Christ. c. 9 saith, that all things necessarily belonging to faith or manners are contained in plain places of scriptures. the ancient fathers do every where speak honourably of scriptures, and Ireney saith, it is the property of heretics, when they are convinced by scriptures to accuse them.  
Secondly, these are special points of Popery, viz. that the Pope is the foundation, head, and spouse of the church: that his decretales concerning matters of faith are infallible: that unwritten traditions are the word of God not written, and equal to scriptures: that the old Latin vulgar translation of the bible is authentical. for the most of this is delivered and determined in the conventicle of Trent sess. 4. the rest is holden by the canonists, and the Pope's proctor's. these doctrines are contrary to the words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. who showeth us, that no other foundation can be laid, but Christ jesus: and Ephes. 2, where it is said that the faithful are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. Irenaeus lib. 3. adverse. haeres. c. 1. showeth that the scriptures are the pillar and foundation of our faith. Chrysostome hom. 6. in Matth. saith the church is Jerusalem, whose foundations are laid upon the mountains of the scriptures. that the Pope should be the foundation of the church and not be subject to error in determining matters of faith, is contrary both to scriptures and fathers, as I have already showed in my books de pontifice Rom. the diversity and contrariety of divers editions of the old Latin vulgar translation of the bible we have proved heretofore. that it differeth from the original, it is apparent, and Arias Montanus, Erasmus, Caietan and divers others acknowledge it. the fathers in matters of doubt send us to the originals. the falsehood of Romish traditions, & the repugnance betwixt them and scriptures I have proved in my book de scriptures against Bellarmine.  
Thirdly, the Papists allow no interpretations of scriptures against that sense, 
Cont. Trident. sess 4.  which the church of Rome holdeth. contra eum sensum, quam tenuit, & tenet sancta matter ecclesia. and by the church they understand the Pope principally. but that was never the opinion of Catholics. nay the Pope and his followers allow divers interpretations contrary to the judgement of all ancient fathers and catholics. they believe that these words of Christ, feed my sheep, do properly belong to the Pope, and that thereby he hath power to depose Princes. these words Hiercm. 1. I have appomted thee over nations and kingdoms, they transfer to the Pope. Boniface the 8. in the chap. unam sanctam. extr. demaior & obed. doth thereof conclude, that the Pope hath power to judge all earthly princes. Innocent the 3. in the Chap. solitae. de maior. & obed. because it is said, Genes. 1. that God made a greater and lesser light in the firmament, collecteth, that the Pope is above the emperor. Christ said, do this in remembrance of me. they interpret it, as if Christ had said, offer up my body and blood to my father, and do it in remembrance of Angels and Saints. Christ said, search the scriptures, and drink ye all of this, which they expound, as if he had forbidden lay-men either to search scriptures, or to receive the cup. They have also infinite other such like perverse interpretations of scriptures contrary to the exposition of Catholic fathers: and yet stifle maintain them.  
4. Catholics never allowed the legends of S. George. S. Christopher. S. Catherine, S. Ursula, S. Cyprian the magician, and such legends, as the Papists read in their churches publicly, and believe them as traditions of their Elders, and grounds of faith. the legend of S. George, of Cyricus & julitta, of Abgarus, and of the invention of the cross is condemned by Gelasius c. sancta Romana. dist. 15.  
5. Tho. Aquin. opusc. count errores Graec. saith, it is a matter of faith to believe the determination of the Pope in matters belonging to saith or manners. a matter never believed by Catholics.  
6. Bellarmine and others say, that the Pope's laws do bind us in conscience. but this never entered into the thought of Catholics. S. james. c. 4. saith, we have only one lawgiver and judge, that can save and destroy.  
7. They believe, that images are to he made and worshipped: and consequently fill every corner of their churches with images. they also think it lawful to picture God the father like an old man, and the holy ghost in the figure of a dove. but the law of God expressly forbiddeth the worship of graven images, and all such similitudes. and Lactantius lib. 2. instill. c. 19 saith there is no religion, where such images are. S. Augustine de fid. & symbolo saith, that it is impious to place the image of God in the church. tale simulachrum deo nefas est Christiano in templo collocare.  
8. The jebusites of Collem in their censure teach, that we are justified by the law, and that our life and salvation doth consist therein. but the Apostle teacheth us, that the law is the minister of death. and Irenaeus testifieth lib. 3. adverse. haeres. c. 20. that the law being spiritual doth only manifest sin, and not kill it. and so do Catholics believe.  
9 The conventicle of Trent sess. 5. teacheth, that concupiscence is not sin in the regenerate: but the Apostle Rom. 7. showeth the concupiscence is sin. and all true Catholics must needs confess it, seeing it is forbidden by the law.  
10 Bellarmine and his consorts believe, that all Christians are able to perform the law perfectly. but Catholics believe, that this savoureth of Pelagianisme. for if they be able to perform the law of God perfectly, then may they live without all sin; which Augustine and Hierome in their disputes against the Pelagians declare to be heresy.  
11 Papists believe, that the Pope is able to dispense with oaths, and to absolve subjects from their obedience and fealty to their Princes. but Catholics assure themselves that it is impious to take God's name in vain, and to violate lawful oaths upon the Popes, or any other man's warrant.  
12 Papists teach, that the Virgin Mary was exempt from original sin, as we may perceive by Bellarmine lib. 4. de amiss. great. c. 15. and by the decrerale of Sixtus 4. and this is the most common opinion. but Catholics think contrary. for the Apostle Rom. 5. saith that through the offence of one, all men are subject to condemnation.  
13. They believe that the blessed virgin's house was carried out of Galiley into Dalmatia, and from thence into Italy by the ministry of Angels, and that the same is now at Loreto. but Catholics laugh at such fables, and esteem the worship of her image there to be idolatrous.  
14. They celebrate the feast of our Lady's conception, and of the assumption of her body into heaven, as appeareth by their missals and breviaries. but Catholics drslike both, as grounded upon apocryphal fables, and lying legends. S. Bernard epist. 174. speaking against the feast of her conception saith, she needed no false honours.  
15. Catholics never believed, that Christ had a body invisible, impalpable, and not comprehended in a place. S. Augustine de essentia divinitatis, saith, that Christ according to his human nature is visible, corporal and local. but our adversaries teach, that his true body is in the sacrament, where it is neither seen, felt, nor circumscribed in a place.  
16. They speak reverently of Christ's body, and hold it blasphemy to say, that the same may be cast into the fire, or eaten of dogs or hogs, or other brute beasts. but the Papists do not so much as go about to clear themselves of this blasphemy.  
17. They teach, that Christ had a body like to ours in all things, sin except. the Papists believe that his body is really in the sacrament, and contained in the compass of a consecrated host, and that the same is invisible, and able to penetrate other  bodies without the dissolution of their substance. but such abodie no man ever yet had, nor by nature can have.  
18. They believe, that every body is continued to itself, or as Logicians call it, continua quanutas. but Papists believe, that Christ's body is in heaven and earth, and every altar, and yet not in the middle places: whereby it followeth, that Christ's head in heaven is not continued to his feet being in a consecrated host in earth.  
19 Vigilius lib. 4. cont. Eutych. saith, that Christ's body being now in heaven is not on earth, and that is the faith of Catholics. but the false and pretended catholics believe, that his body is both in heaven and earth, and divers distant places at one time.  
20. Catholics believe, that Christ only is our redeemer. for so the Apostle teacheth us, Rom. 3.1. Cor. 1. and divers other places. but Bellarmine in his first book of indulgences teacheth us, that saints and others may be called redeemers. all his consorts also teach, that the Pope by his indulgences redeemeth souls out of purgatory.  
21. Catholics acknowledge that Christ is our justice. for so the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. expressly saith. they believe also that we are justified by faith in him, as we read Rom. 5. but Kellison in his survey and his consorts teach, that he is only the meritorious cause of our justification, and that we are formally justified and saved by our own works.  
22. Catholics doubt not to make their election sure, and being justified by faith have peace with God, and are persuaded that nothing shall separate them from the love of God. for all this is Apostolic doctrine. but Papists teach their followers to doubt of their election, and of the grace of God towards them; and deprive them both of peace of conscience, and of all assurance of God's grace.  
23. Catholics believe, that Christ was wounded for our transgressions, and that he hath borne our infirmities, and that by his stripes we are healed. for so the Prophet Isay cap. 53. teacheth us. but the pretended popish catholics do lash themselves, and hope by their own stripes to heal their sins and to satisfy for them. and without this satisfaction they believe, that no man can obtain remission of sins.  
24. Catholics ever spared their own bodies. but certain heretics and idolaters did usually afflict their bodies and lash themselves before their idols. in lashing of themselves therefore the Papists imitate the Priests of Baal, and not true Catholics.  
25. Catholics believe, that their sins are purged by the blood of Christ, as we read Hebr. 1. but Papists believe that their sins are purged in purgatory, and by their own satsifactions.  
26. The Greeks' to this day never believed Purgatory, neither do any of the ancient fathers believe that after our sins are remitted, Christians are to satisfy for temporal pains, either in this life or in purgatory. the doctrine therefore of purgatory will never be proved Catholic.  
27. The Apostles and ancient fathers never knew nor heard of the doctrine and treasure of the Pope's indulgences. this doctrine of Papists therefore is to be abolished, as not Catholic.  
28. True Catholics never believed, that Christians were justified by marriage. the master of the sentences saith it is only a remedy against sin. but Papists hold they are justified by marriage, aswell as by other Sacraments.  
29. The doctrine of the conventicle of Florence concerning the form of priesthood, popish confirmation, extreme unction and their number of seven sacraments cannot be proved to be Catholic.  
3.. Bellarmine lib. 2. de effectu sacrament. c. 3. and other his consorts affirm, that Christians are justified by the sacraments ex opere operato, or by their own act and work wrought. whereby it followeth, that they are justified by greasing, crossing, and such like acts. but this doctrine is not catholic. the Greeks' to this day acknowledge no such doctrine nor is any such thing to be found in ancient writers.  
31. The Greeks' to this day renounce the Pope's supremacy. the ancient fathers never heard of a triple crowned Pope, with a crossed slipper, and a guard of Suitzers. the doctrine therefore of the Pope's general vicarship taught by Bellarmine in his books de pontisice Rom. and by others is not Catholic.  
32. Papists teach, that some sins are done away by holy water, and without repentance, and that such sins deserve not death. but the Apostle Galat. 3. showeth him to be accursed that abideth not in all the words of the law to do them, and Rom. 6. saith, that the wages of sin is death. this is also the faith of all Catholics. but of the efficacy of holy water to do away sins, true Catholics say nothing.  
33. Papists offer the sacrifice of the mass pro redemptione animarum suarum, for the redemption of their souls. but Catholics do not hope for redemption, but by the sacrifice of Christ once offered upon the cross.  
34. They make Christians eaters of man's flesh, and drinkers of man's blood really and literally, as their words in the chapter, ego Berengarius. dist. 2. the consecrat. do import. but our Saviour saith, that the spirit quickeneth, and Saint Augustine tract. 25. in loan. showeth that Christ's flesh is not to be received with our mouth or teeth. ut quid paras dentem, saith he, why dost thou prepare thy teeth?  
35. They make their Priests creators of their creator, as Innocentius in his books the myster. missae, stella Clericorum, and Boner in his speech to the Priests in Queen Mary's time in express words do declare. but Christians and Catholics abhor to hear Priests called creators, or God to be made a creature.  
36. They make the Priest to intercede for Christ's body and blood saying, supra quae propitio & sereno vultu respicer● digneris, etc. upon which vouchsafe, saith the Priest speaking of Christ's body and blood, to look with a propitious and serene countenance. but true Catholics do hope, that God will look upon them favourably for the sacrifice once offered on the cross by their Lord and Saviour Christ jesus.  
38. They compare the sacrifice of Christ's body & blood in the Mass with the sacrifice of Abel, that offered brute beasts: which no Catholic ever did.  
39 They make God an intercessor to Saints, praying to him, that by the intercession of saints they may obtain their desires, and saying that God revealeth our thoughts to saints: which is far from the doctrine and belief of Catholics.  
4.. True Catholics never added these words & aterni, and mysterium sidei, to the words used by Christ in the consecration of the cup, as the Papists do in the Mass.  
41. True Catholics believe, that Christ was once only offered to his father for the sins of the world. the Apostle Hebr. 9 saith that Christ was once offered to take away the sins of many. but the Papists say, that Christ offered himself twice, and that every priest doth offer him up, and cat him up continually in the Mass.  
42. True Catholics never confessed their sins in the celebration of the Lords supper to the Virgin Mary, to Michael the Archangel, and to other Angels and Saints. let Kellison but name us one Catholic father, that made such a confession, or else we must needs conclude, that he and his consorts be idolatrous mass-priests.  
43. True Catholics never believed, that they could do penance by a procurato or attorney, as the Papists believe they may.  
44. Neither did they ever believe, that no Christians could be absolved from their sins without auricular confession, and the Priest's absolution, as the false Romish Catholics do.  
45. The false catholics believe that the Popes are the successors of Peter, but true Catholics never believed or thought them to be successors of that holy apostle, that neither taught nor administered the sacraments, and in lieu of feeding, cause Christ's sheep to be massacred and killed.  
46. True Catholics are often persecuted, but persecute none. Optatus lib. 2. contr. Parmen. speaking of himself and his fellow catholics, which of us, saith he, hath persecuted any man? but the Papists like cruel wolves persecute all, that are not of their own opinions.  
47. Catholics keep their words and perform thehir promises, yea though it be to their hindrance. Papists teach, that faith is not to be kept with heretics, and burned john hus in the conventicle of Constance contrary to the emperor's safe conduct and faithful promise.  
48. In the 13. session of the conventicle of Trent the mass-priests curse all, that shall affirm, that the principal fruit of the eucharist is remission of sins: which falleth upon all Catholics, that shall believe Christ's words Matth. 26. this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for remission of sins.  
49. Christ taught true Catholics to pray to the father in his name. neither ever do we read that true Catholics did pray thus, ave maris stella, Dei matter alma, atque semper virgo, foelix coeli porta, solve vincula reis, proffer lumen caecis. or that they hoped to come to heaven, or to have remission of sins by the Virgin Maries prayers and intercession.  
50. True Catholics never said to a crucifix of wood, thou hast redeemed us, thou hast reconciled us to thy father. nor did they pray to the cross, as the Papists do saying, o cross of Christ protect●m●. nay Ambrose de obitu Theodosijs, showeth, that Helen finding the cross did not worship it, but Christ, that hanged upon the cross.  
51. True Catholics never consecrated any paschal lambs, as the mass-priests are prescribed to do in their missals.  
52. True Catholics never said any Psalter in the honour of our Lady, nor repeated an hundred and fifty ave Maries, and after every fifty ave Maries one creed, and after every ten ave Maries one Paternoster, as he Papists do after the prescription of their ladies psalters and rosaries.  
53. Never did true Catholics devise new religions, nor allow the swarms and sects of jebusites, Franciscans, Dominicans, and the filthy rabble of Friars, which we see in the Romish church.  
Finally all those devices, tricks, fooleries, novelties and impieties of Popery, which we refuse, were never admitted by true Catholics, or allowed in the practice of Catholic religion.   

CHAP. XVI. That Popish religion is not the ancient religion of the primitive church.  
ID verius quod prius, saith Tertullian lib. 4. contra Marcionem. that is true that is former, and that is former, that was from the beginning, and that was from the beginning, that came from the Apostles. Hierome also epist. 65. ad Pammach. & Ocean, said to a certain newly vp-start teacher in his time, cur proffers in medium, quod Petrus & Paulus edere noluerunt? why dost thou now bring forth that, which neither Peter nor Paul would ever teach? if then Popish religion were that ancient religion, which the Apostles first published; then had the Papists cause to rejoice, but if Popery be nothing else, but cockle, that hath been by heretics, and others the devils ministers sown in the Lord's field since the first plantation of the Gospel, and if the principal points thereof prove new devices brought in by the Pope and his complices many ages since the Apostles time, than I hope every Christian will reject the same as novelties, and Papists hereafter will blush to talk of antiquity.  
That Popish religion is not the ancient religion of the primitive church, it may be proved, first by the grounds of Popery, that are of a later standing; next by the founders and cheese authors of this sect, that are not ancient; thirdly by the particular points of Popery, whose original is found in later authors; and lastly by the repugnance betwixt the doctrine of Popery, and Christian religion.  
The principal grounds of Popery are the Pope's decretales, the acts of certain late counsels, the disputes of schoolmen, and glosses and commentaries of the Pope's canonists, and proctor's. but the Pope's decretales had no authority of law before the time of Gregory the ninth, who first published them, and authorised them, before his time Gratian and others had made divers rhapsodies and collections of the Pope's decrees, but the canonists themselves do not allow them for law. beside that, not one of the Popes before the time of Gregory the 7. who is the first that took upon him to give law to the whole church, and whose epistles are first recorded in the great bullary, took upon him to publish his decretales for laws, if any decretales be set out before his time under the names of ancient bishops of Rome, the style, arguments, simplicity, and fooleries contained in them bewray them to be counterfeit.  
The Pope's authority began to flourish about the times of Boniface the 3. who, as Platina saith, obtained of Phocas the Emperor, that the church of Rome should be called and holden the head of other churches.  
The council of Rome, that authorised the Popish real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament was celebrated under Pope Nicolas the 2. some 1050. years after Christ. the 2. Nicene Council that established the worship of images in some sort, was assembled long before under the reign of Irene; but the acts of the council could not be received in the Western church till long after, the council of Lateran, that decreed transubstantiation, was assembled in the times of Innocentius the 3. the council of Constance, that first brought in the communion under one kind, and the subsistence of accidents without subject, was summoned about the year of our Lord 1414, the synod of Florence that first established the 7. sacraments, and began to talk of their forms, and confirmed the Pope's supremacy and Purgatory, published her decrees about the year of our Lord 1439. the acts of the conventicle of Trent, that made up a complete body of Popery were confirmed by Pius the 4. in the year of our Lord 1564. and this is the antiquity of those conventicles, that do principally confirm the doctrine of Popery.  
The schoolmen crept into the church about the year of our Lord 1200. the father of them all was Peter Lombard, that flourished some 1140. years after Christ.  
The canonists began after the times of Gregory the ninth, that lived and flourished about the year of our Lord God 1230.  
The chief founders of Popery were the Popes by their authority, the Cardinals by their counsel, the Monks and Friars by their books and preaching, the mass-priests by their massing and practising, the dinel himself by his craft, malice and violence. the Pope's authority in ecclesiastical causes was not great before the times of Boniface the third. nor in temporal matters before Gregory the seventh. Boniface the ninth, as Theodoric à Niem testifieth, by craft entered upon the temporal inrisdiction of Rome. The cardinals were but parish priests until such time, as the Pope of a Priest became a Prince. the monks in the West church are descended from Benet of Nursia that lived about the year of our Lord 530. the Friars arose out of the bottomless pit about the year of our Lord 1230. their first fathers were Francis and Dominicke. the last brood of Friars flew abroad into the world under the leading of Ignatius Loyola, a lame soldier, anno Dom. 1540 the devil being bound up for a thousand year, counting from the time of Constantine, began to be loosed again about the time of Innocent the third, and by all fraud to work in the heads of Popes, Friars, Monks and mass-priests, and with violence to make opposition against all those, that preached the truth.  
The foundation therefore of Popery being so lately laid, and the chief founders thereof beginning to stir so long after the times of the Apostles, and ancient fathers; it were great simplicity, if we should affirm popery to be ancient.  
But the same doth most clearly appear by the particular doctrines of popery, which the Pope's factors maintain against us. first they hold that holy scriptures are imperfect, and no sufficient rule of faith. Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo Dei c, 12. affirmeth, that they are only apart of the rule. but none but heretics in ancient time did derogate from scriptures.  
2. They teach, that holy scriptures and the traditions of the church are to be received with equal affection. but that was first determined in the 4. session of the conventicle of Trent.  
3. In that wicked conventicle also they first determined, that the old Latin vulgar translation of the Bible should be authentical.  
4. That the bishop of Rome is sovereign judge of all controversies of religion, and the principal interpreter of scriptures, is a point taught of late, since Friars began to steel their faces with a double mask of impudence.  
5. Before the late conventicle of Trent we never read, but that concupiscence was sin both in the regenerate, and vnregenerat, as being contrary to the law of God.  
6. Stapleton in his preface to his relection of doctrinal principles is the first man that ever taught, that we hear God speaking in the Pope, and that the church is founded upon his authority.  
7. The first that ever called the Pope a God on the earth are the Pope's canonists. they likewise began first to call him the head, and spouse of the church, an universal bishop.  
8. The Papists of late time only began to prohibit scriptures to be read publicly in vulgar tongues, and to repine at God's people, that desire to read them in those tongues. for the ancient fathers exhort men to read scriptures.  
9 Since Dioclesian's time we do not read of any that burned books of scriptures besides Papists. neither did any since his time hold out his feet to be kissed.  
10. Of late time Papists believe no Catholic church, but that which is subject to the bishop of Rome, whereas in time past the Catholic church was held to be dispersed through all nations, and not universally subjecteth to other head, than Christ.  
11. The Romish church now observeth not the old canons of the Apostles, as they are commonly called. ex 84. Apostolicis canonibus, saith Medina de sacror. hom. continent. c. 105. quos Clemens Romanus pontifex & eorundem Apostolorum discipulus in unum coegit, vix sex aut octo Latina Ecclesia nunc observat. Martin Perez also de tradit. part. 3. c. de authorit. cc. Apost. confesseth, that the Apostles canons now are not well observed.  
12. The ancient Christians did never confess their sins to the blessed virgin, to S. Michael, to Peter and Paul, and other saints, as the Romish mass-priests do.  
13. Of late the Clerk at Mass hath taken upon him to absolve the Priest, and to pray for him: a matter both strange and absurd.  
14. The confession of the faith set out by Pius the fourth, concerning Romish traditions, justification by works, the seven sacraments, the sacrifice of the mass, indulgences and such like points of Popery, was never heard of before the time of that wicked Pope.  
15. The Papists can not show, that any Christian before of late durst cut out the second commandment out of the first Table, as they have presumed to do in their short Catechisms. This they did, knowing themselves to be guilty, in worshipping images, of the breach thereof.  
16. The decree of Sixtus the fourth concerning the conception of the blessed virgin without original sin, is but a late device.  
17. It is not long since the Papists taught, that venial sins are done away with holy water.  
18. He should be very shameless, that would say, that Christians in time past did whip themselves either going in procession, or before the crucifix, as now Papists do, hoping to redeem their sins with their own blood.  
19 Ancient Christians never believed, that it was sin to transgress the Pope's laws, as the resistance of the churches of Asia against Victor, of the churches of Africa against Sozimus and other Popes declare.  
20. Of late time friars, especially the Capucins, have attired themselves like chimney sweepers, & burners of houses.  
21. The rules of monks and friars are divers from the rules of Christian religion, and can not be elder than the orders of monks and friars.  
22. Gregory the seventh, as Otho Frisingensis saith, was the first that did excommunicate the Emperor, and taught that he had power to assoil subjects from the others of obedience to Princes.  
23. The use of private masses without communion is but new, as the old ordinal of Rome, that hath no masses of that nature declareth. the canons of the Apostles forbidden Christians to departed before they received the communion.  
24. Innocent the third in the chap. omnis utriusque. de poenit. & remiss. did first bring in a necessity of auricular confession. he also was the first father of the monster transubstantiation, as we find by the chapter firmiter. de sum. Trinit. & fid. Cathol.  
25. Purgatory for satisfaction for temporal pains of sins, whose guilt before was remitted, was first devised by schoolmen.  
26. The jubiley among Christians was first devised by Boniface the eight. he also decreed first, that all temporal princes and others upon pain of damnation must be subject to the Pope.  
27. Popish indulgences are but of a late stamp, and the school doctrine thereof much latter, the Papists themselves being as yet not fully resolved, what to think of them.  
28. Clement the sixth, first devised the treasure, out of which indulgences are supposed to be granted, as appeareth by the chap. unigenitus. extr. depoenit. & remiss.  
29. The doctrine of cases reserved to the Pope is not once spoken of in the writings of the fathers. and yet the mass-priests make a great matter of them.  
30. The doctrine of the Pope's penitentiary tax for dispatch of pardons for murders, incest, sodomy and all villainies, I think, Kellison will not contend to be very ancient.  
31. Bellarmine's doctrine lib. 1. de verb. Dei. c. 3. concerning the new Testament, where he saith, it is nothing else, but the love of God shed into our hearts by the holy Ghost, is new. for it contradicteth Chrysostome, Theodoret, and others in 2. Cor. 3. who teach that the new Testament is God grace remitting sins.  
32. The prohibition of marriage between spiritual gossips is a late device of the Pope for gain.  
33. The separation of married couples for religion before consummation of marriage, without consent of both the parties, is both new and wicked.  
34. The popish ceremonies used in baptism are of a late invention, as for example salt, spittle, candles and popish exorcisms.  
35. Of late they have begun to exorcize salt in salutem credentium, for the salvation of the faithful, and holy water to cast our Devils, and to drive away diseases. these consurations are not found in the old Romish ordinals.  
36. The Masseppriests have now gotten a new trick to sprinkle the altar with holy water, and to say, thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shallbe cleansed: applying the scriptures contrary to the meaning of the holy ghost.  
37. Honorius the third in the chapter, sane cum olim. de celebr. miss. did first ordain, that the sacrament should be worshipped, and safely kept, and carried with light to those that are sick.  
38. Half communions are direct contrary to Christ's institution, and the practice of the church; and first established in the conventicle of Constance.  
39 The Mass cannot be old, for that Nauclerus, Platina, Polydore and others confess is was innented by divers authors long after the Apostles times.  
40. The prayers for the dead now found in the Mass are not to be seen in the book called Ordo Romanus.  
41. In old time the fathers never believed, that Christ had a body invisible and incircumscriptible, and that might be in heaven and earth and many places at one time.  
42. The godly bishops of old time did neither swinge the chalice about their head, nor make crosses about it, when they celebrated the eucharist.  
43. The saying of service and administration of Sacraments in tongues not understood is a foolish novelty.  
44. Now in the Roman Catechism they teach, that every masspriest consecrating worketh three miracles. but in old time they were never taken for such workers of miracles.  
45. The Papists after their Pater noster, say their ave Maria, and pray to our Lady. which practice is neither ancient, nor Apostolical.  
46. The Psalter of our Lady and her peculiar offices, and Masses in honour of Saints will not be justified by ancient precedents.  
47. Hardly will the Papists bring a precedent of 300. years old to prove, that Christians prayed to the cross for increase of justice, and remission of sins.  
48. In the missal of Sarum the Priest saith to the sacrament, ave, or hail, and boweth to it contrary to all ancient practice.  
49. The worship of Papists must needs be new, for that both their Saints are new, and their prayers and offices new.  
50. The missals, breviaries and offices of our Lady have their antiquity from the conventicle of Trent.  
51. Popish idolaters worship the sacrament, and the cross with divine honour. but they shall never bring allowance of antiquity for this practice.  
52. They burn also incense to dumb images kiss them and bow to them. but these unchristian tricks were not known in old time.  
53. Of late time they have decreed, that the Pope is above the council. but it is since the council of Constance.  
54. Now the Pope pretendeth right to handle the temporal sword. but that did not the Bishops of Rome for a thousand years after Christ.  
55. Of late time the Pope hath trodden upon the necks of Emperors. but in ancient time the bishops of Rome were subject to Emperors.  
56. In time past the bishops of Rome were persecuted and martyred. now the Popes of late time persecute and martyr others.  
Finally all the points of doctrine differing from the faith oh this church, which the Pope and his complices seek now to thrust upon Christians, are for the most part novelties.  
And this doth clearly appear in this, for that they are contrary to the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, as before hath been particularly declared. the same is also contrary to the doctrine of the fathers and ancient churches practise, as we shall declare hereafter.  
Further the Papists have turned the whole service of God into a massing mommery. Finally for God they worship Saints and dumb images. the institution of Christ jesus in the eucharist they have altered. new sacraments they have devised. are they not then ashamed to call popery ancient Christian religion?   

CHAP. XVII. That Poperic is repugnant to ancient counsels.  
Much doc Papists brag of counsels. Campion saith the first, last, and midst are his. concilia generalia, mea sunt, general counsels, saith he, are all for me. thus saith Campion, and great cracks do others also make, when they come once to mention counsels. but if counsels do make so much for the Pope's cause, as these Popish agents praetend, what is the reason, why the Pope is so much afraid, when he doth but once he are the name of counsels? Gaguine in Carolo 7. saith, that the Pope's refuse to assemble general counsels, searing lest their large authority should be restrained by their decrees. Petrus de Alliaco also in his treatise de reformat. ecclesiae showeth that many supposed, that the Popes were negligent in gathering counsels, that they might more fully rule at their pleasure, and usurp the right of other churches. the author also of the book entitled onus Ecclesiae doth allege the same reason, why counsels were so slowly assembled. experience certes teacheth us, that nothing is more fearful to the Pope, than the name of a lawful and christian council, Gregory the 12. and Petrus de Luna, as Theodorio à Niem testifieth, by all means delayed the assembly of a council, and Martin the fifth, notwithstanding the decree of the council of Constance for assembling counsels from every ten years to ten years, would no more hear of the matter. of late time Clement the 7. rejected the petition of divers princes requiring a general council. and Paul the third would not yield to have one, before such time as he had so settled his affairs, that no man should dare to speak the truth freely, or to touch his authority. Nay albeit Trent were no indifferent place for us; yet did not julius the third think himself safe enough there, nor did he rest until such time, as he had removed the council to Bononic. lastly whatsoever they here speak magnifically of the council, yet otherwhere they say the Pope is above the council, and that without his confirmation the acts of the council are of no force. and so they bring the authority of counsels to a low price.  
But admit the authority of counsels to be as great, as the Papists would have them; yet neither do they esteem much of counsels, nor do counsels make much for them.  
For the time of assembling provincial counsels we find diverse canons. the council of Nice c. 5. decreed, that prouniciall conncels should be assembled twice every year. visum est per singulos annos in singulis provincijs bis in anno concilium episcoporum sieri. the like course we find taken in the 20. canon of the council of Antioch. but the Pope regardeth neither. The council of Constance sess. 39 an. 1417. decreed, that from thence forth general counsels should be celebrated, ut amodò concilia generalia celebrentur: and that the first should begin within siue years after the end of the council, the second 7. years after that, and that so from ten years to ten years counsels should perpetually be celebrated. deinceps de decennio in decennium perpetuò celebrentur. but the Popes have made a scorn of this decree.  
The cannons of the Apostles decree, that a bishop should be ordained by two or three bishops. but the Pope supplieth the room of Bishops oftentimes with Abbots & tituler bishops, as is proved by practice, & confessed in part by Bellarmine. the sixth canon excommunicateth bishops and Priests, that under pretence of religion put away their wives. the mass-priests separate such violently from their wives, and forbidden men to marry upon pretence of religious vows.  
The ninth and tenth canons determine them worthy to be excommunicated, which being present at the oblation of the eucharist do not communicate. qui facta oblatione non communicaverint, and again, qui sacram communionem non percipiunt. the Papists esteem them that hear mass only, good Christians, and do little regard these canons.  
The seventeenth Canon pronounceth him unworthy, nay uncapable to be Bishop or Priest, that keepeth a concubine. which is a plain sentence against most of the Romish clergy.  
The 28. canon forbiddeth Bishops and Priests to strike Christians offending. but popish prelates cut Christian men's throats, albeit they offend not.  
The 36. canon prescribeth bishops their limits, and forbiddeth them to ordain clerks out of their jurisdiction. but this is not observed by the Pope nor his complices, that ordain certain Priests of Baal and send them for England, where they have no jurisdiction.  
The 83. canon deposeth him that shall use reproachful words against the Emperor, or Magistrate, qui imperatorem aut magistratum contumelia affecerit. yet do Popes rail upon Emperors and Magistrates, that displease them, at their pleasure.  
The 84. canon leaveth judith and Tobia & Wisdom out of the catalogue of holy books of scripture. the conventicle of Trent reckoneth them in the canon as well as the best.  
When divers in the council of Nice went about to prohibit the use of wives to Bishop's Priests and Deacons, Paphnutius resisted their determination, and the synod consented unto him, as Socrates lib. 1. c. 8. Sozomen. lib. 1. hist. c. 22. Nicephorus lib. 8. hist. c. 9 do testify.  
There it was determined also c. 5. that those, which by one bishop were excommunicated, should not be received of others, ut hi qui ab alijs excommunicantur, ab alijs ad communionem non recipiantur. all which notwithstanding the Pope separateth married Priests from their w ives, & receiveth most infamous offenders being e xcommunicated, when they appeal to him.  
The Pope also manifestly breaketh the 6. canon, which boundeth his jurisdiction, and giveth like jurisdiction to the bishop of Alexandria and Rome.  
The 18. Canon forbiddeth clergymen to follow filthy gain, and to put out their money to usury. all which notwithstanding the Pope's task rends of public whores at Rome, as is publicly known and testified to the world, and ordinarily have their b ankes of usury called by them monti di pietà, where men may borrow money, at 12.10.8. and six in the hundred, as Onuphrius witnesseth in the lives of julius the 3. Paul the 4. and Pius the 4.  
In the council of Ancyra c. 10. deacons protesting, that they would marry, and could not contain, were permitted to continue in the ministry aster marriage. hopostea si ad nuptias venerint, maneant in ministerio. the same council c. 16. condemneth Sodomites, that live against reason to 15. years penance. and can. 20. putteth adulterers to 7. years penance; and c. 23 inflicteth upon soothsayers, or magicians 5. years penance. but the Pope, as he neglecteth the punishment of adulterers, necromancers, & Sodomites, which in Rome and Italy abound, as every travailer knoweth, that is acquainted with the manners of that country; so he forbiddeth the marriage of deacons, and separateth such, as mary, notwithstanding any protestation they can make.  
The council of Neocaesarea can. 2. condemneth her, that shall marry two brethren. yet do the Papists account the marriage of Queen Catherine to prince Arthur and Henry the 8. King of England his brother lawful, because the Pope dispensed with that marriage. so we see neither the Pope, nor his complices regard counsels, if they make against their profit or pleasure.  
Bishops, Priests, Deacons committing adultery, and practising usury are grievously punished by the council of Eliberis. c. 18. and 20. but now these offences are common among mass-priests. and the Pope showeth them by the chapter & si clerici. d● indicijs. and by his example, how little he regardeth the acts of counsels against these sins. in the same synod can. 34. Christians, are forbidden to light candles in the churchyard in the day time, and c. 36. to set up pictures in Churches. cereos per diem saith the council, placuit in coemiterio non incendi. and again placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus deping atur. yet Papists do superstitiously set up lights in church yards, and fill their churches with images and pictures.  
Those which accuse their brethren falsely by the first council of Arles c. 14. are shut from the communion to then dying day. de his qui accusant fratres suos, placuit saith the council, eos usijs, ad exitum non comunicare. the same council decreeth that no bishop should tread down his fellow Bishop. yet the Popes and their complices do hire parasites and scrrilous companions to traduce and falsely to accuse their brethren and all good bishops are now trodden down by the Pope.  
The Council of Gangra condemneth those that dispraise marriage, or do tax him that eateth flesh; or that despise the oblation of a married priest, or make meetings without the church, qui extra ecclesiam scorsim conventus cilebrat, or that take a pride in virginity, or use peculiar habits, and despise those that use common apparel, or departed from their parents upon praetence of religion. quicumque silij à parentibus praetextu divini culius abscedunt. the same likewise condemneth those women, which cut their hair propter dminum cultum, for religion sake; or that contrary to scriptures and ecclesiastical canons shall b ring in new precepts. but Papists despise matiage as pollutions and fleshly life, and esteem monks that eat no flesh more holy and perfect then other Christians. they despise also the oblations of married Priests, & Monks and Friars have their conventicles apart. further the mass-priests extol their pretended virginity, and Monks and Friars use peculiar habits, and despise such as use common apparel. Children among them departed from their parents and creep into monasteries, and nuns cut their hair, when they vow to enter into religious houses. finally according to the diversity of monkish sects they observe divers rules and precepts without warrant of holy scriptures or ecclesiastical canons, and do many things contrary to holy scriptures.  
The second council of Arles c. 23. pronounceth that Priest to be sacrilegious, that shall suffer men superstitiously to light candles, or to worship trees, fountains, or stones: and those that worship such things are condemned as Infidels. and yet maste-priests suffer Christians at Candlemas, and in divers processions to go about with candles, and great pilgrimages are made by their followers to stocks, and stones, and wells after a paganical fashion.  
The council of Laodicea c. 35. condemneth such as worship Angels, or assemble together to honour them. and c. 36. that use exorcisms or enchantments, or that read books in the church, that are not canonical. the same excludeth the books of Tobia, judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees out of the canon. the which acts forasmuch as they condemn the superstitious worship of Angels, the conjurations of mass-priests in casting out of Devils, and the reading of lying legends, and the false canon of the conventicle of Trent, are no more regarded by Papists, then as if there never had been any such made.  
The council of Constantinople c. 2. restraineth the ambition of Bishops, that began to stretch forth their hands to the dioceses of their neighbours, and c. 5. giveth the next place of dignity after the Bishop of Rome to the bishop of Constantinople. which also was confirmed by the authority of the council of Chalcedon. that council also addeth this reason, because Constantinople was called new Rome. but the pope neither regardeth the acts of this council, nor the reasons thereof, but encroacheth upon every bishop's jurisdiction, calling himself universal bishop, and challenging his authority not from the privilege of the city, but from Christ's institution.  
The 3. council of Carthage c. 24. decreeth, that nothing more be offered in the sacrament of the Lords body and blood, than he hath appointed, to wit bread and wine mingled with water. but this overthroweth the mass utterly, wherein the mass-priests say, they offer neither bread nor wine, but Christ's body and blood. the same synod decreeth, that the bishop of the metropolitan see shall not be called the Prince of Priests, or chief priest, or any such title. which overthroweth the pride and arrogance of the Pope, that will needs be called the chief Priest, the head and monarch of the church, and other far more arrogant titles.  
The forms of ordering Priests and deacons prescribed by the fathers of the fourth council of Carthage the Pope's complices in the synod of Florence have quite altered. likewise have they abolished those canons of the council, that concern his house, apparel, study, preaching. nay they account him now a bishop sufficient, that preacheth not, if he be formally greased and appareled. in the 100 canon women are forbidden to baptise. mulier baptizare non praesumat. the Pope's decretales contrariwise allow women to baptise.  
The fist council of Carthage c. 14. reproveth altars erected by vain reuclations and dreams: and it meaneth such, as are supposed to be made over some martyrs relics. but that is the case of many Popish altars, who are erected for the most part upon supposal of relics, and vain dreams.  
By the 4. canon of the first council of Toledo it appeareth, that subdeacons married wives. the same synod condemneth those, that receive the eucharist and cat it not, and which believed Christ to have an imaginary body, such as that is, which the Papists suppose to be in the eucharist.  
The council of Milevis, c. 22. forbiddeth appeals to Rome. ad transmarina qui putaverit appellandum à nullo infra Africam in communionem suscipiatur. this canon therefore cannot stand with the Pope's supremacy.  
The council of Agatha c. 13. forbiddeth Nuns to be veiled before the age of forty years. the synagogue of Rome admitteth them before twenty, and few after forty. the same council separateth the monasteries of men and women. the Papists put them near together.  
The council of Oreuge pronounceth them guilty of Pelagianisme, that say the liberty of the soul remained after the fall of Adam, and that a man can do that, which is good of himself.  
The 8. canon of the council of Turon showeth, that bishops had wives & dwelled with them, although they are commanded to use them as sisters.  
The 3. council of Toledo was summoned by K. Recaredus, who by his authority proposed a form of faith which was allowed by the council. the same also followed the form of the Eastern church. all which the synagogue of Rome now misliketh.  
In the 6. synod the Emperor presided, as appeareth by divers acts of that synod. there it was decreed c. 13. that Priests and Deacons should not be separated from their wives. that none should fast on Sundays or Saturdays in Lent. that Christ should not be painted in the similitude of a lamb; and that the communicants should receive the sacrament with their hands. all which canons condemn the modern practice of the synagogue of Rome.  
The 2. Nicene council saith, that God is not to be form. and Act. 7. that the cross and other images are not to be worshipped with latria. which is direct contrary to the doctrine of Papists.  
The council of Lateran under Innocent the third, mentioneth only two sacraments in the chap. Firmiter. de sum. Trinit. & fid. Cath. there also somewhat is said of penance. but the same is not reckoned there as a sacrament.  
If then later counsels make sometime against Papists; little are they to hope for proof of their heresies out of the first ancient counsels. the popish sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ contained really in the eucharist, the communion under one kind, transubstantiation, the adoration of the sacrament, the Pope's supreme power in dispensing against laws, or rather in breaking laws, the popish worship of images, Angels and Saints, and the rest of their heresies shall never be proved out of ancient counsels. but easily may they be reproved by them.   

CHAP. XVIII. That Popery is not the faith of the ancient fathers of the Church.  
TO handle this point fully would require a large volume. but we will only allege a few arguments for proof of our assertion, referring the Reader for the rest to our larger disputes against the Papists, wherein we challenge them, that in no one point of faith in controversy betwixt them and us they jump with the fathers. and that may appear in a generality first, for that in most points, and that of greatest difference they are destitute of fathers. as for example where they go about to prove the book of Maccabees and others not found in Hebrew, to be equal to the books of the 4. Evangelists. that scriptures are to be read publicly in a tongue not understood of the hearers. that the Latin vulgar translation is more authentical, than the original books in Hebrew and Greek. that Christ's body may be both visible and invisible at one time, and is in many places also at once. that the body and blood of Christ is really and carnally contained and offered for quick and dead in the mass. that Christians not consecrating are to receive the communion only under one kind. that in purgatory souls satisfy for temporal pains of sins remitted. that the Pope by dispensing the merits of Saints by indulgences is able to deliver souls from the pains of purgatory. that charity is the form of faith, and is that grace, that maketh us acceptable to God, and divers other doctrines of that nature.  
Secondly they oftentimes acknowledge the father's errors. Bellarmine de gratia primi hominis c. 16. taxeth Theodoret and Procopius for their opinion concerning the cherubin set for the guard of Paradise. haec opinio, saith he, tam est inepta & ridieula &c. like wise lib. 2. de concilijs c. 8. he reprehendeth Irenaeus, Cyprian, Chrysostome, and Oecumenius. Canus lib. 7. loc. theol. c. 7. rehearseth divers of the fathers, and namely of those, which believed, that Adam's soul was created before his body, and that Angels were created before the world, and that denied, that the souls of the faithful do see God before the last judgement. generally they tax Origen for divers heresies and novelties, Eusebius for favouring Origen and Arius, Papias and Irenaeus for holding the heresy of the Millenarians, Cyprian for rebaptizing heretics, Hilary for teaching, that Christ in his passion felt not any pain, as we may see in Lombard seut. lib. 3. dist. 15. Russine for maintaining both the errors of Origen and Pelagius. in these points therefore and such like they follow not the fathers by their own confession.  
Thirdly divers books are published under the name of the fathers, that were never written by them. as for example the decretales that bear the names of the ancient Bishops of Rome, the canons of the Apostles, divers acts of the Nicene council, of the council of Sinuessa, Neocaesarea, Rome under Sylvester, and divers others, the commentaries upon job set out under the name of Origen, certain treatises of Zion and Sina, and of the invention of S. john Baptists head, set out under the name of Cyprian, a sermon de assumptione beatae Mariae, set out under the name of Hierome, divers sermons and epistles set out under the name of Ambrose, Chrysostome and other fathers, divers legends condemned by Gelasiu● c. sancta Romana. dist. 15. and some of these the adversaries themselves deny not to be counterfeit, as doth appear by the censure of Gelasius above mentioned, of Erasmus; Caietan, Sixtus Senensis, and other Popish writers. now they that bring forth counterret and basterdly writings of heretics, and men unlearned, in lieu of the testimonies of fathers, must first prove, that the writings alleged by them are authentical before they can say, that they allege fathers.  
Fourthly the fathers were not all of one opinion. Chrysostome homil. 18. in Genes. Nyssenus de create. hommis c. 18. Hierome lib. 1. in iovinianum and others suppose, that if Adam had not fallen, neither woman should have been subject unto man, nor should mankind have been propagated by marriage. but S. Augustine lib. 14. the civit. dei. c. 21. and lib. 9 de Genes. ad lit. c. 3. and Eucherius and others are of a contrary opinion. Hierome in c. 1. Eccles. and others do hold, that Solomon repent himself of his sins. Augustine in Psal. 126. thinketh otherwise. concerning the beginning of souls, and their estate also after this life the fathers are divided. some think, that after divorce the party innocent may marry, others think contrary. great difference also there was in the beginning about the feast of Easter, the fast of Saturday, and Lent. these therefore that allege a father or two, where the soundest and best learned think otherwise, cannot say, that fathers make for them.  
Finally, albeit all the fathers should speak against the Pope, yet do not the Papists value them at any thing. si totus mundus sententiaret contra Papam etc. if all the world should give sentence against the Pope, saith a canonist, yet are we to stand to the Pope's determination. commonly the Papists make as light account of fathers, as any men, if they speak against them. Caictan in the beginning of his commentaries upon Genesis signifieth, that he goeth against the stream of the doctors in expounding scriptures. The Pope's regard them not one straw, if they talk against their triple crown, two swords, or glorious and pompous state, as may appear by the light account made of S. Bernardes' books the consideratione ad Eugenium. all of them, if the Pope defineth otherwise, reject the fathers with great facility. Bellarmme lib. 1. de verb. dei c. 3. declaring his opinion of the new testament departeth from the exposition of Chrysostome, Theodoret, and other fathers.  
Generally in the account of the books of canonical scriptures of the old testament, they reject the testimony of Hierome in prologo Galeato, of Ruffian in the exposition of the Creed, of the council of Laodicea c. 59 of Athanasius in synopsi. of Gregory Nazaanzen in his verses, of Epiphanius lib. de ponderib. & mensuris, and divers other fathers; and will have the books of Tobiah, judith, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, and the Maccabees to be of equal authority with the law and the Gospel in despite of all the fathers.  
Contrary also to their opinion they prefer the old Latin vulgar translation of the bible before the Hebrew text of the old, and the Greek text of the new testament, that is, the standing puddles before the clear fountains of holy scriptures.  
The fathers exhort Christians, the Papists dehort them from reading and hearing scriptures read in tongues understood. Origen homil. 2. in Isaiam wisheth, that all Christians would perform that, which our Saviour Christ speaketh of searching scriptures. Hierome writing upon the Coloss. c. 3. here, saith he, it is showed, that laymen ought to have the word of Christ, not only sufficiently, but also abundantly, and that they ought to teach and admonish one another. Ghrysostome also in his 9 homily in 1. ad Corinth. attend, saith he, as many of you, as are secular persons, and govern wife and children, how the Apostle doth command you also to read the scriptures above all, and that not lightly and carelessly, but with great diligence.  
That the Pope should be above all counsels, it never entered into the father's thought. nay all of them have recourse in matters of doubt concerning faith, not to the decretales of Popes, but to the determination of general counsels, next after holy scriptures.  
The bishop of Rome oftentimes consulted with learned fathers concerning the interpretation of scriptures, and no learned bishop did in time past attribute more to the bishop of Rome, then to other bishops. the Papists therefore making the Pope that is often blind in matters of religion supreme interpreter of scriptures, digress from all the fathers, and have not so much seuce herein, as little children, that know that blinde-men cannot judge of colours.  
The conventicle of Trent determining, that traditions and holy scriptures are with equal affection to be received, digress from all the fathers, that make not traditions, but the scriptures to be canonical, and of sacred authority.  
The Papists, that say, that scriptures are not authentical to us without the determination of the Pope, and Romish church are of an opinion contrary to all the fathers, who derive their authority and credit from God, and not from man.  
Bellarmine lib. 3. de eccles. c. 16. saith, that Hierome, Apollinaris, and Hippolytus were deceived in the exposition of the ninth chapter of Daniel concerning the times of Antichrist.  
In his 2. book de Purgatorio c. 1. he rejecteth the opinion of Ambrose, Hilary, Lactantius, Hierome and Alevinus, that teach, that as well good, as bad need to be purged.  
In the number of 7. Sacraments the conventicle of Trent departeth from the opinion of all the fathers. for not one can be alleged, that saith there are just 7. Sacraments, and neither more, nor less. Ambrose in his books de Sacramentis, and de initiandis in mister. mentioneth only two. so doth justine Martyr long before him in his 2. apology. S. Augustine lib. 3. de doctr. Christ. c. 9 reckoneth only the Sacrament of baptism and of the body and blood of Christ, where he talketh of sacraments. he saith also, Christ left but few and easy. but Popish sacraments are many, and hard to be performed.  
The fathers no where mention spittle, salt, blowing, light and such ceremonies, as the Pope hath added to baptism.  
These words this is my body, are expounded figuratively by Tertullian lib. 4. contr. Martion. Origen in levit. Chrysostome homil. 46. in joan. Augustine contra Adimantum and lib. 3. de doctr. c. 16. & in comment. in psal. 3. but the Papists in this exposition forsake all the fathers.  
Gregory dial. lib. 2. c. 43. willeth those to departed, that communicate not. si quis non communicet, saith he, det locum. the Apostles canons do excommunicate him, that departeth before communion. the same is also confirmed by the chap. si quis. dist. 2. the consecrat. the mass-priests therefore in the practice of their private Masses depart from the canons of the Apostles, and all the fathers.  
Innocentius the third, lib. 4. the myster. missae c. 6. thought that Christ consecrated without words. others believe, he consecrated by prayer. the modern Papists reject both.  
Bellarmine lib. 4. de eucharist. c. 26. maketh the best proof he can for the communion under one kind. but it appeareth by his silence, that the fathers are all adverse to him.  
Gelasius in the chap. comperimus. de consecrat. dist. 2. condemned those of sacrilege, that receiving one kind abstained from the cup. and Lyra in 1. Cor. 11. declareth, that in the primitive Church all Christians received both kinds.  
The father's speaking of the sacrifices of Christians call them sacrifices of praise, and spiritual sacrifices, and signify, that the eucharist is a commemoration of Christ's only sacrifice on the cross. that is confirmed by the testimony of justin in dialog. cum Tryph. of Tertullian. lib. 4. contr. Martion. of Eusebius lib. 1. de demonstr. evangel. of Cyprian adverse. judaos. c. 16. of Basil in Isaiae c. 1. and others. this is proved partly by the same authors, and by Chrysostome in Psal. 95. & in epist. ad Hebr. homil. 13. and Theodoret. in epist. ad Heb. c. 8. & 10. and by divers others amply cited by me in my books de missa against Bellarmine. all which do show, that the Papists bringing an external and real sacrifice of Christ's body and blood actually offered, as they teach, by every masspriest into the church, are departed quite from the doctrine of the fathers.  
Canus lib. 7. loc. Theol. c. 1. confesseth that all the fathers, which speak of the Virgin Maries conception, teach that she was conceived in original sin, as Ambrose in Psal. 118. ser. 6. Augustine in Psal. 34. Chrysostome, Eusebius Emissenus, Remigius and others. yet most of the Pope's proctor's especially the Franciscans reject these fathers.  
The fathers with one consent teach, that we are not to fast between Easter and Pentecost, nor upon Sundays, as Bellarmine de bon. oper. in part. c. 23, confesseth. yet doth he reject their authority, and all Papists do contrary.  
Leo in epist. ad Rusticum Narbonensem, and all the fathers almost deny public penance to Priests and Deacons fallen into notorious crimes. but the popish faction regardeth them not one jot.  
Bellarmine lib. 1. de eucharist. c. 11. saith, that Augustine did not well weigh these words of Luke, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine.  
Augustine lib. 22. the civit. Dei c. 10. saith that Christians do not worship martyrs, or erect remples in their honour. lib. 1. de morib. eccles. c. 3. he denieth that we are to adore any ereature. Hierome also joineth with him in this opinion mepist. ad Riparium. but the popish sect doth not regard what they say, nor followeth their doctrine.  
Finally it were an easy matter to show the fathers to be adverse to popery in all material controversies. but what shall we need to do it, seeing their late corruptions and false allegations of fathers do plainly testify, that they do not hope for victory, if the fathers may be truly alleged? of late they have set out indices expurgatory teaching Printers how to falsify fathers. Sixtus Senensis inepist. ad Pium 5. ante biblioth. sanct. showeth how that Pope had caused the fathers to be purged, or rather corrupted. expurgari fecisti omnium authorum catholicorum, saith he, & praecipuè veterum patrum scripta. Pameluts hath most shamefully corrupted Cyprian. and the like course all Papists take with the books of the fathers lately set forth.  
Sometime also they confess the corruption of fathers. Aeneas Sylu. lib. 1. de gest. council. Basil. showeth, how Popes stand upon these words, vocaberis Cephas, and launch into the deep, and such like, neglecting the exposition of all the holy doctors. posthabitis omnino omnium sanctorum expositionibus. Alan Chartier saith, they reject the holy doctrine of fathers. sanct●● patrum doctrine reiectae & posthabitae sunt. Matth. Paris in Wilhelmo Conquest. speaking of hildebrand's decree against married Priests, saith, it was made without consideration, and against the judgement of holy fathers, inconsiderato judicio contra sanctorum patrum sententiam.   

CHAP. XIX. That Popish religion was never testified by the blood of Christian martyrs.  
STrange it were, if the martyrs of Christ should turn from Christ, and testify for Antichrist. yet because the adversaries of truth do boast of ancient martyrs, and Bristol in his 15. motive doth place Martyrs, as setters forth of the Pope's glorious kingdom, we are briefly to show, that the testification of Martyrs maketh nothing for popish religion. and that appeareth first, for that the Papists refuse to be tried by the doctrine of the Apostles, which were principal Martyrs.  
Secondly we have showed, that the principal points of Popery were neither taught, nor received during the time of the primitive Martyrs, nor many ages after, and that many points now taught and received among Papists, were then refused as heresies.  
Thirdly Papists adore idols and burn incense unto them. but the ancient Martyrs were therefore martyred, & cruelly put to death, because they would not consent to the worship of idols, nor burn incense to them.  
Fourthly the practices of Papists declare, that they are more like to the heathen Emperors, and persecutors of Christians, then to the ancient martyrs of Christ's church. for as they massacred Christians for maintenance of the Apostolic faith, so do the Popes and their complices massacre all that stand for the same. as they by sword and fire sought to uphold idolatry; so do these. as they hated them deadly, which taught the true faith; so do these.  
Finally the confession of the faith published by Pius the fourth, and that doctrine, which the conventicle of Trent hath of late confirmed, and commanded to be taught and believed, is in many points contrary to the faith of ancient martyrs, and in all points of controversy betwixt Papists and us utterly unknown to them.  
The holy Apostles commend scriptures, and so do ancient martyrs. but Papists accuse them of insufficiency, obscurity, flexibility, and call them a nose of wax, and a kill letter.  
Ancient martyrs were burned and put to death, because they would not deliver holy scriptures to be burnt. the Papists do burn scriptures, and suspect such for heretics as read them in vulgar tongues.  
The Apostles and Primitive martyrs believed the scriptures, because they came from God. the Papists will not have scriptures to be belecued, unless they be delivered by the Pope.  
They taught neither heresy, nor impiety, nor novelty. but Popish religion, as before is declared, is full of heresies, impieties, novelties.  
In ancient time the Bishops of Rome were martyrs. now those, that call themselves their successors, do murder God's Saints, and make them martyrs.  
Ancient martyrs taught, that one God was to be adored. the Papists give divine honour to the cross and crucifix, and call the Sacrament, their Lord and God.  
Ancient martyrs did break down images. now the Papists erect them, fall down before them, and worship them.  
Finally ancient martyrs never believed, that either dogs or hogs could eat Christ's body, or that the same was in any place, where it could neither be felt nor seen, or that the same was both in heaven, and earth, and every pyx at one time, or that bread is transubstantiated into Christ's body, or that Christians do with their teeth eat man's flesh, or with their throats swallow man's blood, or that the bishop of Rome is lord and monarch of the church, or that he can fetch souls out of Purgatory, or that there is a treasure of Saints merits, out of which indulgences are granted, or that Christians are justified by extreme unction, or eating fish, and such like Popish devices.  
Neither is it material, that these holy martyrs are put in Popish calendars. for the jews bragged of their father Abraham, and adorned the sepulchres of the Prophets, although they neither abode in the faith of Abraham, nor followed the doctrine of the Prophets.  
Further, Bristol telleth us, that S. Stephen helped all those, that sought unto him. but his proofs are drawn out of legends, and certain counterfeit sermons of S. Augustine. in his 22. chapter de civit. dei. c. 8. there is no such matter; and yet these reports, that are there inserted seem to be none of S. Augustine's. but suppose certain superstitious people should pray to S. Stephen; yet S. Stephen never taught them so to do, nor allowed such forms of prayers.  
Lastly he talketh of Fisher, More, the Charterhouse monks, and divers that died in king Henry the 8. & the late Queen's reign for the Pope's cause, and telleth us, that they were of his religion. but it is first denied, that they were martyrs, and next that Fisher, and More, were of the modern Romish religion. the first is proved, for that they died for the Pope, and not for Christ. Secondly they died as traitors, either by open rebellion, or by overt act oppugning the Prince's authority. the second is evident, for that divers of them died before the conventicle of Trent, which hath now published a new form of faith, and decreed many things, which then were not known nor believed as matters of faith. these fellows therefore are liker the Martyrian heretics, then to Christ's martyrs. and if they be honoured of any, it is of rebels, leaguers, and traitors combined with the Pope, and foreign enemies against their Prince and country. so likewise the Circuncellions were honoured of their consorts, as martyrs. yet Augustine epist. 58. speaking of them saith, they lived as robbers, and were honoured as martyrs. vivebant ut latrones, honorabantur ut martyrs.   

CHAP. XX. That Popery is a mere human devise, and not in any sort to be deduced or proved out of holy scriptures.  
In matters of religion we are diligently to take heed, that we pass not beyond the commandments of God, upon whose word only all true religion is founded. Whatsoever I command you, saith Moses Deut. 12. take heed you do it. you shall put nothing thereto, nor take aught therefrom. our Saviour Christ Matth. 15. telleth us, that they worship God in vain, that teach for doctrines men's precepts. finally the apostle Coloss. 2. condemneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or voluntary worship taken up by men without warrant: and well doth the old Latin interpreter of the bible translate that word, superstition. let us then a little consider, whether Popish religion be derived out of holy scriptures, or else be only a pack of human devices.  
The mass, as our adversaries themselves confess, was framed at several times, and by divers authors. Polydore de inventorib. lib. 5. c. 10. saith, S. Peter after consecration used only the Lords prayer, and that S. james, and S. Basil did increase the mysteries. out of Walasridus, Platina, Naucler and others we read, that Celestine made the introit beginning judica me deus, that Damasus added the confession said by the Priest, and Gregory the Antiphona, and Kyris eleeson, and Telesp horus Gloria in excelsis, and Gelasius certain orisons or clauses of oray sons, and the prayer te igitur, and Syricius communicantes. and so we see how it was peeced by little and little.  
In the consecration of the cup they have added to the words of our Saviour the words & aeterni, and mysterium fidei. Innocentius c. cum Marthae. de celebrat. missar. saith first, that they were added by the Apostles, albeit not found in the gospel. as if it were not a simple matter to think that they did not write, that which they thought sufficient. he saith again, that they are proved out of the words of the Gospel. but his proofs are ridiculous. for he must show that these words were used, where they are placed: which he doth not so much as once endeavour to do.  
The Masses in honour of Saints and Angels are devised by men, and that very lately. Thomas Aquinas, as is said, devised the office said on corpus Christi day. who devised the masses and offices said in honour of S. Francis and S. Dominicke and other late Saints, the Papists themselves do not know.  
The Psalter of our Lady, as some think, was devised by Bonaventure. her Offices are of a latter stamp. all are mere human devices without any ground of scripture.  
That Priests offer Christ to his father for the sins of quick and dead, nay for sick horses and pigs, and whatsoever necessities else can be imagined, is a devise of man, and no way to be justified by Christ's institution.  
Christ instituting baptism said, baptise: and not spit, and salt, and grease, and light candles. he said also to his Disciples being present, take and eat: and not gape and gaze. the ceremonies therefore used in baptism, and in the mass by Papists proceed not out of God's word.  
It is also a mere human devise that no Priest may say Mass without water and fire, and is prescribed, not by evangelical authority, but by the Pope in the chap. literas tuas. de celebrat. missar.  
The worship of the sacrament, and the custody thereof in a pyx dependeth on the decretal Sane cum olim. de celebrat. miss. and was first brought in, and invented by Honorius the third.  
The practice of Priests in saying canonical hours cometh from no canon of scripture, but from the constitution presbyter. de celebrat. missar.  
In ancient time the relics of martyrs were buried in the ground, and might not be touched. but human curiosity hath thought it better now to dig them out of the ground, and to place them in the altar, and to worship them, and that without any instruction or direction of holy scriptures.  
Popish litanies, wherein Papists pray to Angels & Saints, and sometime to those which are no Saints, are divers from the forms of prayers prescribed in scriptures: and lately brought in by the devise of superstitious Monks, Friars, and mass-priests.  
Benet, Francis, Dominicke and other authors of feigned religions, took not their rules from the Gospel, but thought they could frame a more perfect religion then the Gospel.  
The Pope's triple crown, guard of swizzers, crossed slipper, and such like devices will hardly be found in the writings of the Apostles. S. Peter certes never wore any such crown, nor had any such guard.  
Where they pray to the cross in the breviary and say, increase righteousness in the godly, and grant pardon to sinners, they do it of their own head, and shall never find any such prayer in scriptures.  
Boniface the eight first ordained the feast of the jubiley, and Clement the fifth appointed the feast of corpus Christi. but if you ask their warrant, they will show you some other authority, than from the Apostles.  
Sixtus quartus ordained the feast of our Lady's conception, and another Pope of her assumption: but both upon false grounds, supposing that she was conceived without sin, and that her body was taken up into heaven. they maintain the same also by lies and apocryphal fables.  
Finally it is an easy matter to show, that the forms and signs of popish confirmation, extreme unction, and other new made sacraments are prescribed by Popes and their adherents, without warrant of holy scripture.   

CHAP. XXI. That popish religion in divers points is directly contrary to holy scriptures.  
NEither is popery only destitute of warrant out of scriptures, but also directly contrary in some points to holy scriptures. In the law Deut. 12. we are expressly forbidden to add to the law of God, or to take from it. The Papists offend both ways. for to the laws of God they add the precepts of the Romish church and decretales of Popes, and say they bind the conscience. they do also cut out the second commandment concerning the worship of images, as their short catechisms and primers do testify, and by false interpretations corrupt God's law.  
In the first commandment we are forbidden to have other Gods beside the God of heaven and earth. but the mass-priests, as before is declared, call the sacrament their Lord and God, and honour the Pope as a God on earth, and give divine honour to creatures: which is as much as if they should expressly command their followers to have other gods.  
The law forbiddeth us to make graven images and similitudes, to the intent to worship them. the Pope commandeth his followers to make them, and to worship them, and burneth such as teach contrary.  
The Apostle calleth concupiscence in himself sin. the mass-priests of Trent deny it to be sin in the regenerate.  
Our Saviour in the fifth of john commanded his followers to search the scriptures. these followers of Antichrist forbidden Christians to search the scriptures translated into vulgar tongues without licence.  
At his last supper after the blessing he said, take and eat. but these good fellows say, gape and gaze on the Priest saying mass, and eat not, but rather keep the sacrament in the pyx.  
He said, do this in remembrance of me. they do it in remembrance of Angels and Saints, and observe not that form which he prescribed.  
The Apostles of Christ did receive and eat the sacrament. the false Apostles of Antichrist command their scholars to heave it, to adore it, and to carry it about in procession.  
In the conventicle of Constance the Pope's adherents establish the communion under one kind, and where Christ said, drink ye all of this, they say, drink not all of this.  
Christ taught his Disciples to pray to his father, and to say Pater noster. they teach their Disciples to pray to our Lady, and to say, matter nostra, or at least matter miscricordie.  
God in the 50. Psalm saith, invoca me, call upon me. and the Apostle 1. Tim. 2. showeth, that there is but one only mediator betwixt God and man. they teach us to call upon Saints, and say they are our intercessors.  
When S. john Apocalyps. 22. would have worshipped the Angel, he said to him, see thou do it not. these say, see thou do it.  
The Apostle 1. Cor. 14. commandeth him that speaketh in a strange tongue, or that is not understood to keep silence in the Church. he addeth, that prayers in a strange tongue, or without understanning are without fruit. but the Romanists contrary do enjoin their Priests to read scriptures, and to say service in Latin, which of the vulgar sort is not understood. Coster in his Enchir c. de precibus latinè recitandis saith, that he that prayeth in Latin, albeit he understand not what he prayeth, receiveth fruit by his prayer. hune tertium fructum (orationis) non minus percipit, saith he, qui non intellecta àse lingua precatur, quàm qui verborum intelligentiam assequitur.  
S. Paul 2. Tim. 3. teacheth us, that scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect. Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo Dei, saith, they are imperfect, and insufficient without traditions.  
The Apostle Hebr. 1. saith God spoke by the Prophets. and this is to be understood, when the holy Prophets delivered scriptures to God's people. Staple ton de author. eccles. in divers places denieth, that God speaketh in scriptures. and his meaning is, that he speaketh in the Pope.  
Both Prophets and Apostles teach, that the just shall live by faith. but the mass-priests say faith of itself is dead, and that the life and form thereof is charity.  
The Scripture saith, it is better to marry than to burn. the Papists teach that it is better to burn with lust then to marry after the vow made of single life.  
The Apostle 1. Tim. 3. will have a bishop chosen, that is the hush and of one wise. and Hebr. 13. saith, that marriage is honourable among all. the Papists admit no married men living with their wives to be bishops, and count marriage in Priest's pollution.  
The Apostle saith, the law is the ministration of death, and that by the works of the law no flesh is justified. the mass-priests teach their followers, to seek for life in the law, and by the works thereof say, that all the faithful are to be justified.  
Finally, popery in effect is nothing else but a contradiction in most things to the words of holy scripture.   

CHAP. XXII. That the founders and defenders of popery do most wickedly abuse holy scriptures.  
ALl which notwithstanding, the Papists for proof of their false doctrines do allege scriptures; but yet so, as any man may see, if he be not wilfully blind, that they wickedly abuse scriptures, and wrest them contrary to their true sense and meaning. Aventinus lib. 7. annal. Boior. speaking of Gregory the seventh, saith, he forced the scriptures to serve his purpose by false interpretations. divinas scripturas falsò interpretando s●●e causae servire coegit. and Aeneas Silvius lib. 1. de gest. council. Basil. speaking of other Popes saith, they expound the words of Christ, not as the meaning of the holy ghost requireth, but according to their own humour. verba Christi, non prout sensus sancti spiritus exposcit, sed suopte ingenio interpretantur. so in times past false teachers, as S. Peter testifieth, 2. Pet. 3. perverted scriptures to their own destruction. and I would to God, that it were to their own destruction only. but alas! such seducers destroy both themselves and their credulous followers.  
Innocentius 3. c. solitae. de maior. & obed. expoundeth these words Hieremy 1. behold I have placed thee over nations and kingdoms: of the Pope, as if the holy Ghost had appointed him over Nations and kingdoms, and made him superior to the emperor; whereas he seemeth rather to be appointed by the devil than the holy Ghost.  
Likewise these words Genes. 1. God made two great lights in the firmament of heaven, the greater to rule the day, the lesser to rule the night: he supposeth to be meant of the Pope and Emperor, as if the Pope were the great light ruling by day, and the Emperor the less light ruling by night.  
In the chapter novit de judicijs. he doth understand these words Deut. 1. thou shalt judge the great, as the small; neither shalt thou accept any man's person: of the Pope, and of kings, as if by the law of God the Pope were made judge of kings, and were as well to overrule them, as the most contemptible masspriest of his own rascal retinue.  
Again where we read 1. cor. 5: that the servant standeth or falleth to his own master, he concludeth in the chapped. nimis. de jure iurando, that laymen are not to compel clerks to take oaths before them, as if all clerks were the Pope's slaves, and to fall down before him, and to serve him.  
Clement the fift. c. si dominum. de reliq. & venerat. sanct. out of these words, praise God in his Saints, concludeth, that we are to keep the feast of Corpus Christi day.  
Boniface the 8. extr. de maior. & obed. c. unam sanctam. concludeth, that the Pope is above all men, because we read Genes. 1. that in the beginning, and not in the beginnings, God made heaven and earth. as if the Pope were the beginning mentioned in that place.  
Likewise of these words 1. Cor. 2. the spiritual man judgeth all, and is judged of none: he concludeth very wisely, that the Pope is judge of all men, and not to be judged of any.  
Again where we read in the Gospel, behold here are two swords: he presumeth the meaning of those words to be, that the Pope hath two swords. he doth also in the same place abuse the words of God Hierem. 1. ecce constitut te hody super gentes & regna, in the same manner that Innocentius did, as is showed before.  
In the chapped. per venerabilem. qui filii sunt legitimi. Innocentius concludeth that Deuteronomy is to be observed of Christians, because Deuteronomium importeth as much, as the second law.  
By the place which the Lord hath chosen, spoken of Deut. 17. he understandeth the Popes see. locus quem elegit dominus Apostolicasedes esse cognoscitur, saith he.  
By the priests of the stock of Levi he understandeth the Cardinals. his words are these, sunt sacerdotes leuitic● generis fratres nostri.  
Vocaberis Cephas, id est, caput. thou shalt be called Cephas, that is, a head, saith Anacletus in a certain decretal epistle. and c. sacrosancta, dist. 22.  
Suscitabo super eos pastorem unum, saith God by his prophet Ezech. c. 34. that is, I will set over them a shepherd. and he prophesieth of Christ. but Turrecremata lib. 2. sum. c. 2. apply these words to the Pope.  
The priest sprinkling himself and the altar with holy water, as is contained in the missal in the consecration of holy water, saith, thou shalt sprinkle me o Lord with hyssop, and I shall be clean, as if the Prophet had prophesied of holy water.  
When a church is consecrated the Bishop without saith, attollite principes portas vestras, and then answereth a certain quidamet fellow within, quis est ille rex gloriae? and then out steppeth a fellow with a mitre, and saith, I am the king of glory. thus do they play with the words of holy scripture, and blasphemously apply the words spoken of Christ to a mumming masspriest.  
Alexander the third, treading upon the emperors neck uttered these words of the 91. Psalm to his disgrace, thou shalt walk upon the Lion and Asp: and Boniface the eight, for these words, remember man that thou art dust, said to the bishop of Genua, remember man thou art Gibelline, and with them thou shalt be beaten to dust.  
The canonists in the chapter translato. c. de constitutionibus, believe, that the Pope hath power to make laws, because the Apòstle saith translato sacerdotio, necesse est ut legis translatio fiat. but in these words the Apostle speaketh not of the Pope, but of Christ and his priesthood.  
Turrecremata lib. 1. sum. c. 90. finding these words 2. King. 7. I will establish the seat of his kingdom for ever: imagineth, that this prophecy showeth, how the Pope's kingdom shall endure for ever. and lib. 2. sum. c. 80. by the faithful servant set over the whole family, Luke 22. he understandeth the Pope, which as he saith, is set over the whole Church. and lib. 1. c. 8. expounding these words Apocalyps. 4. sedes posita est in coelo, & supra sedem sedens, & in circuitu eius sedil 〈◊〉 24. & super thronos 24. seniores. by the seat he understandeth the Popes see, and by heaven the church of Rome, and by him that sat upon the seat, the Pope; and by the 24. elders, the Cardinals.  
Isay 40. we read quis appendit tribus digitis molem terrae: and by these words Hosites confess. Petricou. c. 10. supposeth to be meant, that the sign of the cross is to be made with three singers.  
Bellarmine in his preface unto his book de Pontif. Rom. doth wrest the words of scripture spoken of Christ the corner stone laid in the foundation of the Church, and draweth them most impudently to the Pope.  
These words of the Prophet, adducentur regi virgines post eam, which are meant of the church, the synagogue of Rome in their missal upon the feast of S. Catherine wrist so, as if they had been meant of her.  
On the feast of Clement, in their missal they apply these words, thou art a Priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech, to Clement.  
On the feast of Cecilia likewise in the missal these words, audi filia & vide, & inclina aurem tuam etc. which are spoken of the church, they apply to Cecilia.  
These words, ego ex ore altissims prodivi, primogenita ante omnem creatur●●●, they apply in their breviaries to the Virgin Mary, as if she were the first borne before all creatures.  
Thus it were an easy matter to bring infinite examples out of the books of our adversaries, and to make it apparent, that they make no conscience of wresting scriptures. but these are sufficient for this first taste.   

CHAP. XXIII. That the Pope and the principal proctors of his cause are great forgers and falsifiers of fathers, profane writers, and of public records.  
seeing then they make so little scruple to wrest the words of holy scriptures, we may not think, that our adversaries will be scrupulous in falsifying either public records, or the writings of the fathers and other authors. for first we find divers counterfeit writings avouched by them, which were never written by those, who are pretended to be the authors. under the names of the Apostles they have set forth canons, which contain divers errors. in the 46. canon they condemn the baptism of heretics. in the 84. canon Ezdras and Nehemias is omitted, and Clement's epistles put among canonical scriptures. Leo c. Clementis. dist. 16. and Isidore c. canon's. in the same distinction, and Gelasius. c. sancta Romana. dist. 15. do reckon them among apocryphal writings; which they would not do, unless they were counterfeit.  
2. They have also falsified the acts of counsels. of the acts of the council of Sinuessa, Peter Crabbe setteth out 3. copies never a one agreeing with the other. the style is so simple, that it can no way agree with the form of speech of those times. the like falsity is committed in the acts of the council of Rome supposed to be assembled under Sylvester.  
Russine reporteth only 20. canons made in the council of Nice, and Stephen bishop of Rome c. viginti. dist. 16. confirmeth his saying. but Gratian under colour of the authority of Athanasius saith there are 70. as appeareth by the chap. septuagint. dist. 16. now one Alphonsus of Pisa a jebusite, hath published 80. canons of that council translates, as he saith, out of Arabic.  
In the sixth council of Carthage, Sozimus bishop of Rome was convicted manifestly to have falsified a canon of the Nicene council concerning appeals to the bishop of Rome.  
Paschasius one of the Pope's agents in the 16. action of the Council of Chalcedon thrust in a piece of counterfeit stuff into a canon of the council of Nice, as if that council had said, that the church of Rome had always the primacy. this he did, or at the least some under his name, as appeareth in the acts of that council.  
Likewise Bellarmine lib. 2. de Pontif. Rom. foisteth in the same words into the sixth canon of the Nicene council. but he may be convinced of falsity by the testimony of all ancient copies, and of Russine, and all that record the canons of Nice in their histories.  
Pius the fist in certain letters of his to the emperor Maximilian recorded in his life written by Hierome Catena, allegeth a false canon of the council of Nice, to prove, that the Pope is governor of all Christian Princes.  
Bellarmine lib. 1. de cult. sanct. c. 19 doth falsify the 7. canon of the sixth synod to prove the invocation of saints. and this falsification is also committed by those, that have lately published the acts of counsels. but they may be convinced by the original copies in Greek, and by all ancient editions of that council in Latin.  
In the 35. canon of the council of Laodisea, Surius and Carrauza in their editions of the decrees and acts of counsels for angelos write angulos, lest it should appear, that the worship of angels is condemned by that council as idolatrous. but this gross falsehood is discovered by Theodoret in Coloss. 2. and Chrysostom's homilies upon the same epistle, and confessed by Bellarmine lib. 1. de cultu sanct. c. 20.  
In the chapter renovantes. dist. 22. the 36. canon of the 6. synod is notoriously falsified. for there it is ordered that the church of Constantinople shall not be magnified as Rome, directly contrary to the sixth synods meaning, and contrary to the acts of the council of Constantinople and Chalcedon.  
Gratian hath corrupted the 22. canon of the council of Milevis, adding these words, nisi forte sedem Romanam appellaverit, whereas expressly that council forbade priests and deacons to appeal beyond the seas. this appeareth by the chap. placuit. 2. q. 6.  
The donation of Constantine is confessed to be counterfeit by Cusanus, Valla, and divers papists; yet still maintained by Gregory the 13. in his new correction and edition of the canon law.  
The constitution also of Ludovicus dist. 63. c. ego Ludovicus, is manifestly forged, as may appear by the contradiction of the copies of Gratian, and Volaterran Geograph. l. 3. and for that it contradicteth the histories of those times.  
The Pope's agents have also counterfeited two epistles under the name of justinian and john bishop of Rome, and thrust them into the code C. de sum. trin. & fid. cath. l. inter claras. Alciat. parerg. lib. 5. c. 23. testifieth, they are not found in ancient copies. and the contradictions and notorious falsities declare them to have been devised of purpose for the advancement of the church of Rome.  
Alexander the 3. upon colour of some counterfeit grants, doth in his registre affirm, that the kingdom of England from the first time the same was converted to Christianity, was under the defence and subjection of the prince of the Apostles. and that which belonged to him the Popes do now challenge as their own proper right.  
Boniface the 9 as Theodoric à Niem lib. 2. de schism. c. 6. doth testify, would antedate any grant of his for money. vendidit prioritates datarum plus offerentibus: which is a notorious trick of falsehood.  
Bellarmine lib. 3. de bonis operib. in part. c. 11. doth confess, that the epistle of Clement to james is counterfeit, and did he not confess it, yet may the same be proved by most evident arguments.  
The decretal epistles set out under the names of ancient bishops of Rome before Sylvester are most shamefully forged. the style, and repugnancy, which they carry with the state of things in those times do plainly convince them to be such. Contius also in his annotations in c. septuagint. dist. 16. doth confess it, and saith he hath proved it.  
Bellarmine lib. de monach. c. 40. acknowledgeth, that the epistle of Anicetus concerning shaving of crowns, is not undoubtedly authentical. he might as well have said, plainly forged.  
Melchiades 12. q. 1. c. futuram. telleth how Constantine was Christened, and gave his seat and other great possessions to the church of Rome. yet it cannot be denied, but that Melchiades was dead before the time of Constantine's Christening.  
Under the name of Clement they have published certain constitutions, which they call Apostolical. yet Gelasius doth account them apocryphal. under his name also pass certain counterfeit recognitions.  
The books of Tertullian and Origen are often cited. yet doth Gelasius note them as corrupted. the commentaries upon job set out under the name of Origan were written by an Arian heretic.  
divers treatises set out under the names of Abdias, Prochorus, Martialis, Africanus, Egesippus, Amphilochius, and other ancient fathers, were never written by the authors, whose names they bear. yet are they commonly alleged by our adversaries.  
Under the names of Cyprian, Hierome, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Basill, Nazianzen, Augustine, and other fathers, the Papists have published divers commentaries, treatises, sermons, epistles, prayers, and fragments most unworthy their piety, and learning. Bellarmine de bonis operib. in party. lib. 2. c. 15. confesseth that the sermons d● tempore, that go under S. Augustine's name were collected by a later author. the sermons ad Eromitas, are taxed by Paulus Langius in Chronico Citizensi, and by Hilgerius. his Manual savoureth of Pelagianisme. his meditations in some editions are ascribed to Anselmus. Bellarmine lib. 2. de missa c. 16. rejecteth certain epistles, that go under the name of Hierome and Damasus, as foolish. and certes very foolish he must needs be, that alloweth all the books, set out under the names of these fathers, as authentical.  
In their expurgatory indices they put out, and put in what they please in the books of divers authors. Sixtus Senensis in epist. ad Pium 5. ante biblioth. sanct. saith, he caused the writings of fathers to be purged. Bertram is shamefully mangled, and visibiliter changed into invisibiliter. Possevin in his book entitled selecta bibliotheca, showeth how Hermes, Melito, Cabasilas, Anastasius and other authors are to be corrupted. for so we must say rather then corrected.  
The writings of the fathers they allege most falsely. Bellarm. lib. 1. de sanct. beat. c. 13. corrupteth a place out of Eusebius de praeparat. euangel. lib. 13. and another out of Eusebius de praeparat. euangel. lib. 13. and another out of Euscbius his history lib. 4. c. 14. and infinite places out of Origen, Tertullian, Hilary, Hierome, Augustine, Chrysostome, and other fathers, as I have particularly declared in my answers to his most corrupt allegations.  
Adrian the Pope in his epistle alleged in the 2. synod of Nice citeth these words as out of Basil. deiparam virginem, sanctos Prophetas, Apostolos & martyrs suscipio, qui pro me apud deum supplicant etc. which words are no where found in Basil. Nay the term of Deipara was first by act of the Ephesine Council devised to meet with the heresy of Nestorius, which was celebrated long after Basils' time.  
To prove that the Pope's decretal epistles are to be reckoned among canonical scriptures, Gratian c. in canonicis. dist. 19 doth falsify S. Augustine.  
In our country the Papists have falsified a statute anno 2. Henrici 4. c. 15. by adding these words, ac etiam communitates dictiregni, thereby to authorize their cruel burning of Christians, as by statute, whereas in the original roll no such words are to be found. so it appeareth, that all the cruel executions of Christians in Queen Mary's time were contrary to law. he that looketh into the original record in the tower shall find this most true.  
We may therefore say of our adversaries that, which Hierome in symbolum Russini saith of men of their quality. perversi homines ad assertionem dogmatum suorum sub virorum sanctorum nomine interseruerunt ea, quae illi nunquam scripserunt: nonnulli Hiberas naenias libris authenticis praeferunt. perverse men for proof of their opinions, have interlaced, under the names of holy men, things which they never wrote. and some prefer idle fables before authentical books.  
May we think them then honest men, which practise such falsity?   

CHAP. XXIIII. That Popery standeth much upon heathenish observances and customs.  
CHristian religion intendeth the overthrow of heathenish impiety and idolatry. Yet such is the craft of Satan, that by the ministry of the Pope he hath established many heathenish customs under colour of Christian religion. for first as the laws of heathen nations were partly written, and partly unwritten, so our adversaries have one word of God written, and another unwritten, & as we read sess. 4. council. Trid. do esteem both with equal affection. but the Apostle teacheth us, that the scriptures are able, to make us wise unto salvation, and Ireney lib. 3. c. 1. saith the scriptures are the pillar and foundation of our faith, neque hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet, sed Dei veritatem, saith Cyprian lib. 2. epist. 3. that is, we are not to follow men's customs, but God's truth. our church saith Saluianus lib. 5. de provident. des, is more happily founded upon the scriptures only. videtur nostrae ecclesia ex una seripturafeliciùs instituta.  
Secondly the schoolmen build their opinions as well upon Aristotle and other Philosophers, and their authority, as upon the Prophets and Apostles. Bernard of Luzemburg in cattle. haeret. showeth how the doctors of Colein defined, that Aristotle was the forerunner of Christ in naturalibus, as john Baptist was his forerunner in divinis. writing upon the first book of Lombard's sentences dist. 3. they seek out the distinction of the 3. persons in the Trinity by similitudes drawn out of Philosophy. by the same also they hope to find out the eternal generation of the son of God, albeit the Prophet do declare it to be menarrable. and the like they attempt in disputing of the proceeding of the holy Ghost.  
Gratian in the chap. decretis. dist. 21. talking of divers orders and degrees in the Romish hierarchy, confesseth that this difference was deduced from the gentiles. horum discretio, saith he, a gentilibus maximè introducta est, qui suos flamines, alios simpliciter flamines, alios archislamines, alios protoslamines appellabant.  
Gregory the first writing to Mellitus, as we may read in Bede lib. 1. hist. Angl. c. 30. permitted the English to build booths in the day of the dedication of their churches, and to kill oxen for the praise of God: which were customs of pagans serving idols.  
Boniface the 4. consecrated the Church called Pantheon, wherein Cybele, and all heathen Gods were worshipped, to our Lady and all Saints, as is testified by Platina, john di Pineda and others. this showeth that the worship of Saints is succeeded in lieu of the worship of Idols and heathen Gods.  
Baruch c. 6. speaking of the Priests of the gentiles, saith, they have their heads and beards shaven. from them therefore came the Popish shaving of their Prìests heads and beards.  
From them also the Papists borrow the scourging themselves before the cross and other images. for before their idols the Priests of Baal did launce themselves. the Priests of Cybele did also whip themselves as, Apuleius testifieth.  
The gentiles did keep secret the mysteries of their religion. so do the Papists likewise, uttering the canon of the Mass in a low voice, lest the people should hear it, and reading the scriptures in unknown and strange languages. and they yield this reason, lest holy things should be cast to dogs.  
The best ground, that Bellarmine layeth for proof of the Pope's monarchy is, for that the gentiles thought that form of government best. but God in disposing of matters of ecclesiastical government borroweth no precedents from the gentiles.  
Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 59 art. 1. by a Philosophical argument drawn from the similitude between our spiritual and corporal life, proveth the number of his seven sacraments.  
By Philosophy also the Pope's agents prove, that one body may be in many places at once, and yet fill no place. out of holy scripture certes they are not able to derive any proof for it.  
The worship of Saints is a mere trick of Gentilism. for as the Gentiles had one principal god, and divers demie and inferior gods, so have the Papists. Ambrose in chap. 1. ad Rom. saith the gentiles used the mediation of others to God, as men use to come to princes by tribunes and hushiers. so likewise do the papists. they gave the honour of God to creatures, honorem nominis Dei deferunt creaturae. so likewise do Papists.  
Likewise the worship of images is a mere invention of Pagans. in the book of Wisdom c. 14. they are called idols of the nations. this is plainly declared by Athanasius in his treatise against idolatry, and Cyprian de idolorum vanitate. Ambrose in Psal. 118. ser. 10. saith, gentiles did worship wood, because they thought it to be the image of God. gentes lignum adorant, quia dei imaginem putant. so likewise Papists worship images, not because of the matter, but because they represent the image of God. and in his commentaries upon the first chapter to the Romans, he saith the gentiles changed the glory of God into the likeness of men, so that the form of a corruptible man is by them called God. and so likewise Papists call the image of God, God; and the image of Christ, Christ; and change the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of man.  
At Rome the temple of Romulus and Remus is now turned into the church of S. Cosmas and Damianus. The temple of Faunus into the church of S. Stephen, and at Loreto the church of juno Cupra into the chapel of our Lady of Loreto. Gregory in his dialogues lib. 2. c. 8. showeth, that Benet in stead of Apollo substituted S. Martin in the castle of Cassinum, and that he erected an altar to S. john in the place, where an altar stood dedicated to Apollo. nay so little difference there is between paganism and popery, that the image of Inpiter in brass doth now serve in S. Peter's church at Rome for the image of S. Peter, as every one may see, and their antiquaries dissemble not.  
The Gentiles did deify their Emperors and benefactors, and erect temples & altars in their honour. And what do Papists? do not they canonize their Popes, and do not Popes canonize Saints? and do they not erect temples and altars to Saints? they will not deny it. but S. Augustine lib. 22. the civit. Dei. c. 10. showeth, that Christians built no temples nor altars to martyrs, as gods. nos, saith he, martyribus nostris non templa sicut dys, sed memorias sicut hominibus etc. fabricamus. nec ibi erigimus altaria.  
Heathen nations, as Tertullian showeth us, did so dispose of God, that they assigned the chief Empire to one, and distributed his offices and duties to many. divinitatem sic disponebant, us imperium summ●● dominationis penes unum, offieia eius penes multos esse vellent. so the Papists acknowledging one God in terms, do assign the parts of his government to many Saints, making our Lady chief of all, as may appear by their practice, and by the express words of Horatius Tursellinus before rehearsed. to S. George they assign the charge for the wars, to S. Antony the custody of swine, to S. Apollonia the cure of the toothache, to S. Roch and S. Sebastian the remedy against the plague, to S. Fiacre the healing of quartan agues, to S. Margaret the charge of women in travel of childbirth, to S. Lewes the government of horses.  
Eusebius hist. eccles. lib. 7. c. 17. showeth, that ancient Christians, after the custom of the Gentiles, kept the images of those with them, of whom they had received benefits.  
In the Mass also divers tricks are borrowed from the Gentiles. they did offer for the dead, and so likewise do the Papists. Polydore lib. 6. de inventorib. c. 9 proveth the yearly sacrifice for the dead out of Macrobius and Cato. and c. 10. the 9 days sacrifice out of Horace. fichat sacrificium pro mortuis, saith he, nono die. from thence also he fetcheth mourning and mourning blacks.  
The use of burning incense, saith Polydore lib. 5. de inventorib. c. 10. came from the heathen. apud nos Leo tertius idem fiers sanxit, saith he, quod etiam ab Ethnicis seruabatur. than he bringeth Virgiles testimony for burning incense.  
From the heathen the Priests also take their washing of hands at Mass. ab Ethnicis sumptum est, saith Polydore, apud quos sacrificantes primùm omnium n● vius lausabant.  
Likewise of them they borrow their skippings and turnings. for as Apuleius saith, the Priests turned about, sprinkling the blood of the sacrifice.  
The clause of the mass, as appeareth by the testimony of Apuleius lib. 11. of the golden ass cited by Polydore de inventoribus lib. 5. c. 11. came from the Gentiles. for as the Priest said there, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so the Priest saith here, ite missa est.  
The consecrating of images Durand deriveth from the example of Nabuchodonosor, that called all his Princes to the dedication of the golden image. as we read rational. divin. lib. 1. c. 6.  
The gentiles did not sacrifice without fire and water. no more do Mass priests, as appeareth by the chapter literas tuas. de celebrat. miss.  
In their prayers the mass-priests turn themselves to the East. and this custom Polydore lib. 5. de invent. c. 9 doth prove to have been borrowed from the gentiles. for God forbade his people to pray toward the East.  
The mass-priests carry about their corpus Domini upon a hackney, when the Pope goeth in progress. so likewise did the Priests of Isis carry the image of their goddess about with them, and the Chaldeans the fire, which they worshipped as God.  
Choul in his book of the religion of the Romans confesseth, that tunicles, albes, and the pomp and ceremonies of the Mass have been taken from the Egyptians and Gentiles.  
That Purgatory came from the Gentiles it cannot be denied. Virgil Aenead. 6. doth testify so much. ergo exercentur poenis, veterumque malorum, saith he, supplicia expendunt.  
So likewise the Papists suppose that souls are there purged for their sins. likewise from them they borrow their purgation by holy water, as is signified by Polydore de inventoribus lib. 6. c. 1.  
As the Gentiles believed, that every one had his good and bad genius, so the Papists assign to every Christian a good and bad Angel.  
The Gentiles allowed no married Priests, as Hierome. lib. 1. contra jovin. doth testify. the same practice have Papists used concerning their Priests.  
The 2. council of Arles c. 23. showeth it to be a custom of Pagans, to worship trees, or stones, or fountains. yet our English Papists cease not to go on pilgrimage to S. Winifride's well, nor to worship stocks and stones.  
How then can the Papists call themselves Christians, that have in fresh practice so many heathen customs?   

CHAP. XXV. That popery borroweth also divers fashions from the jews.  
WHat they have not from the Gentiles, that for the most part of their ceremonies is borrowed from the jews. from them also I have showed how they have borrowed divers heresies. with the pharisees they boast in the law, and are more curious in observing their own traditions, than the law of God.  
With the Hemerobaptists they sprinkle themselves continually with holy water. with the same they consecrate their clergy, as the Levites were consecrated Numbr. 8. by the law of Moses. they do also borrow their shaving at the time of their ordination from the law. God speaking of the consecration of Levites, aspergantur aqua lustrationis, saith he, & radant omnes pilos carnis suae.  
Innocentius the third in the chapter per venerabilem, proveth the supreme authority of the Pope, and of his see, out of the words of the law Deut. 17. thence also he proveth his Cardinals. nay to show himself more jewish, he toeth Christians to the observance of the ceremonial laws of Moses contained in Deuteronomy.  
In the chapped. cleros. dist. 21. they endeavour to prove the seven orders of their clergy, & their several functions from the Levitical law.  
The burning of incense at the altar Polydore lib. 5. de inventorib. c. 10. showeth to have been borrowed from the example of Aaron. quoth thus adoletur ad altar, id primus fecit Aaron, saith he.  
The jews began their feasts with washing of hands. and from thence doth Polydore think, that the washings of mass-priests at the altar are derived.  
As the jews adorned the tombs of the Prophets, so do Papists adorn the tombs of their martyrs hoping to be relieved by them.  
Durandus rational. divin. lib. 1. c. 6. deriveth the consecration of Churches, altars, and vessels, and the greasing of them from the law of Moses. and this is also proved by the chap. tabernaculum. de consecrat. dist. 1.  
The apparel of Priests is transsiumpted from the jewish ceremonial law, as Durandus witnesseth lib. 3. rat. divin. c. 1. sacrae vestes, saith he, à veteri lege videntur assumptae. praecepit enim Dominus Mosi etc. and again, noster Pontifex plura, quàm octo induit vestimenta, quamuis Aaron non nisi octo habuisse legatur, quibus moderna succedunt.  
From thence also the mass-priests have borrowed their altars, sacrifices and priesthood. for in the Gospel we find none of these things instituted, as they use them.  
Alexander the first did institute the consecration of holy water in imitation of the aspersion of the ashes of the red cow.  
The burning of incense by Durand. rat. lib. 4. c. 8. is drawn from the manner of the Priests of the law, and out of the 30. chapter of Exodus.  
The salutation, Dominus vobiscum, is borrowed from Boos Ruth. 2. who with like words saluted his reapers. as if the Mass were only to be said in harvest time, and among mowers and reapers.  
The feasts instituted in the dedication of churches are derived from the first of Maccabees c. 4. because the jews did keep holy the day of the dedication of the temple.  
Durand. rat. divin. lib. 6. c. 6. proveth the four ember fasts by the example of the jews. nam & judaei, saith he, quater in anno ieiunabant. and he allegeth a brave reason for it, viz. for that the four elements of the body being corrupted, by these four fasts may be purged.  
In the later end of the missal the Papists show, how the paschal lamb is to be consecrated; which is is a ceremony savouring of the relics of the Levitical law not yet sufficiently purged out of popery.  
The heaving and lifting of the sacrifice the mass-priests borrow from the ceremonial law, wherein a heave offering was prescribed. and from thence also cometh the swinging of the chalice about the priest's head.  
Garret from the testimony of Averroes and other Rabbins goeth about to prove the popish real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament. Robert Parsons in his book of 3. conversions endeavoureth to prove prayers for the dead by the corrupt custom of the jews.  
Finally it were an easy matter to show, that many other popish cymbals and ceremonies are drawn partly from the Gentiles, and partly from the jews. but by this, which I have already brought, it appeareth sufficiently, that Popish religion is either grossly heathenish, or ceremoniously jewish, or at the least corruptly and stiffly heretical.   

CHAP. XXVI. That Popish religion is full of contradictions, and contrary opinions.  
AS truth is always consonant to itself, so in falsehood there is much jarring and contradiction to specify this matter by examples, we need to seek no further, then in the corrupt and false religion and doctrine of Papists. for notwithstanding their cracks and brags of unity, hardly shall you name any point of doctrine, wherein the chief founders and defenders of Popery hold not singular opinions, and vary one from another. nay whosoever hath leisure to peruse the whole corpse of their doctrine, shall find, that it containeth strange pieces and points one contradicting another. In the article of the Trinity, wherein we agree with the common doctrine of Papists, they are so curious and contentious, that they agree not, almost in any point among themselves.  
First they contend about the distinction of the divine attributes, whether it be real, or formal, or imaginary, or rationis. Dionysius Richel in lib. 1. sent. dist. 2. saith, that this is one of the chief difficulties of divines, and that about it there is great dissension, and contention. he telleth further, how Aegidius doth herein lance Thomas, and others run upon both.  
Aegidius in lib. 1. sentent. dist. 2. would have the persons of the Trinity distinguished by a certeive thing in one, that is not in another: which displeaseth the rest of his consorts.  
Most of the schoolmen deny the examples and similitudes of the master of sentences lib. sent. 1. dist. 3. brought to illustrate the unity of the essence & Trinity of the persons: and that, which one affirmeth, another misliketh.  
Bonaventure saith, that a man may attain to the knowledge of the holy Trinity by the light of reason. others say contrary.  
The Scotistes lib. 1. sent. dist. 5. inveigh against Henricus de Gandavo for his singular opinion about the eternal generation of the son of God.  
Aegidius holdeth, that the son of God is able to beget another son: which displeaseth Thomas and Bonaventure, and is very strange divinity.  
Thomas Aquinas 1. q. 32. art. 4. holdeth, that doctors may hold contrary opinions, cire a notiones in divinis. he teacheth also, that the holy Ghost doth more principally proceed from the father, then from the son: which others mislike.  
If then they agree not about the doctrine of the holy Trinity, what little hope can we conceive, that they will better accord in other matters? Durand denieth Theology to be scientia. Thomas and Richard hold that it is.  
About the words uti, and frui, there is great variety of opinions, some dissenting from their master, others one from another, as their disputes in 1. sent. dist. 1. do testify.  
Pighius lib. 1. de eccles. hierach. c. 2. saith, that Scriptures are not above our faith, but subject unto it. Stapleton lib. doct. princip. 12. c. 15. teacheth, that the church and scriptures are of equal authority.  
Eckius in enchirid. loc. come. c. de ecclesia, determineth, that the Scriptures are not authentical without the authority of the church. Bellarmine thought best to pass over this question without resolution.  
Nicholas Lyra, Hugo de S. Victore, Dionysius Carthusianus, Hugo cardinalis, Thomas de vio and Sixtus Senensis lib. 1. biblioth. S. reject the last seven chapters of the book of Hester, as not canonical Scriptures. the conventicle of Trent, and most popish doctors of later times hold them to be canonical.  
john Driedo lib. 1. de scripture. & ecclesiast. dogm. denieth the book of Baruch to be canonical scripture. Bellarmine lib. 1. de verb. Dei, and most of his sellowes be of a contrary opinion.  
Caietan and Erasmus in their Commentaries upon the Epistles to the Hebrews, of james, Jude, the second of Peter and the 2. and the third of john do dissent from the rest of their fellows, and that partly concerning the authors, and partly concerning the authority of those epistles.  
james bishop of Christopolis in praefat. in Psal. and Canus lib. 2. loc. theolog. c. 13. affirm, that the jews have depraved, and corrupted the original text of the old restament: an opinion false & blasphemous, & therefore contradicted by Bellar. lib. 2. de verb. dei. and by divers of his consorts.  
saints Pagnmus in Praefat. interpret. suae biblior. and Paulus bishop of Foro Sempronio lib. 2. c. 1. de die passionis domini, deny, that the vulgar Latin translation of the Bible was made by Hierome. Austen of Eugubium and Picus Mirandula hold contrary. Bellarmine and D●sedo say, that it is part his, and part others.  
Alexander Hales and Durand hold, that the divine attributes are not distinguished, but in respect unto creatures. Henricus and Albertus in 1. sent. dist. 2. hold contrary.  
Richardus in 1. sent. dist. 3. holdeth, that the mystery of the Trinity may be demonstrated by natural reasons. Scotus, Maronis and Thomas affirm the contrary.  
About the faculties of the soul called potentiae the schoolmen are divided into three sects, as may appear by their disputes lib. 1. sent. dist. 3. some hold, they are all one with the substance of the soul; others that they are accidents; the third, that they are between substances and accidents.  
Abbot joachim, and Richard de sancto victore taught, that the divine essence might generare & gigni. the contrary is taught by Peter Lombard and his followers.  
Peter Lombard lib. sent. 1. dist. 17. taught, that charity, wherewith we love God, and our neighbour, is the holy ghost, and that it is not any thing created. but now most of his followers in this point forsake him.  
In the 24. dist. of his first book of sentences Peter Lombard saith, that the words of number spoken of God are spoken only relaturely, and that the word Trinity implieth nothing positively, but only privatively; which because it overthroweth the mystery of the holy Trinity, is almost generally contradicted by his followers.  
In the 44. distinction of the same book he saith, that God can always do whatsoever he could ever do, and that he willeth whatsoever he would at any time, and knoweth whatsoever he knew at any time. but his Disciples hold direct contrary.  
Thomas p. 1. q. 46. art. 2. holdeth, that the world, or at the lest some creature might have been from everlasting. so likewise holdeth Bonaventure and some others. Richardus maintaineth the opposite opinion, and that rightly, for that the other savoureth of Arianisme.  
The master of sentences in 4. dist. 1. and Gabriel and Vega lib. 7. pro Conc. Trid. c. 13. hold, that not only substances, but accidents also are created.  
Alexander Hales q. 9 m. 6. & q. 10. m. 1. and Thomas p. 1. q. 45. art. 4. affirm, that only substances are created.  
About this question an omnium aeviternorum sit unum aewm vel multiplex, there are 5. different opinions, the first of Scotus, the second of Thomas, the third of Durand, the fourth of Henricus, the fifth of Bonaventure.  
Likewise about this question, quae sit ratio formalis, cur Angelus sit in loco, there are five opinions all repugnant one to another.  
Thomas and Richardus do affirm, that two Angels cannot be in one place together. Scotus, Occam and Gabriel hold the contrary.  
Thomas holdeth, that Angels have not intellectum agentem & possibilem. Scotus doth directly contradict him.  
Scotus and Gabriel teach, that both Devils and good Angels do understand naturally both our thoughts, and the thoughts one of another, but to Thomas p. 1. q. 57 art. 4. this seemeth absurd.  
Antisiodorensis lib. 2. sum. saith that Christ had Angelum custodem. other schoolmen deny it.  
Scotus in 2. sent. dist. 1. holdeth, that the soul and an Angel do not differ as two divers kinds. others teach contrary.  
Some doctors hold that Angels consist of form only: others hold contrary, as appeareth by their disputes in 2. sent. dist. 3.  
The second council of Nice Act. 5. determineth, that Angels & souls are corporal. nemo dixerit, saith the council, vel angelos, vel daemons, velanimas, incorporeas. but this opinion will not now be believed of any learned Papists. Why then should they rather believe that synod in the article of worship of images, than in this?  
Scotus saith, that the will is the only subject of sin. Thomas denieth it.  
Concerning the place of paradise there are three different opinions. some hold, that it reacheth to the circle of the Moon. Thomas in 2. dist. 17. and Bonaventure do place it upon a high mountain, they know not where. others place it in the East.  
Concerning the nature of free will there are diversities of opinions among schoolmen and others, as josephus Angles in lib. 2. sent. dist. 24. and 25. showeth particularly.  
Richardus holdeth, that free-will cannot be changed by God. others for the most part hold the contrary.  
Thomas, Bonaventure, and Setus hold, that grace is not a quality infused, but a quality inherent in the soul. Alexander Hales and Scotus hold, that it is a quality infused.  
josephus Angles in lib. 2. sent. dist. 26. rehearseth three several opinions of schooledoctors about the division of grace, in gratiam operantem & cooperantem: whereby it may evidently appear, that Papists in talking of grace go about to shut out God's grace.  
Most schoolmen and others affirm, that Adam and Eve believed not Gods words concerning the forbidden fruit. Bellarmine lib. 3. de amiss. great. c. 6. saith they believed.  
In the same book c. 9 Bellarmine saith Adam's offence was greater than that of Eve: contrary both to ancient doctors, and to schoolmen.  
Lib. 5. de amiss. great. c. 17. he showeth great diversities of opinions among his schoolmen & fellows about original sin. and himself dissenteth from all.  
About the conception of the blessed Virgin, whether it was in original sin, or not, there have been not only contradictions, but also tragical stirs and contentions.  
Certain scholars of Aquinas believe and teach, that no man being of years of discretion can be justified by the absolute power of God, without the act and concurrence of free will. Scotus, Vega, and Caietan hold contrary. both their opinions are touched by josephus Angles in 2. sent. dist. 27.  
Richardus in 2. dist. 27. art. 2. q. 1. Scotia in 1. dist. 17. q. 1. art. 1. and Durand in 1. dist. 17. q. 2. and others, hold, that a man may merit the first grace do Congruo. Gregorius Arimineusis in 2. dist. 26. Lyra in joan. 1. Waldensis and others deny it. Sotus. lib. 2. de not. & great. c. 4. saith, that the former opinion is near to Peligiamsine.  
Gregorius Ariminensis and Capreolus in 2. dist. 27. q. 1. hold, that no man without the illustration of God's special grace can attain to the knowledge of any moral truth. but Thomas and Scotus in 2. dist. 27. do hold contrary.  
Durand placeth original sin in the carnal appetite. Thomas placeth it in the whole substance of the soul. Scotus differeth from both, and placeth it in the will of man.  
josephus Angles in 2. dist. 27. rehearseth three several opinions about this question, whether a sin of omission may be committed without a positive act.  
The same man reckoneth 5. different opinions about the difference of mortal and venial sins. and three opinions concerning this question, what is sin of malice.  
Catharin and Caietan do strive about faith of infants, and divers other matters; and greater would the contention have been, if the matter had not been taken up, or at least silence commanded by the Pope.  
Bellarmine lib. 1. de pontiff. Rom. c. 12. saith, that the keys of the church are nothing, but order and jurisdiction. the Master of sentences, and Caietan de just. & auth. pontiff. Rom. hold, that they contain somewhat more.  
Pighius lib. 4. hierarch. eccles. c. 8. holdeth, that the Pope cannot fall into heresy, nor be deposed. Turrecremata lib. 4. sum. p. 2. c. 20. saith, that the Pope falling into heresy ipso facto is deposed before God. there he addeth also, that the Pope neither for manifest, nor for secret heresy is deposed. Caietane in tract. de authorit. Pap. & concilij. c. 20. & 21. saith that the Pope proving a notorious heretic is not deposed ipso facto; but that he may and aught to be deposed by the church. Bellarmine lib. 2. de pontiff. Rom. c. 30. holdeth, that if the Pope be a notorious heretic, he then of himself ceaseth to be Pope.  
Hostiensis in c. novit. de judicijs, and Austen Triumphus in summa de potest. eccles. q. 1. art. 1. and others very triumphantly affirm, that the Pope by the Law of God hath full power over the whole world, and that as well in civil, as ecclesiastical causes. Turrecremata, Driedo, Sotus, Sanders and others reckoned by Bellarmine lib. 5. de pontiff. Rom. c. 1. are content to abate somewhat, and say, that directly the Pope hath not power over all the kingdoms of the whole world.  
Petrus De Alliaco, Gerson, Almain and others in their treatises de potestate ecclesiae, hold, that a general council is above the Pope. Turrecremata lib. 2. sum. c. 99 & 100 confesseth, that the council of Constance, and Basil decreed, that the council is above the Pope. and so must it needs be, or else neither was john the 23. or Petrus de Luna rightly deposed, nor Martin the sift rightly chosen. others notwithstanding hold, that the Pope is above the council, as jacobatius de concilijs, Sanders de visibili monarchia, and Bellarmine lib. de concilijs. others aver, that although the Pope be above the counsels, yet he hath power to make the council above himself, as may be gathered out of the gloss in c. non si. 2. q. 7. and in c. in synod. dist. 63.  
In the chap. in novo. dist. 21. it is said, that Peter was made Pope by these words, thou art Peter. but in the chapter considerandum, and Fidelior. dist. 50. the contrary thereof is determined.  
In the chapter secundum. dist. 19 it appeareth, that Anastasius not only held opinions contrary to other Popes, but also published contrary decretales. contra decreta praedecessorum, & successorum suorum haec rescripta dedit, saith Gratian: likewise Stephen did annul the acts of Formosus, and john the 9 canceled the acts of Pope Stephen.  
Turrecremata lib. sum. 2. c. 111. saith, that john the 22. did publish a decretal contrary to that, which Nicolas the 3. determined, concerning Christ's poverty. and in his third book c. 57 he proveth, that a Pope may define against the canons of his predecessors.  
Evaristus determined, that all marriages not consecrated by a priest were incestuous, as Platina, and Genebrard in Chronolog. do testify. but now the current opinion is otherwise.  
Concerning the kingdom, seat, and proceed of Antichrist, Papists hold different opinions, as may appear by the disputes of Bellarmine.  
jansenius denieth, that the coming again of Helias can be proved out of Ecclesiasticus c. 48. Bellarmine lib. 3. de pentif Rom. wondereth, that he should be of that opinion.  
Francis victoria relect. 2. de potestate eccles. q. 2. and Alphonsus a Castro de haeret. just. punit. saith, that as well bishops, as Apostles did immediately receive jurisdiction from God. Turrecremata lib. 2. Sum. c. 54. and jacobatius de concilijs, hold, that the Apostles received their jurisdiction from Peter, and other Bishops from Peter's successor. Caietane in tract. de auctorit. Papae. Dominicus a Soto in 4. dist. 20. and Hernaeus de potestate Papae teach, that the Apostles received their power from God, and all other bishops from the Pope. and this is also Bellarmine's opinion.  
The Roman catechism in the exposition of the Creed, Waldensis lib. 2. c. 9 Turrecremata lib. 1. c. 3. and others do shut out excommunicate persons from being members of the church. but this is misliked by others, as Bellarmine lib. de eccles. milit. c. 6. confesseth.  
Alexander Hales 3. p. q. vlt. art. 2. and Turrecremata lib. 1. de eccles. c. 30. affirm, that in the time of Christ's passion only the Virgin Mary had true faith. Bellarmine lib. 1. de eccles. milit. c. 17. marveleth at them for it, and condemneth their opinion.  
Mayor in 4. dist. 24. q. 2. saith, that by God's law Priests are forbidden to marry. with him also doth Clichtovey concur the continent. sacerd. c. 4. but Thomas in 2.2. q. 88 art. 11. and Bellarmine holdeth that the vow of continency is annexed to Priest hood by the laws of the church only.  
Gregory the first forbade marriage within the 7. degree. Yet without the 4. degree schoolmen commonly hold marriages lawful. likewise they have contrary opinions as touching affinity, and marriages between gossips, as may appear by their disputes in 4. sent. dist. 40. & 41.  
Innocentius the 3. permitted men in Livoma to marry their brother's wives, as appeareth c. sin. de divortijs. but, I think, few Papists now will allow this for law. the Master of sentences in 4. dist. 2. saith, that marriage doth not confer grace. alia in remedium tantùm sunt, saith he speaking of sacraments, ut coniugium. his disciples teach all contrary.  
In time past marriage contracted by words of the present time might be dissolved, though Alexander decreed contrary in c. licet. de sponsa duorum.  
Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 52. art. 2. saith, that the soul of Christ as touching the essence descended to limbus patrum. Bellarmine lib. 4. de Christ. c. 16. faith the soul of Christ did for three days pass through limbus puerorum, and the place of the damned.  
Thomas 3. q. 76. art. 5. saith, Christ's body is in the sacrament, but not as in a place. Bellarmine saith, it is there locally.  
The master of the sentences in 4. dist. 13. holdeth, that heretics and schismatics consecrate not. the schoolmen in this point are adverse to him.  
The master of the sentences would not yield that Christ's body is devoured by mice, or brute beasts. but the masters of Paris in this point censure their master for it and say, magister hic non tenctur.  
Marsilius de Padua writeth, that Clerks are subject to secular princes. the canonists in c. tributum. 23. q. 8. and in c. quamuis. de censibus in 6. hold, that both their persons and their goods are exempted. Francis. victoria relect. 1. q. vlt. de potest. eccles. and divers others cut the controversy in the midst, and hold, that they are free for their persons and their goods partly by the law of God, and partly by privileges of princes, and partly by neither.  
How the souls of Saints departed do know, what we say or do, Bellarmine bringeth in three divers opinions lib. de cult. sanct. c. 20.  
Caietan in Exod. c. 20. taketh an image and an idol for one thing. Bellarmine lib. 1. de cult. sanct. c. 7. reproveth him for it.  
Ambrose Catharine tractat. de imaginibus. saith, God prohibited images simply: but that this prohibition was positive. others deny both images to be forbidden, and the second commandment to be positive.  
Occam, Maior, and Richardus are of opinion, that a sacrament cannot be defined. Scotus in 4. dist. 1. q. 2. holdeth, that it may be defined imperfectly. Ledesma in tract. de sacrament. in genere q. 1. art. 2. saith it may properly be defined.  
Finally to show the contradictions of Papists we need to seek no further, than to Bellarmine. who in every controversy bringeth in different opinions of men of his side.  
Gardiner a pillar of popery did oftentimes contradict himself and his fellows. sometimes he swore against the Pope's supremacy, sometime like a forsworn creature he stood for it. sometime he consented to the dissolution of monasteries, as sinks of Sodomy, and all tibaldrie and villainy; sometime be spoke for them. his book entitled Marcus Constantius is full of contradictions. M. Fox hath scored up great multitudes.  
The contradictions of Robert Parsons in his book of three Conversions, I have noted in my answer to that treatise.  
The whole mass also of Popery doth consist of contrary pieces, as I have showed in the contradictions of the doctrine of the Mass, of purgatory, of indulgences, of the Pope, and divers other principal points, and have proved the same in treatises of that argument.  
For example they say the Mass is an unbloody sacrifice, and yet teach, that every Priest doth really offer and drink Christ's blood.  
Sometime they say the sacrifice is but one sacrifice, yet in the canon they say sacrifices in the plural number.  
Sometime they say the Priest only offereth this sacrifice. but in the canon they make the people to offer sacrifices.  
In the canon they pray, that Angels may carry Christ's body unto God's high altar. but all confess, that Christ's body is in heaven before.  
There also they make the Priest a mediator for Christ. but where they speak soberly, they make Christ a mediator both for the Priest and others.  
In heaven they say Christ is visible and palpable. on the altar they make him invisible, and impalpable.  
They say the Mass is an external sacrifice. yet no man ever yet could see Christ's body externally sacrificed.  
In purgatory they say souls suffer extreme pains. but in the Mass they say they sl●epe in peace.  
They teach, that Christians may perform the law of God perfectly. but they will not grant, that they may live without sin; which is all one.  
Talking of auricular confession they make it necessary. but in the chap. Petrus doluit. and lachrymae. dist. 1. de poenit. they deny it.  
The Pope calleth himself servant of servants. yet doth he take upon him as lord of lords.  
Order they say is one sacrament. yet they teach also, that there are seven Orders, and every one of them a sacrament: which is as much, as if they should make one seven, and seven one.  
The Pope, they say, is head of the Church. but that is as much as if they should teach, that their Church in the vacatio nis headless.  
If then the catholic faith be one, and those that profess the faith agree in one; then cannot popery be the true Catholic faith, that containeth so many contradictions.   

CHAP. XXVII. That popery is a most foolish and absurd religion.  
AS the laws of God are full of wisdom, and give us a true understanding; so when man of his own brain undertaketh to add unto his commandments, the same in proof falleth out to be nothing, but vanity and foolery. the same we sinned verified in the additions of the superfluous religion of Papists. for although it have a show of wisdom, as the voluntary worship of Angels had, of which the Apostle Coloss. 2. speaketh; yet compared with the wisdom of God revealed in the Gospel, it is mere foolery.  
For first what is more foolish, then to forsake the living springs of holy scripture, out of which do sally waters of life, and to follow after the puddle streams of Romish traditions? of scriptures we are assured, that they are the word of God. but no man can affirm that of Romish traditions, or the Pope's decretales, that either professeth piety, or loveth truth. is it not then strange, that any Christians should be so foolish, as to match the word of man with God's word, and where we have a certain rule, to seek for a broken, uncertain, and crooked rule?  
Again, it is most absurd, not to believe the scriptures without the Pope's warrant. but to say that Christians are not to believe in God, nor in Christ jesus, nor to receive the rest of the articles of our Creed, unless the church of Rome do deliver them unto us, is not only a piece of great foolery, but also a very high strain of madness. and yet this is the doctrine of Popery. for Stapleton saith, that the church must needs consign the scriptures unto us, and the authority of the church both he and others give to the Pope. likewise in their catechism the Papists signify that faith is of things only proposed to us by the church. so that if the church propose not the articles of faith, we are not to believe them, if these men teach truth. further this showeth the Romish church to consist of a pack of infidels. for if the same believed not without the authority of the church, than did she believe nothing of Christ; seeing the Papists acknowledge no other Church, but that of Rome, and no church can teach itself.  
Finally this is as much, as if they should say, that the law of the Prince is not to be received, unless it be proposed by the crier, or other such like officer.  
The mass-priests of Trent sess. 4. most absurdly prefer the old Latin vulgar translation of the Bible before the original text. which is as much, as if they should prefer S. Hierome and other interpreters before the Prophets and Apostles, and the streams before the fountains.  
Generally they forbidden scriptures to be read publicly in vulgar tongues. but they permit most fabulous legends to be read publicly.  
The holy scriptures they will not permit to be read in vulgar tongues of the multitude without licence. but they are content that any of their followers should read the Pope's decretales, or the miracles of their god of paste, or the history of our Lady of Loreto, and other such lying legends without licence.  
To say that the Pope is the head of the universal church is mere foolery. for grant that, and it will follow, that the Church is sometime without head, as in the time of vacation of the papacy; and sometime a monster with two or three heads, as when two or three Pope's reign at once; and sometime a mad Church, as having a mad and frantic head.  
The church they say albeit catholic, yet is always visible. but this being granted, it followeth, that universal things may be the object of sense, and that the church of Rome before our times is not the church, because no man can now see it.  
They hold also, that the true church may always be seen and discerned. but this being so, how happeneth it, that the Pagan Emperors in time past, and the Turks now do neither see it, nor discern it? for we may not think, that if they knew the church, they would hate it, and persecute it.  
They bear men in hand, that the Pope desining out of his chair cannot err. but it is as much as if they should say, that a blind man sitting in a chair cannot do amiss in judging colours, or that the Pope should be more wise sitting in a chair, then standing in a pulpit, or walking in a hall; sitting at the table in his chair, and feeding daintily, then disputing in schools:  
They call him Christ's vicar. yet our Saviour did neither wear triple crown, nor thunder out his excommunications against God's children, nor persecute & cut the throats of Christians.  
By the right of S. Peter the Pope challengeth power to depose Princes, and to translate kingdoms. yet it is absurd to think, that Peter had any such power.  
They know, that Peter was charged to feed Christ's sheep. are they not then absurd fellows, that believe the Pope to be S. Peter's successor, that never feedeth nor teacheth, but rather murdroth and massacreth Christians?  
Peter was never borne upon men's shoulders, nor did he give his feet to be kissed of his followers, as a favour. nay when Cornelius fell down at his feet, he willed him to rise up, and would not suffer himself to be worshipped. are they not then strange fellows, that believe the Pope to be S. Peter's heir, who is heaved on men's shoulders, and requireth that Princes and all others should kiss his feet and worship him?  
They permit public stews, and forbidden honest wedlock. they dispense with adultery and fornication very easily, as appeareth by the chap. & siclerici. de judicijs, but depose and burn their priests and friars, if they join themselves in honest marriage with lawful wives. are they not then absurd fellows, that make good evil, and evil good?  
Every continued quantity is in one place. are they not then strange teachers, that say Christ's body is in many places at once, and that it is in heaven, and in earth, and not in the middle place, nor continued to itself?  
Reason teacheth us, that accidents have their being in a subject. but these fellows against reason say they subsist in the Sacrament without a subject.  
The Egyptians abstained from eating such creatures, as they worshipped for God. but the mass-priests, as men more senseless, than the barbarous heathen nations, have no sooner made their God, but they devour him. and hereof proceeded such a scandal, that Averroes for this only cause pronounced the Romish religion to be the most foolish and absurd religion of all others.  
Christ's body in heaven, they confess, is to be felt and seen. how then cometh it to pass, that this body being at the same time in the Sacrament, as Papists say, is neither felt nor seen? is not this notorious patchery?  
They confess also, that Christ's body is of a just length, breadth, and thickness. are they not then absurd fellows, that believe, that such a body can be contained in a piece of an host no bigger than a counter? and are they in their wits, that teach that one host being consecrated, Christ's whole body is there, and that the host being broken, Christ's body is also whole in every piece thereof?  
Are they not also impious and absurd fellows, that say, that a dog, a hog, a mouse, or a sparrow, may eat up the Saviour of the world?  
That the same man should be both a creature and a creator, nay a creator of his own Creator, is an absurdity passing the bounds both of religion and reason. and yet this is a piece of Popish divinity. Innocentius lib. 4. the mist. missae. c. 19 saith, that daily a creature is made the creator. ita ergo quotidie creatura sit creator. and in Stella Clericorum we find these words, Sacerdos est creator sui Creatoris: that is, a Priest is the creator of his creator.  
Papists also make Christians barbarous Canibales, and eaters of man's flesh, and drinkers of man's blood.  
Nay when they eat his flesh, they suppose they drink his blood by a necessary concomitance, making Christians both to eat and drink with one breath. and in a certain provincial constitution, beginning, ignorantia. de summa Trinit. the mass-priests teach their followers, neither to eat, nor to drink Christ's body, but to sup it up perfectly, tritum modicè sorbere perfectè.  
Christ's blood hath redeemed us, and saved us, as holy Scriptures teach us. but the papists say, that Christ's blood is really in the chalice after consecration, in which notwithstanding we read in stories, that both Victor the third, and William archbishop of York, that lived in the days of Anastasius the 4. was poisoned.  
In the Sacrament they confess, that worms may be engendered, and that the consecrated wine may be corrupted. is it not then a most absurd piece of doctrine, to hold, that Christ's body and blood should be in the Sacrament, where vermin is engendered, and which is subject to corruption?  
Is it not also extreme folly to abandon Christ, in whose name we are commanded to pray to the Father; and to pray to God in the name of Saints, which is no where commanded, but rather forbidden as derogatory to God's honour?  
In the office of our Lady at Matins in a certain antiphona, they say, gaude Maria virgo, cunctas haereses sola interemisti in toto mundo. Resoice virgin Mary, thou only hast killed all heresies in the whole world. but what more foolish, then without warrant, to ascribe this to the virgin Mary, and to take this honour from almighty God?  
They also say their Pater noster before stocks and stones. but what is more absurd, then to pray to those, that cannot hear, and to look for help of them, that cannot help themselves?  
The mass-priests in their prayers looking upon a little wooden crucifix, say, thou hast redeemed us. thou hast reconciled us to thy Father, as Bellarmine lib. 2. de cultu sanct. c. 23. confesseth. may we then think, that these are well in their wits, that make a piece of wood, or metal, their Saviour, and take this honour from the Son of God, to give it to a dumb image?  
In their breviaries they pray thus to the cross, auge pijs justitiam reisque dona veniam. iner●ase justice in the godly, and grant pardon to sinners. are they not very blockish then, trow you, that thus pray to a block, and hope to find pardon of a dumb creature?  
At Cahors in France they pray to Christ's winding-sheete, which they call sudarium, saying, holy sudary pray for us: and again, sudarium Christi liberet nos à pest, & morte tristi. the winding sheet of Christ let it deliver us from the plague and heavy death. as if a sheet could pray for us, or deliver from the plague. do they not deserve to be trussed in a cloak-bag, whose trust is in a counterfeit winding-sheete?  
They give the same honour to the sacrament, and to the cross, that is due to God, very absurdly transferring the glory of God to creatures. are they not then absurd worshippers, that cannot distinguish between God and creatures? and do they not very absurdly deny themselves to be idolaters?  
Absurdly also they celebrate the feast of the cross whereon our Saviour was dishonoured, not celebrating the feast of the ass, on which he was honoured. Durand rat. divi. 7. c. 11. disputing this matter is much puzzled about it.  
They believe verily, that images have talked and walked, and all this because it is said so in the legend. but they show themselves very foolish, that believe legends, and believe not the scriptures, that say they have mouths and speak not, feet and walk not.  
The grounds of their religion are very absurd and foolish: for they sound themselves upon the Pope and his decretales; the Pope being oftentimes soolish and ignorant, and his decretales being rude, false, and oftentimes ridiculous. Baldus in c. 1. de nature. feud. saith, that Pope Celestine the sift was a simple fellow. unum pecus. Innocent the 3. in the Chap. solitae. demaior. & obed. argueth, that the Pope is above the Emperor, because the sun is bigger than the moon. an argument merely lunatical. in another place he gathereth, that we are now to observe the laws of Deuteronomy, because Deuteronomium signifieth a second law. Bonisace the eight in the chap. unam sanctam. extr. de maior. & obed. proveth the Pope to be above all Princes, because we read Genes. 1. that God in the beginning made the world. Clement the 6. in the chap. unigenitus extr. de poenit. & remiss. saith, that unless the overplus of the merits of Christ had been bestowed in dispensing the treasure of indulgences, that the same had been void and superfluous, and like treasure laid up in a napkin. that the decretales are full of lies we shall declare, when we come to speak of Popish-lies.  
They say it is a point of faith, to believe, that the Pope is Saint Peter's successor, and head of the church. yet if the Priest, that baptized the Pope had no intention to baptise him, than he is no member of the church: if he that ordered the Pope had no intention to order him, then is he no priest. If he have no intention to consecrate, then doth he not consecrat. so all dependeth upon men's secret and unknown intentions.  
They confess also, that Christ's body is not in the sacrament, if the priests have no intention to consecrat; of which it followeth, that all Papists, for aught they know, are absurd idolaters.  
Their ceremonies are full of foolery. first in the mass the Priest absolveth the clerk, and then the clerk absolveth the Priest, which is all like, as if one mule should scratch another. it is absurd also to put the keys into a boys hand, that is no Priest.  
The Priest kisseth the altar, and prayeth for remission of sins by the merits of Saints whose relics are there contained. so a stock kisseth a stone, and forgetting Christ prayeth for remission of sins by the merits of Saints, whose relics are said to be there, where there is no relics at all, and percase the bones of dogs, or apes, or other beasts, for aught the wise mass-priest knoweth.  
In the Missale of Sarum after the priest hath consecrated, he maketh a low leg worshipping the work of his own hand, and saith ave, which is as much, as God save you sir, or you are welcome to town.  
The priest is appareled like a moriske-dancer, and skippeth and danceth about the altar like an ape in a chain. his head is shaven and well greased, his hands washed, but his heart unclean. and this gallant taketh upon him, not only to offer Christ in sacrifice, but also to swallow him down like a pill without chawing.  
The Friars for the most part are appareled like chimney-sweepers, or burners of houses, with a hood upon their head like a bag of hippocrace.  
The Popes when they are first chosen do cast money abroad saying, argentum & aurum non est mihi, as is prescribed lib. 1. caerem. but most unlike they are to him, whose words they abuse. further, absurdly they deny themselves to have money, when they cast money a broad, and enjoy so great riches.  
When they take the Pope from the pierced stool, where his humanity is tried, they say he hath raised the poor out of the dust. ex stercor ariae eleuantes dicunt, suscitat de pulvere egenum. and yet absurdly this beggar, as they say, is lord of lords and King of Kings.  
Their demands and answers in matters of religion are not very wise. Austen asketh of Gregory, as Bede reporteth lib. 1. hist. Angl. c. 28. whether a woman with child were to be baptized, as if not she, as well as others. Boniface of Mentz asked the Pope; if it were lawful to eat Bacon. and he answereth, yea: but provided alway, said he, that it be dried with smoke, or boiled.  
Their legends are feriall. Ruffian one of S. Francis his scholars disputing with the devil, told him he would do Sir reverence in his mouth. Ruffinus dixit diabolo, aperi os tuum, & ego stercorisabo in illud.  
S. Francis in an award betwixt a wolf, 
See S. Francis his conformity, etc.  and the men of Eugubium, condemned the townsmen in expenses, and speaking to the wolf he said, brother wolf. it is reported also that he preached to swallows, and said, sorores meae hirundines audite verbum dei.  
S. Aidus, as Capgrave telleth, having compassion on 8. hungry wolves gave them 8. of his lambs, and after they were eaten got them out of the wolves belly by prayer.  
Austen the monk by prayer obtained, that the men of Dorset, that had scorned him, and all their posterity, had tails. belike the race is now failed. the whole legend is full of foolish fables. but I shall have occasion to speak thereof elsewhere.  
The reasons of their religion are absurd. Coemiterium, saith Durand. l. 1. c. 5. dicitur a cimen, quod est dulce, & sterion quod est statio etc. vel quia ibi sunt cimexes, vel vermes ultra modum foetentes. and again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicitur quasi pollutum antrum. in the same book c. 4. he saith, the bell-rope betokeneth the humility & life of preachers, and the measure of man's life. it is great pity that the jebusites and mass-priests are not haltred with this sign of humility, and compassed with this measure.  
Lib. 3. cap. 10. he saith the priests stole betokeneth the light yoke of the Lord. Stolalene domini jugum significat. lib. 3. c. 11. speaking of the vestiment called dalmatica, he saith it hath wide sleenes, because charity ought to be stretched out to our enemies. Charitas enim extendi debet etiam usque ad inimicos.  
The school distinctions are as absurd, as the doctrine of Papists. they distinguish between the worship of latria, and doulia, as if that were proper to God, this to creatures. but the use of these Greek words admit no such distinction. beside that distinguishing terms they give in effect the honour of God to creatures.  
They say the first justice is without works, the second is of works. but the holy scriptures speak but of one sort of justice, whereby Christians are to be justified before God.  
They speak strangely of opus operatum, & opus operans. but scriptures acknowledge no such inkepot terms, nor doctrine.  
The distinction of merits of congruity and condignity is as absurd as the rest. for how can a man that is unworthy of favour, be said to merit?  
With the sprinkling of holy water they think to drive away Devils. but it is most absurd to think, that they are scared with water.  
In the church service they use a tongue not understood. but in the primitive church, as Aquin. in 1. Cor. 14. confesseth, that was counted madness. they pray also like parrots, and know not what they say: which is foolish and fruitless.  
In consecrating of churches they writ the Greek Alphabet upon the pavement. but what is more foolish than to teach stones the Alphabet?  
They do also grease the altar and set up lights before crosses, that every simple soul may see their soolery.  
And when their Disciples lie a dying, than they put light in their hands, and grease their eyes. but it is ridiculous to show light to dead men, or to think that men can see better having oil in their eyes.  
What then remaineth, but that we beseech God to open the eyes of Papists, that they may in the end see the fooleries and absurdities of that superstitious religion, whereto now they are so much addicted?   

CHAP. XXVIII. That popish religion doth keep Christians in blindness and ignorance of God and godliness.  
IF none but fools despise wisdom and instruction, as the wiseman Proverb. 1. teacheth us; then cannot we think the Papists wise, that not only delight in ignorance, but also debar laymen from all ordinary means of instruction in the doctrine of true piety.  
That they delight in ignorance, it appeareth, in that they commend the collier's faith, that could answer the Devil nothing, but that he believed as the Church believeth, albeit he knew not what it was. they do also teach their followers, that for simple people it is sufficient to believe the articles of the faith implicit. for so saith Linwood in Gloss. in c. ignorantia. de sum. Trinit. Thomas Aquinas 2.2. q. 2. art. 6. compareth Gods people to asses, and their teachers to oxen, & saith it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere to their superiors. and although he say, that they are to believe the articles of the Creed explicit, yet Sylvester in summa in verb. fides; expoundeth it, that they are to believe these articles explicitè, as far as they direct us to the last end. in 2.2. q. 82. art. 3. Thomas saith, that the women and simple people are most devout. and M. Cole a man not lightly accounted of among the Papists, said openly, that ignorance was the mother of devotion.  
That they deprine laymen of all ordinary means of instruction in matters of faith, it appeareth first, for that they seldom permit scriptures translated into vulgar tongues to be read by them. but Scriptures as the Apostle teacheth us 2. Tim. 3. are profitable to instruct.  
Secondly, they expressly forbidden them to be read publicly in the Church. their service also and administration of sacraments, is for the most part in tongues not understood of the vulgar sort.  
Thirdly they will not suffer laymen to dispute of matters of faith. for they are excommunicate, if they do it, as Navarrus in enchirid. in 1. precept. c. 11. declareth.  
Fourthly, their preachers seldom teach the people. and when they do it, yet as Dante canto. 29. saith, they preach their own inventions, and tell idle tales without edification. Cornelius Agrippa de vanit. scient. c. de theolog. saith, that for the Gospel, and God's word they preach mere toys, and human inventions. pro evangelijs & pro verbo Dei meras nugas & humana verba crepant praedicantes evangelium, adulterantes verbum Dei.  
Fifthly, if either any preach the truth sincerely, or else speaketh against the impieties and heresies of popery; then is he either forced to abjure, or else adjudged to the fire.  
Finally all books of religion in vulgar tongues, whereby Christians may come to the knowledge of the truth are suppressed, and by great penalties forbidden.  
This we find by experience, that both Priests and people are most ignorant of matters of faith, where popery is professed. and first to begin with the Popes, Alphonsus à Castro lib. 1. de haeres. saith, that divers Popes have been utterly unlearned. constat plures Papas adeo illiteratos esse, ut Grammaticam penitus ignorent. this sentence now in later editions they have caused to be razed out of the book. but yet it is not to be forgotten, that one Pope for fiat, said siatur.  
Laziardus epit. c. 183. speaking of Gregory the sixth, saith he caused another to be consecrated with him for saying of mass, seeing he was rude and ignorant of letters. ut dictum est, alium secum consecrari fecit, cum esset rudis literarum.  
Felin c. si quando. de rescriptis, saith, the Pope cannot be deposed for want of learning. Papa propter defectum literaturae non potest deponi.  
How simple clerks they were, it appeareth, for that, as Aventinus testifieth annal. lib. 3. Pope Zachary condemned Virgilius a bishop of Germany as an heretic, for saying there were antipodes. Paul the second, as Platina testifieth, determined them to be heretics, that named the word academy, and was an enemy of learning.  
john Peccham in the provincial constitution, beginning ignorantia sacerdotum, thinketh it sufficient for Priests, either by themselves, or by others once every quarter to expound the articles of the Creed, the ten commandments, the two commandments of the Gospel, the seven works of mercy, the seven deadly sins, the seven principal virtues, and seven sacraments, and that without any curiosity.  
Platina complaining of the ignorance of Priests of his time crieth out, quanta ignoratio, cum suispsius, tum doctrinae Christiana? what ignorance, saith he, is in them, as well of themselves, as of Christian doctrine?  
The two points of a bishop's mitre, as Durand in his rational. teacheth, signify the old and new Testament. but Lois Mersilius an Augustinian friar, being asked, what the two stroppes of the mitre that hang on the bishops back do mean, said, they signified, that he neither understood the old, nor new testament. And this is the case of most popish prelate's.  
Matthew Paris in Willielmo Conquaest. saith, that clerks were then so unlearned, that such as understood their Grammar were a wonderment to their fellows.  
Neither can it otherwise be, seeing so many for bribery, simony and carnal respects were wont to be preferred to livings. venalitate curiae Romanae, saith the author of aureum speculum, inaniter praeficiuntur lenones, coqui, stabularij equorum, & pueri. through the bribery of the court of Rome bands, cooks, horse-keepers, and boys are vainly preferred to the government of the Church.  
The author likewise of the treatise entitled onus ecclesiae, c. 23. saith, that bishops admitted unn orthy men to charges without all choice, and due examination. indignos beneficiatos admittunt, absque omni delectu, & debita examinatione instituunt.  
Aluarus Pelagius lib. 2. de planct. eccles. art. 20. complaineth, that the bishops of Spain commit thousands of souls to some yongue nephews of theirs, to whom a man would be loath to commit two pears. Episcopi alicui nepotulo suo committunt multa millia animarum, cui non committeres duo pyra.  
What the learning was of their best preachers, we may understand by the profound sermons of friar Menot, Maillard, Bromyard, and their fellows; which were full of ridiculous fables, and void of all edification and learning.  
The Germans of late complained to Adrian the 6. Gravam. 47. that bishops advanced unlearned idiots, unsit, vile, and ridiculous fellows to the order of priesthood. episcopi, say they, saepenumero indoctos, idiotas, inhabiles, vilesque ac ludicras personas ad sacerdotij functionem admittunt.  
The ridiculous reasons of Durand in rationali divinorum, and derivations of words in their legends and glostes, do bewray singular ignorance.  
The monks and fries now can scarce read their canonical hours, for the most part. in the monastery of Fulda the monks accused Rabanus Maurus, as is testified in his life, for that he was so studious in Scriptures, and neglected their temporalties. and now lest children should mock the popish priests, that cannot read their mass with true accents, every word in common missals, is accented. and yet as we read in the chapter retulerunt. de consecrat. dist. 4. one baptised an infant saying, in nomine patria, filia, & spirita sancta.  
Neither is it material, that divers are learned in laws, or philosophy. for what is that to the instruction of Christians in faith and manners? Bernard. lib. 1. de consid. taxeth Eugenius for this point. daily, saith he, laws sound in thy palace, but the laws of justinian, and not of the Lord.  
The schoolmen also are skilful in logic, and in decretals; but the Scriptures and fathers they read not, as Ferdinand Vellosillo in the preface of his advertences ingeniously confesseth. they do rather handle curious questions, than matters of edification.  
The guides then being thus blind, what blindness may we think is in the multitude guided by them? may we not say of them, like priest, like people? Nay Vincentius de sine mundi, saith, that they did not hear sermons, nor know the articles of the faith. praedicationes non audiunt, articulos fidei nesciunt.  
john Billet in his prologue de divin. office. saith, that few in his times understood, either what they heard, or what they read.  
Commonly Papists are called Catholics if they hear Masle, albeit they understand not what is said, but only gape and gaze one the Priest. when they say, pater noster qui es in coelis, they neither know what is pater, nor what is noster, nor what is, in caelis.  
God give them therefore the light of his word to direct them, and grant that they may understand the truth, that they be not in the number of those, that see not light at noon time, and perish for want of knowledge.   

CHAP. XXIX. That Popish religion giveth the reins to licentiousness of life, and leadeth Christians the broade-way to destruction.  
TRue religion restraineth men's affections, and directeth Christians in the right way. the Psalmist ps. 119. ask this question wherewith a young man shall redress his way? answereth, in taking heed thereto according to God's word. the same also directeth us by a straight and narrow way unto life. enter in, saith our Saviour, Matt. 7. at the straight gate: and afterward, for the gate is straight, and the way narrow that leadeth unto life. but popish religion looseth the reins to allicentiousnes, and leadeth Christians by a broad, pleasant and easy way to the end of their desires. for first they account adultery & fornication small sins, and give liberty to every Bishop to dispense with them, as they teach publicly in the Chap. & si clerici. de judicijs. de adulterijs, & alijs criminibus, quae sunt minora, saith Alexander the third, potest episcopus cum clericis post peractam poenitentiam dispensare.  
Next they allow public stews both in Italy and Spain, and in Rome itself the Pope maketh a great gain of them.  
Cornelius Agrippa de vanit. scient. c. de Lenocinio, saith, that the revenue of the Pope arising of the tribute of whores, amounteth to twenty thousand crowns. but now it far passeth that sum. the gloss upon a certain provincial constitution of Otho, de concubinis cleric. removend. saith, that it seemeth reason, that the church should wink at the sin of lechery. nam & mareschallus Papae de facto exigit tributum à meretricibus. for de facto the Popes marshal exacteth a tribute of whores. this is also testified by joannes Andreas in c. inter opera. de spon. & matrim. a certain masspriest also in Wisbich maintained not long since, that whores were in Rome with approbation, and with as good right as any citizen of Rome, or as the Pope himself.  
Thirdly it is notorious, that mass-priests both in Italy and Spain and other places keep concubines. the same is also testified by Aluarus Pelagius de Planct. ecclesiae. Theodoric à Niem tractat nemor. union. and divers others. Cornclius Agrippa de vanit. scient c. de lenocinio reporteth, that they kept whores to hire. Ambrose Ansbertus in Apocalyps. 18. saith, that archdeacon's take money of adulterous Priests. archidiacont a presbyteris adulteris pretium accipiunt.  
Fourthly they teach, that concupiscence is no sin. and in Italy and Spain the common people go as commonly to common women, as if it were no sin.  
Lastly, albeit the Friars and Priests condemn such sins, yet if any come unto them for absolution, they deny it not, and that upon some small hope of alms, or else some other small satisfaction. and this is the reason, that lust doth reign in Popery.  
The Germans in their grievances complain, that the facility of granting indulgences was a warrant for men to commit all filthiness: and In Italy it is known, that they that come oftenest to confession are most lose livers. after their offence they come for absolution, and after absolution offend again.  
The way also, by which Popish Priests lead their followers, is broad, easy and pleasant. Bellarmine de eccles. militant. c. 2. requireth in a true member of the Catholic church, neither inward faith, nor other virtue, but only, that he profess outwardly the Romish religion and be subject to the Pope; a matter of no great difficulty.  
If a man take upon him the habit of a Monk or a Friar, they make it a second baptisate, and that state, they say, is a state of perfection. so you see how easy a matter it is with Papists, not only to be a true member of the church, but also a perfect Christian. for who cannot take upon him a Friars or Monks weed? in the apology for Herodotus it is testified, that a certain Friar taught, that the only way for the Devil to be saved, was to put on Saint Francis his cowl.  
Further they teach, that the Pope hath power, to grant pardons for fornication, adultery, incest, rapes, murders, perjury, treachery, sodomitry, maranismes and all vices, as appeareth by the Pope's penitentiary taxes, and that for no great sums of money. now what more easy then to obtain the Pope's pardon?  
If a man hear Mass every Sunday & holiday, and confess at shrovetide, and be houseled at Easter, and fast from flesh, and observe the rest of the Romish precepts and ceremonies, he is taken for a good Catholic. but these are matters to be performed without any great difficulty.  
The Papists also teach, that Christians are justified by extreme unction: which is a matter to be obtained at every piled Priestes-hands.  
They promise also general indulgences to such as visit certain churches at Rome, and else where; which may be done with small labour.  
Now for venial sins they say, that knocking of the breast, and holy water is remedy sufficient. for such matters they say Christians need not to repent them. they hold also, that holy water is good to drive away devils. but in no place is there want of holy water.  
If a man live all his life most lewdly and loosely, yet if he confess to a priest when he lieth a dying, and promise satisfaction, he faileth not to have absolution; and if he satisfy not in this life; yet they hold, that either by Masses, or indulgences, he may be delivered out of Purgatory. but indulgences are not dear, and Masses are dog cheap. a trental is not valued at 30. pence, nor whole farthels at great sums.  
By every small good work, nay by eating red-herrings and saltfish on fridays, and such observances they hope to merit heaven. so broad they make the way to heaven, and so easy a matter to come thither.  
Finally as Eunomius promised them, that professed his faith reward in heaven, howsoever they lived; so likewise do the Papists promise heaven to their followers, so they profess and set forward the Pope's cause. whether they be murderers of Kings, or massacrers, or rebels, or filthy whoremongers, or Sodomites, it skilleth not; the mass-priests promise not only pardon, but also reward in heaven, so they die in the Pope's obedience, and profess his religion.  
This religion therefore that giveth such liberty to sinners, and leadeth them such pleasant ways, feeding the eyes of people with sights, their ears with pleasant sounds, and satisfying all their senses with carnal pleasures, cannot be true.  
We could also specify the same by infinite examples, and by particulars show, that papists run the broad way, but that we reserve it to the next Chapter.   

CHAP. XXX. That Popish religion bringeth forth such bitter fruits, that the professors thereof have no reason to boast of their works.  
GOod trees are known by their fruits. let us then see what fruits have come of Popery, that we may know, whether the tree be good or no, from whence they have issued. Bristol in his 39 Motive imagineth, that we have nothing to say against his consorts, and therefore braggeth much of works, and despiseth his adversaries, as running the broade-way to destruction. but when his consorts shall see our discourse concerning the fruits & effects of Popery, and their strange & enormous wicked lives, they will wish, that for this matter we had never been called in question. First then we say, that the Papists err in the doctrine of works, and next that their lives are so disorderly, as if they did only study to excel in all wickedness, lewdness and villainy.  
Christians believe, that the law of God is a perfect rule of good life. but they hold, that not only God's laws, but all scriptures are imperfect, and insufficient without traditions.  
Christians believe, that the perfection of Christian life consisteth in the Gospel. but these teach, that the rules of Benet, Francis, Dominicke and other monks and friars, do direct us to a further perfection, then is commanded in the Gospel.  
They do as well believe, that the laws of the Pope do bind our consciences, as God's laws, and think, that the works done according to the Pope's laws do as well please God, as the works commanded in God's laws.  
They make more conscience to abstain from flesh on Friday, then to murder Christians, as their curiosity in keeping that form of fast, and their cruelty in murdering and massacring Christians doth declare.  
The mass-priests give absolution to most heinous sinners, and enjoin them penance afterward. the Pope granteth indulgences to most horrible offenders.  
They believe not that concupiscence is sin, or that it is better for Votaries to marry then to burn, or that Venial sins deserve the curse of the law, or eternal death.  
They teach that every Christian is to satisfy for the temporal pains due to sins, and that either in this life, or in the life to come, in purgatory.  
They believe that a man may be justified by extreme unction, and other popish sacraments, and by the works of the law, and not by faith in Christ jesus.  
They suppose, that every man is able to perform the works of the law perfectly. of which it followeth, that, as the Pelagians taught, a man may live without sin.  
Finally by their works they hope to merit eternal life; which is directly contrary to the Apostles doctrine Rom. 6. who teacheth us, that eternal life is the gift of God.  
If then the Papists err so grossly both in the doctrine of works, and also in the rule of our works, it is not like, that their works are excellent.  
Nay we find by practice, that their works are for the most part impious, and displeasing unto God, as for example the adoration of the cross and sacrament, their blasphemous prayers to the virgin Mary, to Angels and Saints, their sacrilegious taking of the cup of the new testament from God's people, their worship done to Antichrist, their perjuries and rebellions against Princes; their murdering Gods saints, their maintaining of public stews and banks of usury, and such like. the rest cannot much please God or man: as for example, the begging of vagabond friars, the forswearing of marriage, the eating of muscles, cockles and red herrings in Lent, the taking of ashes on Ash-wednesday, the ringing and singing for dead men, the shaving of priests crowns, the greasing of sick men, of altars, bells, and such like toys and ceremonies.  
But to let these works pass, wherein the papists please themselves more than God or good men, we will declare, that no sect of heretics ever did commit more heinous offences, or offended more commonly in matters by themselves not denied to be sins, than the principal of the Popish sect. the form of confession commonly prescribed to Romish penitents by the ordinal is this. Confiteor quia peccavi nimis in superbia, inani gloria, in extollentia tam oculorum quam vestium & omnium actuum mcorum, in invidia, in odio, in avaritia tam honoris, quam pecuniae, in ira in tristitia, in acedia, in ventris inglwie, in luxuria Sodomitica etc. so they confess themselves guilty of all their 7. deadly sins, and add Sodomy and many other villainies.  
Of their public stews in Spain, Italy, and Rome itself, and of the concubinage of mass-priests, we have spoken before.  
Boccace in his second novel showeth, that the Pope, Cardinals, Prelates, and other citizens of Rome did live dishonestly, and offend not only in natural, but also in Sodomitical luxury. non solo nella naturale, maanchora nella Sodomitica.  
Hulderichus of Augusta in his epistle to Pope Nicolas, declareth, how the Popish clergy refusing marriage committed incest and abominable Sodomitical villainies, both with men and beasts. Sub falsa continentiae specie placere volentes graviora vides committere, masculorum ac pecudum amplexus non reformidane.  
Petrarch in his 106. sonnet doth call Rome, a slave of lechery and gluttony and drunkenness, and saith, that luxuriousness is come to extremity in her 
De vin serva, di letti, e di vuiande  
In cui lussuria fa l'vltima prova.   
In his nineteenth epistle he chargeth the court of Rome not only with incontinency, and unbridled lusts, but also with all perfidiousness, impieties and villainies. Quicquid usquam persidiae & doli, quicquid inclementiae superbiaeque quicquid impudicitiae & effrenatae libidinis audisti aut legisti, quicquid denique impietatis & morum pessimorum sparsim habet aut habuit orbis terrae, totum istic cumulatim videas, aceruatimque reperias.  
Vguetinus in his visions doth divers times exclaim against the sodomitical abominations of the friars. Iterum atque iterum, saith the collector, de scelere sodomitico verbum intulit. speaking against Priests he said, they gave themselves to follow harlots and luxuriousness, and supposed gain to be godliness. neither may we think the mass-priests have now changed manners, as may appear by john Casaes' sonnets, and a lewd book entitled Cicalamento del Grappa; both of them approving the sins of Sodom, and justifying the city of Gomorrha in respect of Rome. in the visitation of the abbeys of England in king Henry the 8. his days such abominations were discovered, as of modest men cannot handsomely be reported. Huntingdon lib. 5. and Cestrensis report, how Anselme in one synod forbade priests marriage, but in the next made laws against Sodomites, and there condemned eight abbots beside inferior monks, priests, and friars. At Gant, as appeareth by records, four Franciseans and one Augustinian friar were burnt for Sodomy since these late troubles. the manners of the Italians are known to those, that have travailed that country, and therefore I need not to speak much of them.  
Luitprandue lib. 6. c. 6. saith, that the Pope's palace in his time was become a brothel house. Lateranense palatium, olim sanctorum hospitium, nunc est prostibulum meretricum.  
Gregory the 12. as Theod. à Niem tract. 6. union. c. 34. reporteth, chargeth two and twenty monasteries with impiety and filled by life. pene omnis religio, & obseruantia dicti ordinis, ac dei timor abscessit, libido ac corruptio carnis inter ipsos mares & moniales, necnon alia multa mala, excessus, & vitia, quae pudor est effari, per singula sucereverunt.  
Cardinals, saith 
1 4. Brig. 49.  Brigit in her revelations, give themselves without restraint to all pride, covetousness and delights of the flesh. and again, now the stews are in more esteem, than the true church of God.  
Catherine of Siend c. 125. saith, religious men should resemble Angels, but are worse than devils.  
Breidenbach in the history of his peregrinations, speaketh generally of the men of his time and saith, recessit lex à sacerdotibus etc. that is, the law is departed from priests, justice from princes, counsel from elders, good dealing from the people, love from parents, reverence from subjects, charity from prelates, religion from monks: and so he goeth on not sparing any.  
Walter Mapes, that lived in the days of Henry the second, testifieth, that the clergy did study wickedness and impiety. and calleth them heirs of Lucifer, and blind guides.  
Robert bishop of Aquila in his sermons mentioned by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth. lib. 3. turning himself to his country of Italy uttreth these words with great vehemency, o Italia plange, o Italia time, o Italia cave etc. that is, O Italy lament, o Italy fear, o Italy beware, lest for thy obstinacy the wrath of God do not wax cruel against thee. thou art every day more and more hardened, persevering in thy sins and maliciousness. every where men set up banks of usury. all places are defiled with most foul vices of the flesh and most shameful sodomy. pride in pompous shows hath now possessed cities and the country. blasphemies against God, perjuries, lies, injustice, violence, oppression of the poor and such like vices do superabound. and all this is spoken of the Pope's country.  
I need not tell, saith Platina in Marcellino, how excessive the covetousness of priests is, and of those especially, that are in principal places, nor how great their lust, ambition, pomp, pride, sloth, ignorance of themselves, and of Christian doctrine is grown, how corrupt their religion is, and rather dissembled, then true; and how corrupt their manners are, in profane men, whom they call secular to be detested, seeing they offend so openly and publicly, as if they sought praise thereby. in Gregory the 4. he hath these words, in omnem luxum & libidinem se effundit ecclesiasticus ordo: writing of john the 13. he saith, he was a man contaminated from his youth with all filthiness and dishonesty. in the life of Gregory the 6. speaking of three Popes, he calleth them three most foul monsters.  
Wernerus infasciculo temporum, bewaileth the state of the church, as if holy men were failed, & truth perished from the sons of men. speaking of the times about a thousand years after Christ, he saith, Christian faith began to fail, and that then men began to give themselves to soothsaying, and witchcraft.  
Apud plerosque religionis nostrae primores, saith Picus Mirandula in orat. ad Leonem 10. ad quorum exemplum componi, atque formari pl●bs ignara debuisset, aut nullus aut certe exiguus dei cultus, nulla bene vivendi ratio atque institutio, nullus pudor, nulla modestia. he saith, that in the principal of the clergy there was neither religion, nor good life, nor shame. afterward he taxeth the luxuriousness of all estates, but especially the furiousness of lusts, the ambition, covetousness and superstition of the Romish Clergy.  
Marcellus Palingenius in virgine, complaineth of a general corruption of manners throughout the world.  
imo libenter saith he  
Destituam hunc mundum, innumerisque refertum  
Fraudibus atque dolis, incestibus, atque rapinis,  
Est ubi nulla fides, piet as est nulla, nec ulla  
justitia, & pax & requies, ubi crimina regnant  
Omnia.  
He saith, that all vices reigned, and that there was neither faith, nor piety, nor justice in the world: viz. among the Papists.  
Matthew Paris in Henrico tertio complaineth, that religion was trodden under foot, and that usury and simony reigned.  
Erasmus de amicab. concord. saith, that if a man look nearly, he shall find all filled with frauds, injuries, rapines. si quis propiùs inspiciat, inveniet fraudibus, iniurijs, rapini●referta omnia.  
Hereupon Petrus de Aliaco lib. de reformat. ecclesiae complaineth, that certain barators had destroyed the church, which the fathers had formerly built. primitius theologi ecclesiam aedificaverunt, quam nunc baritatores destruxerunt.  
Simony and Usury among the Romanists is so common, that as Matth. Paris saith, they account the first no sin, the second a small sin. Felin in c. ex part. de office & potest. iudic. delegat. saith, that without the rent of Simony the pope's sea would grow contemptible. heu Simon regnat, per munera quaeque reguntur, saith one in hist. Citizensi. Theodoric à Niem lib. 2. de schism. c. 7. saith, that usury did then so much prevail that it was accounted no fault. Paul the 4. and Pius the 4. in their times were great banquiers and usurers, as we may see in their lives written by a Parasite of the Popes called Onuphrius. If we should speak of particular men, we should find no end of their villainies. Wernerus speaking of john the 12. saith he was wholly given to lust. totus lubricus.  
Beno, Platina and others testify, that Silvester the 2. and Benedict the ninth were Magicians, and the Devils sworn sernantes.  
Gregory the 7. was deposed by the council of Brixia, as a notorious necromancer possessed with a diabolical spirit.  
john the 23. was convicted in the council of Constance to be an incestuous person, a Sodomit, and an atheist denying the immortality of the soul, as we read in the acts thereof.  
Clement the 5. as Hermannus testifieth, was a public fornicator. the same is also testified by Mattheo Villani hist. l. 3. c. 39 against Clement the sixth.  
Sixtus the 4. passed Nero in cruelty and all villainy.  
Gaude prisce Nero, saith one, vincit te crimine Sixtus;  
Hic scelus omne clauditur, & vitium.  
Marullus and others testify against Innocent the 8. that he had sixteen bastards, and was a dull fellow given to carnal pleasures.  
Of Alexander the 6. we read, that he wasted the world, overthrew law and religion. neither could Onuphrius dissemble his vices.  
He that listeth to see the like testimonies against mass-priests, Monks, Friars, and their complices, let him read the second book of my answer to Rob. Parsons his warne-word.  
But what should proofs need in so plain matters? if the Popes, whom they call most holy, be such, we must not imagine, that their base slaves, and dependents are better.  
The practice of this sect doth justify this charge most fully. of late time they have murdered millions of God's Saints. In England of late they attempted to destroy the King and his house, to blow up the Lords & Commons in Parliament assembled, and to cut the throats of all good men. they neither respect King nor friend, old nor young, oath nor promise. Among themselves there is neither justice nor honesty. poor people are abused with superstitious shows, and dissembled gravity. through the practices of Popes, Christendom is divided, and the kingdom of Turks enlarged.  
Can those therefore be good men, that do such lewd acts? and have they reason to boast of works, whose lives are so defiled with all vices?   

CHAP. XXXI. That in Popery a base account is made of Princes, and all laymen.  
HOly scriptures do give honourable titles not only to Kings and Princes, but also to all the people of God. Princes Rom. 13. are called superior powers, and Gods ministers for our good. and in divers places they are dignified, as God's anointed. Christians are also called Saints, and God's heritage, and his sons and children, and heirs of God's kingdom annexed together with Christ. but the mass-priests and polshorne crew make but a base reckoning of them. for first they appropriate to themselves the title of God's inheritance, calling themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and clericos, as if the Pope's greasy shavelings were only God's inheritance, and the rest were profane and common persons.  
Secondly in the church they divide themselves from laymen, as if laymen were not holy enough to communicate with them in God's service, or else as if they were unworthy to come near the Pope's poleshorne and greasy complices.  
Thirdly they call themselves only spiritual men, as if the lay-people were gross and carnal, and without sense and feeling of piety. they do call themselves also Gods anointed, interpreting these words touch not mine anointed, of their own greasy company.  
Fourthly the state of matried folks is termed a damned state of life, as appeareth by their decretales de conuersione coniugatorum, where they talk of married folks entering into monasteries no otherwise, then as if they should talk of the conversion of sinners. Syricius c. plurimos. dist 82. doth talk of married folks, as of men profane and unholy; and Innocentius in the same distinction c. proposuisti. doth interpret these words of the Apostle, those that are in the flesh cannot please God, of married folks, as if they were in the flesh and could not please God. for otherwise his conclusion is of no value.  
fiftly they call lay-people imperfect. for that is a word used by Faber contra anatomen missae. the state of perfection they ascribe commonly to Monks and Friars. some call them dogs and hogs, and prove, that scriptures are not to be permitted to be read in vulgar tongues, because holy things are not to be given to dogs, nor pearls cast before swine.  
Thomas Aquinas 2.2. q. 2. art. 6. compareth Gods people to asses, holding, that it is sufficient for them to adhere to their superiors in matters of saith, because we read Ioh 1. that the oxen were at plough, and the Asses fed by them.  
Summa Rosella, and Silvester in his sum in verb. fides, doth take laymen and simple people to be all one. and commonly they call them idiots and rude fellows.  
6 Pops Alexander trod upon the Emperor's neck, calling him a lion & basilisk. and Boniface the 8. endeavoureth to make Kings his subjects.  
7 They make Kings and Princes their hangmen & executioners, forcing them to put God's Saints to death, whom the wolvish inquisitors before have condemned.  
Finally they take from Princes all command and authority in the church, not suffering them either to make ecclesiastical laws, or to meddle with ecclesiastical persons. as for other Christians they do excommunicate them, curse them, burn them, massacre them, and set them together by the ears, that one may tear another, if they repugn against their commandments.  
Can we then esteem Popery to be Christian religion, that holdeth Christians in so base account? and will Christians endure this yoke of bondage put upon their necks by the Pope's faction, that endeavoureth to take all liberty from Christians?   

CHAP. XXXII. That Popery is a doctrine of devils.  
THe devil being the author of all untruth and falsehood, it may well be said, that all the lying and false doctrine of papists is of the devil. but beside this, there are particular reasons, why we call Popery the doctrine of devils. for first divers points of popish doctrine are specially said to proceed from the devil, and next the best proofs and means which our adversaries have to maintain their doctrine, are from the devil.  
The Apostle 1. Tim. 4. calleth the prohibition of marriage, and laws of abstinence from certain meats, doctrines of devils. for speaking of doctrines of devils afterward he specifieth the same, saying, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created. but Papists by law expressly forbidden marriage to priests, and others that have vowed single life, and the eating of flesh on fasting days, and white soul in lent. neither can they excuse themselves, for that they do not condemn marriage as simply evil, or flesh as unclean. for Thcodoret showeth, that such came within the compass of the Apostles censure, as by law prohibited these things, further neither did the Encratites or Manichees absolutely forbidden marriage as unclean, but as not fitting such as tend to perfection.  
Epiphanius in haeres. 79. esteemeth the superstition of those women, that offered the sacrifice of a cake in the honour of the virgin Mary, to be diabolical. totum hoc opus est diabolicum, & spiritus immundi doctrina. but Papists do offer their mass cakes in the honour of our Lady, and of Saints.  
Likewise he calleth it a doctrine of devils, to give divine worship to dead men. but this is a common practice among Papists. for by Saints they swear, and to them they confess their sins, and in honour of them they build churches and altars, and say masses: all which are special points of divine honour.  
Further he showeth, that the desire that men have in making graven images is a devilish endeavour. simulachrificum studium diabolicus conatus. but where is there more labour bestowed in making images, then in the synagogue of Rome?  
S. Chrysostome homil. 9 in epist. ad Coloss. saith, that the devil first brought in the superstitious worship of Angels. diabolus superstitionem angelorum introduxit. here than we understand, whence the Papists have their worship of Angels.  
From the devil also hath the Pope learned to advance himself above all that is worshipped, and to take upon him, as if he were God. Apocalyps. 9 we read, that the smoke that darkened the sun and the air came out of the bottomless pit, and that locusts came out of this smoke. but this smoke is nothing else but the fumes of the errors of Popery, which have long darkened the brightness of the truth, and the locusts are the monks and friars, which with their poisoned doctrine drawn from hell have infected the minds of simple people.  
About the year of our Lord 1256. as Matthew Paris testifieth, the friars published a book entitled evangelium aeternum, composed of certain dreams of abbot joachim. and this, say they, exceeded the gospel written by the four Evangelists, as far as the Sun the Moon, or the kernel the nut. but the author of the Romant of the Rose, where he speaketh of the hypocrisy of friars, testifieth, that this book came from the great devil.  
Fut or baille (c'est chose voire) saith he,  
Pour bailler commun exemplaire,  
un liure de par le grand diable  
Dit l'euangile perdurable.  
That the Popes have served the devil, it appeareth by john the 12. that called upon the devil, as he played at dice, by Sylvester the 2. and Benet the 9 that were necromancers, by Gregory the 7. that 
2 Matt. Paris in With. Conq.  confessed at his death, that by the counsel of the devil he had stirred up God's anger against the world, and divers others: but serving the devil, it is not likely, but they learned somewhat of him.  
Delrius lib. 4. de Magia. c. 1. q. 3. §. 5. testifieth, that the devil appeared to a certain abbot in form of an Angel, and commanded him to say Mass. but he would not have persuaded it, unless he had well liked it. Dibdale a masspriest in England conjured the devil to tell him, whether Christ's body was present in the Sacrament or no. he said it was. and this was a great satisfaction to the Papists present, as is said in a book of miracles, that passeth from hand to hand.  
In the 2. Nicene council act. 4. a certain monk prooneth the worship of Images by the testimony of the devil.  
I sengrenius in libro de Maria in veteri ottinga, proveth that the virgin Mary, was to be worshipped by the witness of the devil, that said his ave Maria.  
In the 2. book of conformities fruct. 2. they make proof by the devils testimony, of the virtue of indulgences granted to the church of Assisium by the means of S. Francis. Likewise lib. 3. conformitatum fruct. 8. a certain ●i●el told one, as is said, how Angels were present at the death of S. Francis. daemon dixit cuidam angelos interfuisse in transitu B. Francisci. another told, how S. Francis his soul passed through Purgatory. by the testimony of another devil, they prove that S. Francis had Christ's wounds imprinted in his body, and that he and Christ only of all that were in heaven had these marks. the words of the book of conformities are these. diabolus dixit, quod Christus videns, quod Franciseus sibi datus esset pro signisero tanti ordmis, ipsi suorum unlncrum stigmata impressit. and again, diabolus adiuratus à quodam sacerdote de veritate dicenda, post plura per os mulieris apud Ranennam morantis nomime Zantese sic inquit, in coelo sunt tantum duo signati, scilicet Christus & slomachosus Franciscus.  
Baronius in his 4. tome, proveth john and Paul to be martyrs by the devils testimony. daemons clamantes ex corporibus obsessorum joannem & Paulum martyres esse testabantur. so here we see whence the Papists have the worship of Saints.  
In the 77. lombard legend it is said, that Dioclesian's son being possessed with a devil, the same devil cried out, that he would not dislodge before Vitus came. lo here a brave testimony of the holiness of S. Vitus.  
Finally the massacres and cruel executions done by the Papists of late years upon the Saints of God, have proceeded from no other fountain, then from the malice of the devil. for he was a murderer from the beginning. and Apocalyps. 12. we read, that the great red dragon, that is, the devil persecuted the woman, which was a figure of the church of God, and caused her to fly into the wilderness. from the same fountain also do issue all the forgeries, lies, and calumniations of Papists, whereby they have gone about to suppress the truth. for the devil is the father of lies, and from their father the devil the lying friars and mass-priests have learned their lying devices. who then is of God must needs hate this religion, that is partly invented, and partly maintained by the devil.   

CHAP. XXXIII. That Papists can have no assurance of the truth of their religion.  
OF the truth of our Christian faith we are assured. for the articles thereof were delivered by Christ, taught by the Apostles and Prophets, contained in Scriptures, and confessed by the catholic church of all times. but it is not so with Popery. for neither did Christ deliver it, nor the Apostles and Prophets teach it, nor is the same contained in Scriptures, or confessed by the catholic church of all times, but dependeth partly upon traditions not written, and partly upon the Pope's determinations, and partly upon the opinions of schoolmen and canonists, and the monks and friars. now what assurance I pray you, can any Papist have of these doctrines?  
First no man yet could ever tell what these traditions are, which the Priests of Trent would make equal to Scriptures. Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. dei talketh at random. but he dare not come to particulars, nor directly express them.  
Secondly, they dare not define, where these traditions are to be found. if they say in the decretales; then all future traditions are cut off, and former traditions founded on the Pope's opinions. if they say in the legends, their traditions will prove lies and fooleries. for such are the legends. if they tell us of the pure fountains of traditions of Caesar Baronius, as Pope Sixtus the fift doth, they will be laughed at, that were not avised of their grounds, before the time of this babbling and confused Cardinal.  
Thirdly, they cannot show, why some traditions should be observed, and others not. but if traditions were to be receined with equal affection to holy Scriptures, than might none be abolished.  
As for the determinations of Popes, they can allege no reason, why they should be true. if they bring the words of Christ to Peter, they concern them nothing, that are so unlike to Peter. if they bring Christ's promises to his church, they concern them much less. for they are rather enemies, than members of the church. but were they members, yet what man is privileged so, that he cannot err, but those which for writing of holy Scriptures were led into all truth by the holy Ghost, which is the spirit of truth?  
Finally there is such contention betwixt the schoolmen and canonists, and such diversity of opinions among the several Doctors of both the sides, that it is hard to say whether any of them teacheth truly, and most certain, that many of them teach falsely. nay scarce any point of doctrine is delivered by schoolmen, wherein they descent not one from another.  
Now if they say, their faith is founded, not only upon the Pope's determinations, and Apostolic traditions, but also upon holy scriptures, yet holding as they do, this shall not any whit relieve them.  
For first they cannot assure themselves, that the Latin vulgar translation of the Bible is more true, than the original text in Hebrew and Greek. for all the fathers with one consent prefer the original fountains before all versions.  
Secondly they must needs stand in doubt, which is the old Latin vulgar translation. for if they allow that which was set out by Clement the 8. then cannot they allow of that, which was set out by Sixtus Quintus, the one so much differing from the other. nor if they approve this, can they follow that.  
Thirdly they do not believe the scriptures, because God speaketh in them, nor the traditions because they are God's word, as they hold, but because the church doth tell us, which are canonical scriptures, and consigneth them unto us, and doth further deliver unto us these traditions not written. for this is Stapletons' opinion in his books de doctrinalibus princip. and authorit. ecclesiast. defence. and is confessed of most Papists. but if the authority of scriptures, and traditions in respect of us, doth so depend upon the church, that no man can be assured of either, without the authority of the Church, then doth the faith of Papists rest upon the Pope, who, as they say, is chief governor of the church. the which will bring the Papists to great uncertainty. for who is so mad, as to believe, that a blind Pope can well judge of colours, or so senseless, as not to believe God's word without the Pope's warrant?  
Fourthly they receive not the articles of the faith, because they are contained in scriptures, but because they are delivered unto us by the Pope.  
Thomas Aquinas 2.2.9.1. art 10. saith, that the ordering of matters of faith, and the publication of the articles of the Creed belongeth to the pope, & that Athanasius his Creed was received, because it was allowed by the Pope. and this by others is delivered in more gross terms. Stapleton in his doctrinal principles saith, that the last resolution of matters of faith is in the Pope's desinitive sentence. and Bellarmine lib. 3. de verb. dei c. 4. goeth about to show, that the Pope is the supreme judge, to whom the interpretation of scriptures, and last resolution of all controversies of religion is to be referred.  
But the papists can neither assure thomselues, that he that sitteth at Rome is true Pope, and S. Peter's true successor, nor that his determinations are certain or true. That the Pope is S. Peter's true successor, it will be hard to prove, considering that he preacheth not, as S. Peter did, nor S. Peter wear a triple crown, and command temporal Princes, as he doth. it is very hard also to know, whether he be true Pope or no after the common understanding of Papists. for unless he be baptised, and truly ordered and chosen, he is no true Pope. but it is hard to know, whether he were baptised, which dependeth upon the Priest's intention, which is uncertain and hidden. it is also more hard to understand, whether he were truly ordered or not. for if he were not baptised, then is he not capable of Priesthood, as Innocentius saith c. ventens. de presbytero non baptizato. and if he that ordered him, had no intention to do it, than received he no orders. lastly it is a matter most difficult, to know, whether the Pope was rightly chosen, or else by Simony, or violence, or other means intruded. so it is always most uncertain, whether the Pope be S. Peter's successor, and a lawful Pope, yea or no.  
In the Pope's determinations also there is great uncertainty and doubt. for neither can the Papists, that were not present in the Pope's consistory, believe for certain, that the Pope hath thus or thus determined, unless they will believe, either this or that masspriest, that telleth him so, or the notary that subscribeth the decretal, or the decretal itself: nor can they assure themselves, that the Pope's determination is true. If they believe every masspriest, or Notary; then is the faith of Papists built upon every piled pated Priests report, or notaries subscription. if they believe the Pope's decretales, because they find them written; then do they give more credit to the Pope's decretales, then to holy scriptures: which is most absurd and impious. that the Pope determineth infallibly true, how can they assure themselves, seeing the scriptures pronounce all men liars, and subject to infirmities? furthermore we read, that the chief Priests under the law erred diverssie, as the offence of Aaron in making the golden calf, of Vriah the Priest, that made an altar, after the form of that of Damascus, of Annas and Caiphas, that condemned Christ jesus, doth plainly declare. Peter also erred in denying his master and dissuading his passion, and in judaizing, and dissembling his religion. the bishops of Rome have erred, as Lyra confesseth in Matth. 16. and may err, as Adrian lib. de sacrament. c. de consirmat. determineth. The examples also of Marcellinus, Liberius, Felix, Anastasius the 2. Vigilius, Honorius the first, john the 23. and other Popes do prove the same. S. Augustine epist. 19 doth testify, that the writers of canonical scriptures only are privileged so, as they cannot err. of other writers he thinketh otherwise. and this is also the opinion of other fathers. finally reason may persuade us, to acknowledge this truth. for we see no more in the bishops of Rome, than other bishops, and less than in other learned men. but other bishops and learned men both have erred, and may err. if they say, that Peter's chair is privileged; then must they show, that the bishops of Antioch & Alexandria, which have as much right to Peter's chair, as Rome, have never erred. but this they know cannot be done.  
Thus we see, that neither in the Romish traditions, nor in the Pope's decretales there is any certainty, all depending of the Pope's supposed determinations, of which no certainty can be had. the same also may be showed by the contrary opinions of popish doctors in every point of controversy, and for that all their errors are plainly convinced both by scriptures and fathers. but because they place their principal defence in the sacrifice of the Mass, we will only show their want of assurance in this point.  
First then no Papist in the world is able to show, that either the whole Mass, or the canon was instituted by Christ, or the Apostles. nay we see plainly words newly thrust into the form of consecration of the cup; and popish doctors themselves confess, that divers parts of the Mass have been made by several Popes.  
Secondly, they cannot show for a thousand years after Christ, that any Priest was ordained to offer Christ's body and blood really for quick and dead.  
Lastly, suppose the Mass were lawful, & the Priest lawful, and all the rest of the lawless and superstitious tricks lawful; yet can no man assure himself, that the Priest hath truly consecrated. for first no man can tell whether the man at the altar be a Priest, unless he know, that he was baptised, and that the bishop ordering him had an intention to do it. Secondly no man can assure himself, that either he had an intention to consecrate, or pronounced the words of consecration, or not. for they are pronounced softly.  
Are not the Papists then miserable, who are so uncertain of their Mass, and know not, whether they worship bread, or God, whether they serve God or creatures, whether they be Christians or idolaters?   

CHAP. XXXIIII. That Popery is repugnant to the laws of Nations.  
But could the Papists persuade themselves, that their Massing sacrifice were lawful and the rest of their religion were true; yet who would not abhor that religion, which is grounded on such foundations, and containeth such impieties, heresies and false doctrines, and is so repugnant both to Catholic religion, and all antiquity?  
Further we find, that it overthroweth the laws of nations, dissolveth the bands of alliance and kindred, preiudiceth the authority of Kings and Princes, hazardeth their lives and persons, oppresseth the liberty of Christians, both for matters of conscience, and their temporal estate, and is maintained by lies, calumniations, forgeries, perjuries, fire and sword, and most dishonest and wicked means.  
The laws of nations require, that oaths, promises, compacts, leagues and treaties of trade and commerce be observed and kept. but all these bonds neither Pope's nor Papists regard. Formosus being deposed from his bishopric, swore, that he would never resume the same again. yet regarded he not his oath. Gregory the 7. was made Pope contrary to his oath, as appeareth in the life of Henry the 4. Paschal the 2. solemnly swore to Henry the Emperor, to observe certain articles agreed upon betwixt them. but he was no sooner out of his hands, but he broke his oath, rebelled against the Emperor, and excommunicated him. Charles the French King, as Theodoric a Niem testifieth tract. nemor. union 6. c. 14. chargeth Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. with violating their oaths, vows and promises. Violarunt sidem saith he, fregerunt votum, promissum non tenucrunt. Omiphrius chargeth Alexander the 6. with more than Punic perfidiousnes. persidia plus quam punica. Guicciardin in his history speaking of Clement the 7. saith, he regarded his oath but little. era di poca sede. he showeth also, how julius the second endeavoured to prove, that the church, that is, the Pope, as he meant, was not bound by any oath. and that appeareth to have been most current doctrine by divers perfidious pranks played by Leo the 10. Clement the 7. and divers other Popes mentioned by Onuphrius, and divers of the Popes own friends and parasites.  
Neither do they only break oaths themselves, but persuade all their complices to do the like. the Bishop of Verdune, as we read in Conradus Traiectensis relateth, how Gregory the 7. esteemed faith to be sacrilege, and them to be loyal, that broke their oaths to the emperor. periuria sidelitatem dicit, fidem sacrilegium sacit. Henry the 4. also, as we read in Helmoldus complained, that his subsects by the instigation of the Pope rebelled against their lord, and broke their saith and solemn oaths. lenarunt manus contra dominum & regem suum, & violaverunt sidem, & iuramentorum sacramenta.  
In the council of Constance the Pope and his complices persuaded the emperor most dishonourably to violate his safe conduct granted to john Husse. there also it was decreed that faith was not to be held with heretics. they endeavoured lately to persuade the emperor Charles the fift likewise to break with Luther. Paul the 3. in his bull against King Henry the 8. did pronounce them accursed, that would not break oaths, and covenauts made with him, or with his subjects. Eugenius the 4. was the cause that Ladislaus King of Poland did break with the Turk. the like practices have divers Popes used to cause subjects to rebel against Princes. Innocentius the 3. moved the English contrary to their oaths to rebel against King john. and the like course did Paul the third take against King Henry the eight, and Pius the sister against Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory. the late traitors were divers of them tied by special oaths to King Iames. but with gun-ponder they meant to blow away oaths, and honesty. Finally it may truly be said of the Pope, and his complices, that they take themselves no further bound by their oaths, than their profit requireth. so one said also in express terms of them. multis annis iam peractis, nulla sides est in pactis. for many years they have regarded no compacts. and by this stratagem they have prevailed against the Emperors, and other Princes, and setting the Christian world upon a flame, have warmed themselves by the fire.  
We read also that divers leagues and treaties of peace by the wicked persuasions of Popes and their adherents and agents have been violated. The Spaniarde and English in time past entertained peace one with another, but Pius the fifth by his agents set the one nation against the other. by the practices of Popes and their agents we find, that the freuch King Charles the 9 broke the articles of peace both with his subjects and other Princes, and caused many thousand innocents to be murdered and massacred throughout his kingdom anno 1572. Philip the 2. King of Spain had not broken the privileges of the low countries, nor the articles of the pacification at Gant anno 1576. but that he was moaned thereunto by the continual persuasions of the Pope. nay Paul the third doubted not to curse all those, that would not break with king Henry the 8. upon his excommunication.  
Furthermore, by the laws of nations, wars are either publicly proclaimed, or after refusal of restitution of goods wrongfully taken, by some heralds or others denounced. but the Pope contrary to all laws, caused the Spaniards anno 1588. to come against England, before any war was denounced. the same course also did Paul the 3. hold in his wars against the Germans. neither do the papists end evour any thing more, then to take Christians on sleep, and so to steal upon them and to cut their throats. and this appeared lately most clearly in the cruel conspiraracy of the ponder men, and undermining papists.  
Great respect is always had to ambassadors and agents sent to treat of war or peace. And this is 
* C. in●gentium, dist. 1.  confirmed by the laws of all nations. but Popes have oftentimes evil entreated the Emperor's ambassadors. Gregorius 7. nuntios Henrici Imperatoris carceri mandavit, as we read in Orthuinus Gratius in certain epistles set down together with the Emperor's life. another Pope killed Frederic the 2. his ambasladors, that brought news of his good success in Palestine. the Marquis of Montigni and earl of Bergues in the beginning of the troubles of the Low country, being sent into Spain to mediate some good conditions with the king, were imprisoned and done to death. and now they are esteemed simple, that will trust the Pope's vassals, or treat with them without hostages.  
Finally by the laws of nations, kings have sovereign power over their subjects. and neither can subjects abandon their Princes, nor oppugn them, nor may kings oppress their subjects, or suffer them to be massacred by the adherents of antichrist or others. but by the doctrine of papists all Kings are subject to the Pope, as they teach in the chap. unam sanctam. extr. de maiorit. & obed. and divers other places. the same also is proved, for that divers Popes take upon them to take away Prince's crowns. the Popes do dispense with the oaths of Princes made to their subjects, and with the oaths of subjects made to their Princes. of which, many calamities do proceed. Papa cum Achaiae principem saith Pachymeres lib. hist. 1. c. vlt. jure iurando, quod Paleologo dederat soluisset, contmentium bellorum causam praebuit. the Pope absolving the Prince of Achaia from his oath given to Paleologus, was cause of divers troubles one following upon the neck of another. and the like inconveniences have followed upon the like presumption of Popes in taking upon them to control kings, and to stir their subjects against them. but what need we to seek for examples in ancient histories, when the calamities happening in France by occasion of the league against the King, and in England and Ireland by the Pope's insolent excommunications and dispensations in this case, are so fresh in memory? is it not then marvel, that so many nations should embrace the doctrine of Popery, that is so repugnant to the laws of nations, and rights both of Princes and subjects founded on the laws of nations?   

CHAP. XXXV. That Popery dissolveth the bonds of kindred, and alliance, and civility.  
THere is no bond straighter than that, which is betwixt parents and their children. and naturally men are inclined to love their kinsmen and allies. but this false religion, which is professed by Papists, and founded upon the Pope, dissolveth all bands of alliance and kindred, and setteth the children against the parents, and the parents against the children. Paschale the 2. and his adherents, as Helmoldus testifieth, armed the son against the father. Paschalis & Pontifices Germani, saith he, silium Henricum contra patrem armarunt, & vicerunt. likewise Gregory the 9 made Henry the son, head of a strong league against Frederic the 2. his father, as is testified by Aventinus in annal. Boiorum. Henricum Caesarem, saith he, missis legatis adversus patrem conspirationis valentissimae principem facit. the same man speaking of Innocentius the 3. affirmeth, that he set cousin against cousin, brother against brother, and son against the father. spectant atque concitante Romano sacerdote, saith he, Philippus & Otho cognatas acies inter so committunt. frater adversus fratrem, silius adversus parentem consligere cogitur. Marius Belga lib. de schism. c. 4. showeth, how certain Popish prelate's set the sons of Ludovicus Pius against the father, & that Gregory the 4. consented unto it. contrariwise Pius the 5. as we read in his life written by Hierome Catena testifieth, how Philip the 2. of Spain consented to the death of his son Charles suspected not to favour popish religion. non pepereit, filio suo proprio, saith he, abusing the words of holy Scripture sed dedit eum pro nobis. he spared not his own son. but gave him for us. In the histories written concerning the persecutions of the church of late time by the Popish faction in England, France, Flanders, Italy, and elsewhere, we read, that divers have been betrayed by their own kinsfolks, brethren, and friends, and find that fulfilled, which our Saviour Christ foretold us, Luc. 21. how Christians should be betrayed of their parents, brethren, kinsmen and friends. In Spain they force parents, to bring wood to burn their children, and children to set fire to their parents. Alphonsus Dias came post from Rome, and caused his own brother to be murdered for that he had embraced true religion. it is reported, that in England Queen Marie, if she had lived any longer, would have caused the bones of her own father to have been digged up and burned.  
It is also a common practice of children in places where Popery reigneth, to abandon their parents, and to profess monkery. Airault of Angiers in France, a man of good note, lost his only son, by the enticement of the jebusites, persuaded to enter into their superstitious order; neither could the father ever after hear what was become of him. and so have many parents been deprived of their sons and daughters under colour of religion, oftentimes drawn away to serve the mass-priests abominable lusts. this among Papists is counted religion. but the example savoureth rather of Turkish, than Christian religion. for as the children of Christians are taken from their parents and friends and made janisars, and so employed in the wars against Christians; so these novices are by fraud and wily devices stolen from their Christian parents and friends, and afterward employed in the defence of antichristian doctrine against truth, and the professors thereof.  
Finally they that profess Popery zealously do forget oftentimes all laws of common civility. lately the poudermen Papists had thought to cut all their countrymen's throats. the Masle-priests esteem laymen no otherwise then dogs and hogs commonly when they appear before magistrates, that are not of their own religion, they give them no reverence. Alexander the third trod upon the Emperor Frederick Barbarossaes' neck. Adrian the 4. suffered him to hold his stirrup. other Popes have used Kings and Princes as their stassiers. and for their hands they give Christians their feet to kiss.  
Neither is this a fault of the practice, but also of the doctrine of Popery. for these facts they commonly defend, and forbidden all speech, communication, dealing with excommunicate persons. os, orare, vale, communio, mensa negatur, saith Navarrus in enchirid. c. 27. these words spoken of Levi, Deuter. 33. which said to his father and mother, I know you not: are applied to all, that enter into any order of monkish religion, as we may perceive by the doctrine of Bellarmine lib. de monach. c. 36.  
Whosoever therefore looketh for filial obedience at the hands of his children, had need ●o look, that they be not nouzled in Popery. whoso expecteth for kind and friendly usage must not consort himself with Papists, who towards Christians use neither respect of kindred, nor of friendship, & upon every warrant of the Pope take themselves absolved from their obedience to their superiors, whether they rule in church or common wealth, and by all means suppose themselves bound to cut Christian men's throats.   

CHAP. XXXVI. That Popish religion either disannulleth, or greatly preiudiceth the authority of Kings and Princes.  
CHristian religion doth give an eminent authority and prerogative to Kings. S. Peter 1. epist. 2. exosteth all Christians to subinit themselves unto them. and S. Paul Rom. 13. teacheth every soul to be subject to the higher powers. Tertullian in his treatise ad Scapulam showeth, that the Emperor was next under God, supreme governor. colimus imperatorem, saith he, sic quomodo & nobis licet, & ipsi expedit, ut hominem a deo secundum. we honour the Emperor etc. as a man, that hath the next place to God. can we then with any reason suppose Popery to savour of Christian religion, that either maketh the Emperor and other King's subject to the Pope, or else taketh away a great part of his authority?  
That the Papists hold all temporal Princes to be inferior and subject to the Pope it cannot be denied. Innocentius the third in c. solitae. de maior. & obed. disputing this matter, compareth the Pope to the Sun, and the Emperor to the Moon, as if the Emperor were as many degrees inferior to the Pope, as the Moon is to the Sun. quanta est inter  & lunam, tanta inter pontifices & reges differentia cognoscitur.  
Clement the sift in the chapter Romani principes. de jure iurando, declareth, that the Emperors of Rome have submitted their heads to the bishop of Rome. sua submittere capita non reputarunt indignum. again he showeth, how they ought to take an oath of fealty and obedience to the Pope.  
The author of the Gloss in c. Romani. clem. de jure iurando, assigneth all this subjection of Princes to Christ his institution. jesus voluit, saith he.  
In the chapter Pastoralis. clem. de sent. & reiudicat. the Pope determineth that by right of the Papacy he hath superiority over the Empire, and that in the vacancy of the empire himself hath the right of the Emperor.  
Bonisace the 8. writing to the French king, gave him to understand, that he was the Pope's subject both in spiritual and temporal matters. scire to volumus, saith he, quoth in spiritualibus & temporalibus nobis subes. in the chapter unam sanctam. extr. de maior. & obed. he determineth, that the Pope hath both the swords, and that he hath power both to make kings, and to depose them. spiritualis potestas potestatem terrenam instituere habet & judicare, si bona non fuerit. that is, the spiritual power hath right to ordain the earthly power, and to judge the same, if it be not good.  
josephus Vestanus lib. de osculat. pedum Pontisicis. p. 137. among the dictates of Gregory the 7. setteth down this for one, that it is lawful for the Pope to depose the Emperor.  
Pius the fist in his blundering bull against Queen Elizabeth our late dread sovereign, blusheth not to affirm, that the Pope alone is made a Prince, and set over all nations and kingdoms to pull up, to destroy, to dissipate and spaile, to plant and to build. hunc unum, saith he, super omnes gentes, & ommae regna principem constituit, qui cuellat, destruat, dissipet, disperdat, plantet & aedisicet. This also is the doctrine of modern jebusites and their complices. Bellarm. lib. 5. de Pontis. Rom. c. 6. speaking of the Pope, teacheth, that he hath power to change kingdoms, and to take from one, and to give to another, if it be necessary for saning souls. and this he offereth to prove. Potest mutare regna, saith he, & uni auferre, atque altericonserre, si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem, ut probabimus.  
The jebusites of France in a discourse entitled la veritè defendue, blush not to defend the Pope's usurped power in deposing Princes: nay to assirme, that this great authority is profitable for Princes.  
Ghineard a jebusite was hanged in Paris anno 1594. for writing and maintaining divers seditious positions concerning the Pope's authority in disposing the crown of France, and translating the same from the family of Bourbon.  
Parsons in his warne-word p. 2. f. 127. alloweth the deposing of Henry the 3. of France. neither would he have desired, that the Bull of Pius the sift against Queen Elizabeth might be suspended against the Papists, but that he imagined, that she was justly deposed. the same man in his seditious book of titles lib. 1. c. 1. endeavoureth to prove, that the succession in kingdoms by necrenesse of blood is by positive laws of the commonwealth, and may upon just causes be altered by the same. in his third chapter he pretendeth, that not only unworthy claimers may be put back, but also that kings in possession may be chastised and deposed. his drift in the fourth chapter is to show, that the people sometimes may lawfully proceed against princes. is it not then strange, that the factious scholars of this seditious teacher are still harboured in the bowels of this state?  
William Rainolde, a rinegat Englishman, in a certain treatise set out under the name of William Rosse, and titled, de justa reip. Christianae supra reges impios & haereticos authoritate etc. doth in express terms defend the wicked league of the French rebels against the King, and give the people power to depose their kings. the same man in the 2. chapter of that book affirmeth impudently, that the right of all the Kings and kingdoms of Europe is laid upon this foundation, that commonwelthes', or the people may depose their kings.  
I us omnium Europae regum & regnorum, saith he, hoc fundamento nititur, quod resp. possint suos reges deponere. In all Europe therefore it will be hard to find more arrant traitors, than himself and his complices.  
Bellarmine lib. 5. de pontiff. Rom. c. 6. saith, it is not lawful for Christians to tolerat a king, that is an infidel, or an heretic, if he go about to draw his subjects to his heresy or infidelity. non licet Christianis tolerare regem infidelem aut haereticum, si ille pertrahere conetur subdit os ad suam haeresim aut infidelitatem. a hard sentence against his Majesty, if Papists had power to judge him.  
Emanuel Sain his book called aphorismi confessariorum, holdeth these aphorisms in verbo princeps. viz. that a prince may be deposed by the commonwealth for tyranny, and also if he do not his duty, or where there is just cause, and that another may be chosen by the greatest part of the people. in the word tyrannus he affirmeth, that a tyrant may be deposed by the people, although they be sworn to be obedient unto him, if being admonished he will not amend. now to the Popish faction all are tyrants, that will not admit their Popish superstition, though otherwise they be never so mild and gentle. and so it appeareth they account of our gracious king, whom of late they have sought treacherously to murder.  
If then we admit this common doctrine of Papists of the Pope's authority in deposing Kings, and giving them Law; we diminish the authority of Kings, and make them subjects to the Pope. which is a matter abominable to be either taught or believed. we do also endanger, not only the state of all Kings, but also of their kingdoms. for how can any King stand against the violence of the Pope, if he have authority to depose Kings? by this usurped authority Gregory the 7. wrought Henry the Emperor and his subjects many troubles.  
Paschall the 2. made the son to rise against the father; and the subjects against their Princes, and in the end caused the en peror to be taken prisoner, and to resign his Empire. the same man also, as he subdued the father, so quarrelled he with the son, and caused his subjects to take arms against him.  
Innocent the 2. by force of arms thought to vanquish Roger King of Sicilia, and in a pitched field had prevailed against him, if the son had not succoured his father Roger.  
Adrian the 4. and Alexander the 3. did so far prevail against Fridericke the first, that he held the stirrup to the first, and was trodden upon by the second.  
Celestin the 3. proudly demeaned himself against Henry the 6. casting the crown from his head, with his foot, as he kneeled before him, as we read in Rogor Hoveden.  
Innocent the 3. brought the Emperors Philip and Otho to destruction by his furious persecution. the same man caused King john of England to surrender his crown, and was the cause of the loss of Normandy to the English. Neither did he alone offer wrong to john King of England. for before his time king Henry the second had received a great scorn of the Pope in the cause of Thomas Becket. Gregory the 9 and Innocent the 4. with great fury set upon Friderike the 2. and employed Christians, that had made vows to fight against the Saracens, to the ruin of the Emperor.  
john the 22. Benet the 12. and Clement the 6. with implacable hatred prosecuted Lewes of Bavier, and that for no other cause, then for that he took on him as Emperor, without the Pope's allowance. and for the same cause Harold encurred the Pope's displeasure, not submitting himself to receive his crown of the Pope's faction. Boniface the eight while he sought to subdue Philip of France, and the howl of Colonna in Italy, troubled both Spain and Italy. the Popes of late time have caused all the stirs in Germany, Italy, France, Flanders, England and Scotland. the leaguers of France, were confirmed in their rebellion by the Pope, and drove King Henry the third out of his palace, and killed him by a Dominican Friar, as he besieged Paris; and long withstood the king now reigning. Upon the excommunication of Paul the third, the papists of England rebelled against King Henry the eight. in his bull of excommunication recorded by Sanders he commanded his subjects to resist him, and to throw him out of his kingdom. principibus viris ac ducibus Angliae, saith he, caeteraeque nobilitati praecipit, ut vi & armis se Henrico opponant, illumque è regni sinibus eijcere nitantur. by the Pope's excommunications the rebellion was raised in the North of England by the Earls of Westmoreland and Norththumberland, and divers tumults in Ireland against Queen Elizabeth. nay albeit our King be not denounced excommunicate, yet did the gunpowder Papists seek to blow him up with the principal men of England. neither had the Spaniards anno 1588. any better ground to invade England, than the Pope's commandment and warrant.  
Seeing then the Pope taketh upon him a superiority over all Kings, & seeketh to depose all such, as will not conform themselves to his will; it is much to be wondered, that Christian princes, that do embrace his doctrine, do not see, in what danger they stand, either to be disgraced, or dispossessed of their crowns. disgrace it is to acknowledge any in earth their superior, and an evident danger to fall out with the Pope, where the subjects are affected to Popery.   

CHAP. XXXVII. That Kings professing Popish religion are either no Kings, or but half Kings.  
But were not Kings in danger to lose their crowns and Kingdoms living under the Pope; yet have they no reason to take upon themselves as free Kings and Princes, or to believe, that they can enjoy all the right that belongeth to lawful Kings and Princes.  
For first no King can freely dispose of matters belonging to his government, that acknoledgeth any man to be his superior. as for example, Herode and other Kings, that ruled under the Romans, who could proceed no further, then pleased the Emperors, and people of Rome. if then the King of Spain, or France, or other nations do acknowledge the Pope to be his judge and superior, he may not refuse his judgement, or resist his authority.  
Secondly we find, that Kings before Christ's coming in the flesh gave laws both to the chief priests, and to all their people; and not the chief priest either to the Kings of Israel and judah, or to the people, as may appear by the laws of Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, Hezekia & josiah. we do also read, that Constantine & other Christian Kings, until the times of Charles the great and long after, gave laws to the Bishops of Rome and other clergymen, as may be evidently proved by the laws yet extant Cod. de sum. trinit. & sid. cath. de episc. & Cleric. de episcop. audient. de haereticis, and in divers other titles, and books. but where any bishop of Rome all this time made any law to bind either kings, or their subjects, we find not, unless we list to admit counterfeit decretales for currant laws, which no man of any understanding will do, nor any modest Papist can require. wherefore taking upon them authority to make laws to bind both Kings and their subjects, the Popes plainly declare, that Kings lining under the confusion of antichrist's tyranny, are no kings.  
Thirdly Bellarmme lib. 1. de pontiff. Rom. c. 7. determineth that temporal Princes are no governors of the Church. and generally both the Pope and his complices teach, that kings have no power, either to make ecclesiastical laws, or to reform abuses of doctrine, or to settle matters ecclesiastical. finally the Papists of England in their glozing petitions to his Majesty, wherein they pray his favour, yet will allow him no authority, save only in temporal and civil causes. doth it not then manifestly appear, that Papists take from kings half their authority, and give the same to foreigners, and public enemies?  
Fourthly in temporal matters, which they are content to leave to the disposition of Kings, they restrain them in such sort, that they will not have them either to rest in peace, when the Pope commandeth them to make wars, or to make wars further than the Pope permitteth. Bomface the eight in c. vam sanctam. extr. de maiorit. & obed. showeth how princes are to use their swords, ad nutum & patientiam sacerdotis. that is, at the Pope's beck, & as long as he listeth to suffer it.  
Fiftly the Pope shareth half the king's revenues, claiming tenths, first fruits, subsidies, and other rights out of ecclesiastical livings. he doth also claim the disposition of divers ecclesiastical livings in divers cases, and right to confirm bishops, and getteth great sums of money for pardons, licences, and other rescripts, and faculties.  
Sixtly, if a king need a dispensation against an ecclesiastical law, or an absolution from an offence. he is sent to Rome to obtain it if be can, and oftentimes such faculties and absolutions cost full dear. King Henry the 8. spent great sums of money to be divorced from his brother's wife, and yet failed of his purpose. Frederick the 2. could not be absolved from his excommunication by Gregory the 9 but it cost him 125. M. ounces of gold, as Nauclere and ivan de Pineda a Spaniard do signify. john the king of England to obtain absolution was forced to resign his crown.  
Seventhly, Alex. inder the fourth in the chapter quia nonnulli. de immunit. eccles. in 6. exempteth the possessions and goods of clergy men from tolle and custom.  
Finally Bomface the 8. in the chapter clericis. de immunitat. eccles. m 6. doth excommunicate both kings and others, that impose taxes and subsidies upon the clergy. and this is the common doctrine of the Pope's agents. Bellarmine de exemptione clericorum c. 1. setteth down these propositions, that clerks in ecclesiastical causes are free from the command of secular Princes by the law of God. and again, that clerks are not to be judged of secular judges, albeit they transgress temporal laws. and lastly, that Princes in respect of clerks are not sovereign Princes. Emanuel Sa in his Aphorisms for confessaries, first printed and alleged by him, that wrote the Frank discourse, hath these words, clerici rebellio in regem non est crimen laesaemaiestatis, quia non est subditus regi. the rebellion of a clerk against the king is no treason, because he is not the king's subject. nay of late both the mass-priests and their fiery followers have thought it meritorious to rebel against the king.  
And consonant to this doctrine is the practice of papists, for in matters of contention betwixt the Pope and their kings, they take part with the Pope, and rebel against their kings, as the rebellions of the Germans and French in time past, of the English and Irish against king Henry the 8. and Queen Elizabeth; of the leaguers of France against king Henry the 3. and 4. do manifestly declare.  
When the Pope doth give law to Princes, they take themselves bound to execute it, and upon every excommunication rise in arms against them, and seek to depose them.  
In ecclesiastical causes they run for direction to the Pope, and care not a straw for the ecclesiastical laws of their kings.  
When the Pope commandeth a Prince to execute his bulls, they are ready to follow the wars. if he command them to surcease, they forsake their kings in the midst of his conquests.  
If the Pope levy tenths or subsidies upon the clergy, or Monks, or Friars, they willingly bear all burdens, and to him they run for dispensations, and all faculties.  
King's also seek to the Pope in their own cases for dispensations, and absolutions, where the Pope's law saith, they are necessary.  
Finally both the possessions and persons of clergy men are the Popes to dispose, as may appear, for that he layeth what charge he listeth on their possessions, and sometimes alienateth them to maintain his wars, and findeth their persons priest to do him service.  
If then kings bear themselves as inferiors to the Pope, and receive laws at his hands, and are excluded from all disposition and rule in ecclesiastical causes, and both draw their swords and put them up at his command, and suffer him to tax their subjects, and run to him for faculties and dispensations, and finally can neither dispose of the possessions of the church, nor of the persons of churchmen; we may boldly say, that Popery either maketh kings no kings, or but half kings.   

CHAP. XXXVIII. That Kings live not in any security of their lives where Popery is professed by their subjects.  
David the man of God would not suffer any of his followers to lay his hands upon Saul, although God had appointed him to succeed in the kingdom, and rejected Saul. and great respect always have Christians had to their sovereign Lords and Princes. In the canons attributed to the Apostles c. 83. every contumelious speech against the Emperor, or magistrate is judged worthy of punishment. what are we then to think of the Popes of Rome and their complices, that not only curse and rail against princes and magistrates, but also stir up all the world against them, if they will not yield to their Lordly will and pleasure? such certes are the children of Belial, and not the servants of God. I hope therefore Christian Princes will open their eyes, and every day grow more wary in their dealings with the pope's of Rome and their agents, which are no less dangerous in respect of their lives and persons, than their royal estates and kingdoms.  
For first they hold, that is lawful for the Pope to change kingdoms, and to take from one, and to give to another, as Bellarmine in express terms determineth l. 5. de pont. Rom. c. 6. And this is declared by the continual practice of Popes, who these many years have gone about to take from one, and to give to another, now giving the kingdom of Sicily and Naples to the French, now to the Spanish, now challenging it themselves. the kingdom of Navarre is holden from the French king by no better warrant, than the Pope's grant. by the same also the Spaniards and Portugeses have divided the Indians betwixt them. Boniface the eight by his bull made Philip and the kingdom of France subject to Albert. Philippum ciusque regnum Alberto regi subijcit, saith Platina in Bonifacio 8. but what king doth not with his sword defend his state, and chooseth not rather to lose his life, than his kingdom?  
Secondly they teach, that the Pope is to judge of Kings, as is defined by the extranagant unams'. inctam. de maiorit. & obed. they give the Pope also power to depose kings, and to take away their crowns. but it were great simplicity to think, that any magnanimous Prince will either lose his crown, or submit himself to be judged by a pole-shorne Pope without force. nay sooner will he hazard his life, then either lose his crown, or submit himself to the Pope's judgement.  
Finally, both by their doctrine and practise it appeareth, that the Popes and their agents have sought to murder, empoison and destroy such kings and princes, as either were excommunicate by them, or else were opposite unto them. Gregory the 7. watching the Emperor, that was wont to pray in the church of S. Mary. as Beno testifieth, hired a fellow to place great stones upon the beams or vault of the church right over the place where he prayed, which being thrown down might kill him. his words are these. imperator solitus erat frequenter ire ad oration: mad ecclesiam S. Mariae, quae est in mente Auentino. Hildebrandus autem cum per exploratores omma eius opera solicitè inquircret, locum in quo frequentius imperator, velstans vel prostratus orabat, notari secit, & quendam promissa pecunia ad hoc induxit, ut supra trabes ecclesiae occultè lapides magnos collocaret, & ita aplaret, ut de alto super caput imperatoris demitteret, & ipsum contereret. again the same Beno saith, that the Pope went about by secret traitors to destroy the emperor. eisdem diebus paravit imperatorem perdere per occultos proditores. and when by secret treachery he could effect nothing, by public force and arms he sought to subdue him.  
Innocent the second having raised an army fought with Roger King of Sicilia in a pitched field, thinking to destroy him.  
Philip the Emperor, and his successor Otho were both brought to their destruction by the practices of Innocent the 3 about this time also john king of England was poisoned by a Monk of Swinsted-abby, for that he was supposed to be adverse to the Popish faction. his empoisonment is particularly set down in Caxtons' chronicle.  
Henry of Lucemburg the emperor was poisoned in the Sacrament by a Dominican friar about the year of our Lord 1313. quidam religiosus, saith Vrspergensis, porrexit imperatori intoxicatam eucharistiam. the same is also testified by baptista Igantius, supplementum Chronicorum, Textor in officina. c. veneno extincti, and divers others. Sleidanus saith, the Friar was moved thereunto by Clement the fifth. and the reason was, for that the Emperor grew too strong in Italy. this act committed by a Dominican Friar, was the cause of the death of many Friars of that order slain by the Emperor's soldiers.  
Matthew Paris in Henrico 3. testifieth, that Pope Innocent the 4. was charged with the empoisonment of Fridericke the Emperor by the means of Peter de Vinea, and that the fame of the Pope was not a little stained by this foul fact. obsorduit domini Papae fama, saith he, per hoc non mediocriter. in the end he was murdered by Mansrede, as is said, not without the secret practice of the Pope.  
joan the Queen of Naples being taken by her enemies was murdered with the privity and consent of Urban the sixth.  
Charles the king of Naples by the bloody council of Clement the 4. caused Conradmus and Fredrick duke of Austria to be put to death. vita Conradim mors Caroli, said Clement, which cost that young Prince his life.  
Sixtus the fourth was the principal contriver of that treason, whereby julian de medic●s was slain, and his brother Laurence hurt in the church of Reparata at Florence at the elcuation of the sacrament. conscio & adinuante pontifice, saith Volateran Geograph. lib. 5.  
Alexander the 6. caused Gemes the Turks brother to be empoisoned, being hired thereto by promises and money by the great Turk. so little conscience do Popes make of murdering princes.  
Paul the 3. in his bull against Henry the 8. King of England exhorted the Nobles and principal men of England to oppose themselves against him with force and arms, and sent Cardinal Poole to foreign princes, to stir them up against the king, giving him and his people as a pray to his enemies, and by all means seeking to destroy him.  
Pius the fifth excommunicated all that would not take arms against Queen Elizabeth our late dread Sovereign, and by secret practice stirred her subjects against her.  
Sixtus Quintus anno 1588. in his declaration against the foresaid Lady exhorteth her people to lay hands on her, to arrest her, and to concur to her punishment. and to this end tendeth the most seditious and wicked libel set out by Allen, yet not without the help of Parsons, and directed to the nobility and people of England and Ireland.  
When force prevailed not, the Popes of Rome and their adherents by treachery sought to murder her. William Parry anno 1584. resolved to murder that innocent Queen, and his purpose did so well please Pope Gregory the 13. that Cardinal Como in the Pope's name promised him pardon of all his sins, and a great reward beside for his endeavour. Monsignor, saith he, his holiness hath seen your letters, with the credential note included, and cannot but commend the good disposition, which as you writ, you hold for the service and benefit of the public weal: wherein he exhorteth you to continue until you have brought it to effect. and that you may be helped by that good spirit, that hath moved you, he granteth you his blessing and plenary indulgences, and plenary remission of all your sins. assuring you beside the merit which you shall have in heaven, that his holiness will make himself your debtor to acknowledge your deserts in the best sort he can. thus the Pope promiseth heaven to a wicked murderer: and with him concurred one Benedict Palmio a jebusite of Venice, and other jebusites and mass-priests in France, all setting this assassin & cutthroat on to murder an innocent Queen. Parson's that ringleader of traitors, when an English gentle man went about to discover this treason, by all means disturned and distwaded him, furthering with his desires this most wicked resolution of Parry, as is cuident by his letters dated the 18. of October anno 1598. which are yet to be showed.  
That which Parry intended, divers other traitors also promised to perform, as Savage induced thereto by the persuasion of D. Gifford, and other priests at Paris; Ballard, who was set on by Allen; Somerfield, who was encouraged in the enterprise by Arden, and a Romish maste-priest; Patrick Collen, York and Williams, who were induced thereto by sir William Stanley, Hugh Owen, Holt, Sherwood, Gifford, Worthington and others to commit this villainous fact.  
In the end Lopez the Queen's Physician undertook to empoison the Queen upon hope of a great sum of money, and one Squire promised Walpoole to practise the same treason, damning himself, if he did not execute that treacherous act, and receiving the Sacrament upon it. such zeal have these wicked jebusites to do mischief. neither do they now desist from these wicked attempts, as their treacherous plots against king james declare.  
Of late time Henry the 3. of France was most shamefully murdered by a Dominican Friar called james Clement, and the fact was highly praised by the Pope.  
The like fact did Peter Barrier attempt against Henry the fourth, animated therein by divers jebusites & mass-priests, as appeareth by his confession set down in record.  
john Chastell struck the same king with a knife, thinking to murder him, and this he learned, as he confessed in his examination, of the jebusites.  
The late Prince of Orange was first wounded by john jauregui, and afterward murdered by Balthasar Gerard. both which were persuaded by mass-priests and Friars, that such facts were meritorious. finally divers have been hired and sent by the Pope's agents to murder Prince Maurice, as namely Michael Reinichon, Peter du Four, and Peter Pan. and this is evidently declared by their confessions, by divers presumptions, and by their execution for this cause.  
If then such rewards be promised to such, as attempt to empoison, and murder Princes; let all Christian Princes beware, how they admit such near their persons, as beleene this wicked doctrine. and let them never forget the villainous treason of the English-miners and gun-pouder-men.  
If Papists think it meritorious to kill princes excommunicate by the Pope, and are therein animated by him and his agents; then can Godly Princes have no assurance of their lives before they root out all the professors of this King-killing and bloody religion. and this appeareth evidently by the treason contrived the fifth of November last.   

CHAP. XXXIX. That Popery layeth grievous burdens on men's consciences.  
Our Saviour Christ Matth. 23. denounced a woe to the Scribes and Pharisees, for that they shut the Kingdom of heaven before men, and neither entered themselves, nor suffered others to enter therein. he taxeth them also, for that they bond heavy and importable burdens on men's shoulders, and did not so much as once touch them with one of their singers. but better may the same woe be denounced against the Pharisaical Friars, Monks, and mass-priests, which keeping the people of God from the knowledge of God's word, and nouzeling them up in ignorance, as much as in them lieth, do fast shut the kingdom of heaven against them, and while they seek to maintain their pompous state, and refuse to hear all speech of reformation, neither enter themselves, nor suffer others to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Furthermore they do not only tie their followers to observe unwritten traditions, as did the hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees, but also lay upon them divers other most heavy and grievous burdens.  
First they press men with divers heavy statues and laws. for example, they bind men to confess to their parochial priest once every year. they require that confession be simple, humble, pure, faithful, frequent, naked, discreet, willing, bashful, full and secret, etc. according to these verses: 
Sit simplex, humilis confessio, pura, fidelis,  
Atque frequens, nuda & discreta, libens, verecunda,  
Integra, secreta, & lachrymabilis, accelerata,  
Fortis, & accusans, & sit parêre parata.  And unless all mortal sins be confessed, they say it availeth nothing. but who can either tell all his sins, or observe all these conditions? they also bind men to keep certain holidays and set feasts and fasts, and that with certain conditions. Further they teach, that all Christians are to observe the statutes of the church of Rome and decretales of Popes, and acts of their pretended counsels.  
Secondly, every transgression of the statutes of the Romish church, and of the Pope's decretales they punish with grievous penalties. to eat flesh on fridays, to eat eggs in Lent, to read holy Scriptures in vulgar tongues, without recantation, is capital.  
Thirdly they hold, that every law of the Romish church doth bind in conscience. nay if subjects rebel not against their Princes, and lay hands upon them, they teach that they sin mortally. if then all transgressions of the Pope's laws be sin; then are Papists tied with infinite chains of sins. they lose all these laws, I confess, lightly, but always this scruple will remain, whether they have rightly confessed, and have fully satisfied, and are justly absolved.  
Fourthly the censures of the Romish church even to Papists have always seemed intolerable. Peter de Aliaco in his book de reformat. eccles. complaineth of it, and showeth how the sword of the church by frequent excommunications is grown contemptible. he complaineth also of the multitude of irregularities. add hereunto the grievances proceeding of suspensions and interditements, and then the burden must needs seem more grievous.  
Fiftly, such as do not in matters of faith or Sacraments jump with the Romish church, they pronounce heretics, as appeareth by the chap. ad abolendam. de haereticis. they give them also over to the secular power to be put to death.  
Sixtly they make Kings and Princes their butchers and executioners, forcing them by sentence of excommunication to cut the throat of Christ's lambs, whom they most wrongfully have pronounced heretics.  
Seventhly they burden their clergy & their religious orders both of men and women with a vow of single life, albeit they find themselves most unable to perform it. they force also the monks, friars, and nuns to observe monkish rules, which are oftentimes full of fooleries, and stand for the most part upon external ceremonies.  
Finally like to Scribes and Pharisees they have brought into the church infinite traditions and ceremonies. nay the conventicle of Trent doth paragon and make equal unwritten traditions to Gods written word. and yet no Papist ever yet could tell, what those traditions were, or in what books they were to be found. In baptism they use salt, spittle, blowings, lights, and greasing in the Mass the priest turneth, heaveth, skippeth, swingeth the chalice to and fro, moppeth, moweth, ducketh, speaketh sometimes high, sometimes low, and maketh no end of ceremonies. the consecrating of salt, holy-water, oil, paschal lambs, new houses, new ships, is not done without many ceremonies. in hallowing and rehallowing of churches, saying of canonical hours and offices many ceremonies pass, but few to purpose. the Bishop in consecrating a church walketh round about it, as if there were no entrance in. and in the end abusing a versicle of a psalm saith, attollite portas principes vestras. and entering maketh the Greek and Latin alphabet, and setteth lights before crosses, made on walls, and greaseth stones. the year of jubiley aboundeth with ceremonies. the Pope knocketh first at S. Peter's church door with a golden hammer, showing that no man obtaineth indulgences, but he must spend gold. than the Priests show their wares, and ignorant people goeth about visiting certain churches and relics, of which we never read word in the Gospel, or writings of the fathers.  
The Papists therefore are entangled with a miserable yoke of bondage, and are utterly ignorant of the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. God open their eyes, that they may see, and give them grace, that they may feel their burdens, and shaking off the yoke of Antichrist may in the end be partakers of the light of the Gospel, and submit themselves only to Christ's yoke, that is easy and light.   

CHAP. XL. That Popish religion is very grievous in regard of the Popes and mass-priests manifold taxes and exactions.  
IT followeth now, that we show, how the Pope and his pole-shorne crew doth aswell pole Christian men's purses, as grieve their consciences. wherein I need not to use any long discourse, seeing the same is apparent not only by practice, but also by confession of the Papists themselves. commonly they buy the papacy in gross, and therefore no marvel if they sell it by retail. 
Vendit Alexander, saith one of Alexander the sixth,  
Vendere iure potest, emerat ille prius.  But this was not his fault alone. Benet the 9 sold the Papacy for 1500. pound (of gold) to Gregory the 6. as Beno testifieth. Benedictus 9 Papatum, saith he, pro libris mill quingentis vendidit Gregorio 6. and no man now obtaineth that place but for great sums of money, and large promises, as the discourses of divers late conclaves testify.  
Therefore no marvel, if they seek money greedily both before and after they come to sit in the Pope's chair. Brigit in her revelations saith, the Pope hath turned all God's commandments into this one, viz. give money. convertit decem praecepta in hoc unum, da pecuniam. for money they sell churches, priesthood, altars, masses, crowns, fire, incense, prayers, yea heaven and God himself.  
Venalia nobis, saith Mantuan,  
Templa, sacerdotes, altaria, sacra, coronae,  
Ignis thura, Preces, caelum est venale deusque.  
Fridericke the 2. for one absolution paid to Gregory the 9 an hundred twenty five thousand ounces of gold, as is recorded in the pontifical, or 120. thousand as Naucler, epitome rerum German. john of Pineda and others do reckon.  
josephus Angles in 4. sentent. c. de indulgentijs signifieth, that the King of Spain payeth sometime to the Pope a hundred thousand ducats for one indulgence. Leo the 10. gave such a scandal by the sale of indulgences in Germany, that men began to examine more narrowly these popish commodities: and the rather, for that the profit of this sale came to Magdalene the Pope's honest sister.  
Boniface the ninth, as Theodoric à Niem testifieth lib. 2. de schism. c. 11. sold benefices, as he was hearing Mass. in missarum solennijs benesicia vendidit.  
Mitred prelate's cell imposition of hands, ecclesiastical livings, church censures, and whatsoever is reserved to their office, as the Germans complain in their grievances. Theodoric Trudo complaineth, that Christ's sheepefoldes were broken down with hammers of silver. Malleus argenti consregit ovilia Christi.  
The rascal mass-priests sell Masses, dirges, sacraments, sacramental ceremonies, and other Romish wares, every man according to the faculties given him by the Pope. Brigit in her revelations bringeth in Christ complaining, how Priests dealt worse in selling him, than judas, for that he sold him for money, they for every commodity. deteriores sunt juda, qui pro solis denarijs me vendidit, illi autem pro quovis mercimonio. the Papists themselves know, that the mass-priests and jebusites sent from the Pope into England live upon sale of their faculties.  
Of these pillages divers have complained from time to time. and yet we find, that the Popes would never abide any reformation. Matthew Paris in Henrico 3. speaking only of the rapines of one Pope's legate, saith, he had extorted more, than was remaining behind in England, excepting the church ornaments. nec remansit eadem hora saith he, ut veraciter dicebatur, tantum pecuniae in Anglia, exceptis sanctorum vasis & ornamentis ecclesiarum, quantum à regno extorserat Anglicano. he compareth the Kingdom at that time to a vineyard spoiled by every one that passed by, and rooted up by the wild boar of the wood. he saith, that the court of Rome like a gulf swallowed up every man's revenues. quae curia instar barathri potestatem habet, & consuetudinem omnium reditus absorbendi. Boner in his preface before Gardiner's book de vera obedientia saith, that the Popes pray, or spoils in England were equal almost to the King's revenues. the Emperor as Matth. Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. reprehended the king of England for suffering his country to be impoverished so shamefully by the Pope. imperator reprehendit regem Angliae, quod permitteret terram suam tam impudenter per Papam depauperari.  
Lewes the 9 in his pragmatical sanction complaineth, that his kingdom was miserably brought to poverty by the Pope's exactions, and therefore expressly forbiddeth them. exactiones & onera gravissima pecuniarum, saith he, per curiam Romanam ecclesiae regni nostri impositas vel imposita, quibus regnum nostrum miserabiliter depauperatum existit, sive etiam imponendas, vel imponenda levari, aut colligi nullatenus volumus. The University of Paris in an appeal from Leo the 10. taxeth the insatiable avarice of the court of Rome confounding laws and canons by expectatives and reservations.  
Bernard in ser. 6. in psal. qui habitat. complaineth, that in his time the offices of the church were turned to gain, and that monks were polled, Masses said, and psalms song for money. ipsa quoque ecclesiae sacrae dignitatis officia in turpem quaestum & tenebrarum negotium transiuêre. nec in his salus ammarum, sed luxus quaeritur divitiarum. propter hoc tondentur, propter hoc frequentant ecclesias, missas celebrant, psalmos decantant.  
In the articles of complaints made by the senate of Paris, and exhibited to Lewes the 11. it appeareth, That 25. hundred thousand crowns were drawn out of France in the time of Pius the 3. and great sums every year, upon pretence of divers faculties coming from Rome.  
james Archbishop of Mentz paid divers great sums of money for his pal, and dying professed, that his death grieved him not, but that the poor people of the country was again to pay money to the Pope.  
Valla in his treatise against the forged donation of Constantine accuseth the Pope, for that he made gain of church matters, and of the gifts of the holy Ghost. Papa. saith he, rem ecclesiasticam & spiritum sanctum quaestus habet. and therein he saith, he did worse than Verres, or Catiline, or any robber of the common treasure.  
Theodorie à Niem nemor. union. tract. 6. c. 37. speaking of the Pope's exchequer, compareth it, to the sea, into which all rivers flow, and yet it runneth not otter. he showeth also, how his officers do scourge poor Christians worse than Turks and Tartarians. he compareth the Pope's collectors to wicked spirits tract. union 6. c. 36. collectores camerae, saith he, ●nalignis spiritibus aequales. in his third book de schismate c. 22. he showeth how Gregory the 12. to make money sold the chalices, crosses, and jewels of the church.  
Alan Chartier showeth, that by the Pope and his complices the church was made a den of thieves, and God's sanctuary a common market place, and lastly that the Gospel, and canons being suppressed, trassike was made for benefices, and gain sought every where. vos ecclesiam dei effecistis speluncam latronum, saith he, & sanctuarium diumum, ut iam sit forum cauponatorium. sancta evangelia sunt suppressa, & canon's sublati. exercitium autem simoniae & lucri quam maxime uberis regnant.  
john of Sarisbury lib. 6. polycrat. c. 24. affirmeth, that the Pope to all men is become intolerable, and that he delighteth in the spoils of the church, and esteemeth gain Godliness, and spoileth countries, as if he meant to gather treasure like to that of Croesus. Ipse Romanus pontisex omnibus ferè est intolerab. lis. laetatur spolijs ecclesiarum. quaestum omnem reprt● pie●●tem. pr●uivciarum diripit spolia, ac si thesauros Craesi studeat reparare.  
Vrspergensis in his chronicle showeth how all men sought to Rome what for dispensations for offences, and what for decision of matters of justice, he might have added suits for benefices. and thereupon he saith, that whole streams of money come thither. gaude matter nostra Roma saith he, quoniam aperiuntur cataractae thesaurorum in terra, ut ad te confluant rius & aggeres nummorum in magna copia.  
joannes Andreas in 6. de elect. & electipotest. c. fundamenta. saith, that Rome was founded by robbers, and yet retaineth a tack of her first and original qualities.  
Albericus à Rosate in verbo Roma saith, that Rome receiveth no sheep without wool, and heareth only such as give. curia Romana non petit ovem sine lana. dantes exaudit, non dantibus ostia claudit.  
joannes Petrus de Ferrar. insorm resp. rei convent. showeth that the Clergy by divers tricks ensnared the people and enlarged their jurisdiction. nota, saith he, quomodo, & quot modis isti Clerici illaqueent laicos, & suam jurisdictionem amplient.  
The Germans in their complaints exhibited to the Pope's legate, declare, that the burdens laid on them by the Romish church were urgent, intolerable, and no longer to be borne, urgentissima, atque intolerabilia, penitusque non ferenda. and lest any man might suspect their faith, they prove their allegation by a hundred particular grievances.  
Petrarch therefore doth rightly call Rome, covetous Babylon, l'auara Babylonia. and in his epistles without titles he showeth, that nothing in the Pope's court was more sought than money.  
For money the Pope dispenseth with incestuous persons, with Sodomites, with Parricides, with jews and Mahometans, and with most flagitious and wicked men, as appeareth by his penitentiary tax printed at Paris anno 1520. and found among the treatises published in divers volumes, and made by divers lawyers.  
For money he selleth sins, granteth indulgences, jubilees, cruciataes, and all manner of pardons.  
For money he promiseth heaven, and assureth his favourites of deliverance out of Purgatory.  
For money he selleth benefices and all spiritual offices. Heu Simon regnat, saith Paulus Langius in Chronico citizensi. per munera quaeque reguntur. alas Simon now sitteth as king, and all things pass for bribes. Boniface the 9 did make simoniacal compacts, first by mediators, then by himself. Primò per mediatores, deinde per semetipsum simoniam exercuit. for so saith Theodoric a Niem. l. 2. de schiss. c. 7. he saith also, that first fruits of benefices were first by him exacted and in the 8. Chap. of that book, he saith, he sold one and the same licnesica to two.  
Finally this generation taketh of quick and dead, and maketh a great revenue of public stews, and usury. the tribute of whores is a matter publicly known, and may be proved by the testimony of the gloss in c. licet. de concubine. cleric. remove. which is one of the provincial constitutions of Otho. and Agrippa de vanit. scient. c. de lenocinio. and Sansovinuo in lib. de. 1. governi de regni. c. corte de Roma, and others. the Pope's practice and gain by usury, is proved by the banks called monti di pieta, whereof mention is made by Onuphrius in divers Pope's lives. Theodoric à Niem de schism. lib. 2. c. 7. saith, that usury was so rise in Rome in the days of Boniface the 9 that it was reputed for no sin. Vsura tantum invaluit, ut foenus amplius non putaretur peccatum. Matthew Paris also in Henry the 3. doth say as much, and greatly complaineth of Roman Caursins, and usurers.  
Are not then our modern Papists simple to continue under the government of Antichrist, where they are peeled both alive and dead, and spoiled by divers frauds, and brought to extreme poverty through manifold oppressions and exactions?   

CHAP. XLI. That the Popish church hath no true Bishops, nor Priests.  
THe government of the Popish church being so burdensome and dangerous cannot well be tolerated by rules of policy. but if the same be against both scriptures and canons of the church, then as repugnant both to religion and Christian policy it is to be abandoned of all Christian commonwealths. let us then consider, what allowance it may have either of scriptures or ancient canons.  
The Apostle Act. 20. saith, that the holy ghost hath appointed Bishops to govern the Church of God. in quo vos spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos, regere ecclesiam dei, saith he, speaking of the Bishops of Asia. but the popish church hath no true Bishops. and that is proved first, for that bishops cannot be orderned but by true Bishops. but the prelates of the Romish church are ordained by the Pope, that is no Bishop. the proposition is granted. of the assumption the first part is not denied. in the second part our adversaries insist firmly and affirm the Pope to be a true bishop. but how can he be a Bishop, that neither preacheth, nor can preach, nor administereth the Sacraments, nor succeed the Apostles in their Apostolical office? the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. showeth that the office of a bishop consisteth in the work, and not in the title. qui Episcopatum desiderat bonum opus desiderat.  
Secondly antichrist can ordain no true bishops. but that the Pope is antichrist I have declared in my fist book de Pontif. Rom. and it is apparent in that he teacheth doctrine contrary to that which we have receined from Christ jesus. and is plainly described in the Revelation by the whore of Babylon Apocalyps. 17. and by the beast like a lamb rising out of the earth Apocalyps. 13. which are figures of Antichrist.  
Thirdly, none but the successors of Christ's apostles can ordain true bishops. but the Pope succeed julius Caesar, rather than Simon Peter. for Simon Peter fed Christ's flock. he murdereth Christ's lambs.  
Fourthly, neither heretics nor simoniacal persons have power to ordain bishops, as the master of the sentences lib. 4. dist. 25. proveth by the authority of Cyprian, Innocent the first, and Leo. and this is the practice of the Romish church at this day, who refuseth to allow them for bishops, that are ordered by such as they repute heretics or schismatics. some determine otherwise, but they repugn against the Romish churches practise.  
Finally, no woman can ordain bishops. but Pope joan was a woman. and therefore all ordained by her, and their successors are no bishops by the confession of the adversaries themselves.  
Howsoever it is, the Papists cannot assure themselves, that they have any bishops. for no man is ordained bishop, unless he that ordained him had an intention to order him a bishop. but of this intention no man can assure himself.  
Furthermore the Popish synagogue hath no true priests. for their priests are all ordered to sacrifice for quick and dead.  
The form of priesthood say the mass-priests assembled at Florence is this, accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vinis & mortuis. and this is proved also by their ritual books, and by Bellarmine's confession, lib. deord c. 9 but such priests were never appointed by Christ, or his Apostles. neither is there any footestep of such an ordination to be found in ancient fathers.  
Secondly, no true priests can be ordained by other, then true bishops, and the Apostles successors. but such bishops the synagogue of Rome wanteth.  
Lastly true priests and ministers of the Gospel are ordained to preach God's word truly, and to administer the Sacraments sincerely. but popish priests are not ordered to this end.  
If then that cannot be the church, that wanteth priests and bishops; then are we not to look for the true church among the papists. but Hierome in dialog. contr. Lucifer. denieth, that to be the church, that hath no priests. and Cyprian lib. 4. epist. 9 teacheth, that the church is a people or flock united to the bishop.  
Again, if all the ordination of bishops and priests in the Romish church dependeth upon the Pope, and the Pope be not mentioned either Ephes. 4. or 1. Cor. 12. where all the ministers of the church given to the same by Christ, are mentioned; then doth the ordination of Roman priests and prelate's take his beginning not from Christ, but from Antichrist.  
Lastly, if the function of mass-priests doth consist in saying Mass, and the Mass be proved to be an human invention; then is the Romish priesthood an human invention. but otherwhere we have sufficiently declared, that the Mass was by little and little peeced together, and is a mere human invention: nay an invention contrary to Christ's institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.   

CHAP. XLII. That Popery cannot be maintained without forgery and falsehood.  
THis point of itself alone would require a large discourse, if we should prosecute particularly and distinctly, whatsoever our adversaries have herein offended. for whether we respect the divers kinds of forgeries, or the places of authors forged and falsified by them, it were a great work to comprehend them all. we will therefore choose out some few examples out of many, whereby all true Christians may have cause sufficient to suspect them in the rest.  
First then we charge them with falsity, for that as much as in them lieth, they have gone about to suppress Gods eternal word comprised in the old and new testament. that this is falsity, it is apparent by the law, qui testamentum. ff. ad legem corneliam de falsis. for by that law they are condemned qui testamentum amoverint celaverint. that is, which shall amoove or conceal a testament. but the Pope and his complices forbidden expressly all translations of the new testament made by our doctors, and only grant certain translations made by themselves, and that with hard conditions: as is declared in the index of forbidden books reg. 3. and 4. but publicly they will not have scriptures red in vulgar tongues.  
Secondly they burn the holy scriptures under pretence of false translations. but the law formerly cited doth pronounce him a falsary, that shall abolish or cancel or burn a man's testament. the words of the law are these: si quis testamentum deleverit: that is, if any shall cancel a testament.  
Thirdly it is falsity to cancel, or break the seals of a testament, as the practice of the law of this land declareth. how then can the Popish synagogue of Rome excuse itself, that depriveth the lords people of the cup which our saviour Christ calleth the new testament in his blood? is not this, all one, as if the same should breaken the seals of God's testament?  
Fourthly they have added their own traditions to the old and new testament, receiving with like affection and reverence both scriptures and traditions, as they writ sess. 4. synod. tried. Bellarmine speaketh no otherwise of traditions, then as if they were the word of God not written. but to add to a man's testament is forgery. hominis testamentum saith the Apostle Galat. 3. nemo spernit aut superordinet. no man despiseth a man's testament, or taketh upon him to add unto it.  
Fiftly they have added to the canon of the old testament the books of Tobia, judith, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, the Machabies and certain fragments not extant in the original books of scriptures. but to ascribe books to the spirit of God, which were not published by the authority of God's spirit, is an audacious kind of falsity. that they are not canonical scriptures, it is proved by the testimony of the council of Laodicea, of Hierome in prologo Galeato, Athanasius in synopsi, Nazianzen in carminibus, and divers others.  
Sixtly, certain Friars anno D. 1256. in Paris, for Christ's gospel published an other gospel, which they termed eternal. fratres nova quaedam praedicabant, legebant, docebant deliramenta ex libris Ioachim abbatis, incipitque eorum liber evangelium aeternum, as Matthew Paris testifieth. but no greater falsity by men pretending Christianity can be committed, then in exhibiting a false Gospel. S. Paul Galath. 1. pronounceth such teachers accursed.  
Finally, the conventicle of Trent hath committed an egregious falsity in making the old Latin translation of the bible authentical. for the same in many places dissenteth from the original books, as by conference it appeareth, and as Isidore Clarius in his preface to the translation of the bible, Erasmus, Caietane and divers other learned interpreters confess, and declare. divers editions also of this Latin translation do much differ, as appeareth by the bibles set forth by Sixtus quintus, Clement the eight, and divers others. but that cannot be true, that discordeth with itself. quod dissonat, verum esse non potest. neither can they excuse themselves of falsity, that exhibit a false copy, for the true original, and authentical books of scriptures.  
Likewise have our adversaries corrupted and falsified both the acts of counsels, and the writings of the fathers. for first they suppress the true acts of many counsels, and the true books of many fathers, such especially as touch the authority of the bishop of Rome. Possevin in his select bibliotheke counseleth his consorts, to keep the Greek original books of counsels and fathers from the view of young students. but to suppress the depositions of witnesses all law adjudgeth falsity.  
Secondly they have set forth divers false acts and canons under the names of the Apostles, of the synod of Nice, of Rome under Silvester, of Neocesaria, Sinuessa and other synods, which themselves cannot deny to be diversly falsified. Isidore c. canon's. dist. 16. and Leo c. Clementis. dist. ead. and Gelasius c. sancta Rom. dist. 15. do number these canons among apocryphal writings. the canons themselves condemn the baptism of heretics c. 45. and once dipping in baptism c. 49. and Saterdaies fast. c. 65. and alloweth the 3. book of Maccabees, and Clement's epistles for canonical scriptures; and yet pope Adrian c. sextam synodum. dist. 16. alloweth them.  
Russin in his history, and Stephen Bishop of Rome c. viginti. dist. 16. allow only 20. canons of the council of Nice. others in c. septuaginta. ead. dist. say there are 70. one Alphonsus of Pisa of late in his sum of counsels, hath set out 80. canons of that council. Sozimus in the 6. council of Carthage was taken alleging a false canon of that council for appeals to Rome. Paschasius, or some under his name, corrupted a canon of that council, as if the same had decreed that the Church of Rome had always had the primacy. Pius the fifth in certain letters of his to the Emperor allegeth, that the council of Nice made the Pope of Rome governor of all Christian Princes. the falsification is notorious, and is extant in his letters set out by Hierome Catena.  
Of the acts of the council of Sinnessa there are 3. copies extant in Surius, and different each from other. they contradict themselves also. for where in the latter end it is said, that the first See shall not be judged of any, the fathers of that council notwithstanding condemned Marcellinus. damnaverunt eum extra civitatem.  
The acts of the counsels of Neocaesarea and Ancyra are so simple, and so repugnant to the state of those times, that blindemen, albeit void of sight, may feel them to be counterfeit. in ancient stories there is no mention of them. nay in times of persecution, and before Constantine's time it is not likely that so many bishops could meet, or would make such acts, and canons, as are imagined to be made in those counsels.  
The synod supposed to be assembled at Rome by Silvester, contemeth divers fabulous points, as namely the report of Constantine's leprosy, of Nuns professing virginity after the age of 72. years. The bishop's names are barbarous. the style is Gothike. the number of bishops there assembled is incredible. it is therefore mere impudence to affirm the acts of that synod to be authentical.  
The 18. canon of the council of Chalceden, and the 36. canon of the 6. synod that giveth equal authority to the see of Constantinople and Rome, is falsified. both by Gratian and Gregory the 13. in his new edition of the canon law. for under colour of those canons they determine quite contrary to canons, that the Church of Constantinople should not be equal to Rome.  
The fift council of Carthage c. 3. determineth that bishops, priests and deacons should abstain from their wives in the time of their turns, or service, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but the Romanistes dist. 33. c. placuit. have falsified this canon by adding subdeacons, and excluding bishops, priests, and deacons from their wives at all times.  
The council of Milevis c. 22. forbiddeth Priests, and inferior clerks to appeal to Rome. but Gratian falsifying the canon, addeth these words, nisi forte sedem Rom. appellaverint. which is direct contrary to the meaning of the council.  
In the 35. canon of the council of Laodicea the worship of Angels is termed idolatrous and expressly forbidden. but Carranza in his sum falsifieth the canon, and for Angelos, writeth Angulos.  
Bellarmine lib. 1. de sanct. beatitud. c. 19 showeth, that in latter editions of counsels his consorts have established the invocation of Saints by the 7. canon of the 6. synod. but all ancient copies declare both him and his consorts to be notorious forgers of false canons.  
It were an easy matter to show the falsehood of our adversaries in divers other canons. but the brevity of this discourse will not permit any larger number of witnesses in this point.  
Thirdly, under the names of fathers they have set out divers counterfeit treatises, and have falsely both translated the Greek fathers, and alleged both Greek and Latin writers. under the name of Clement they have published divers constitutions, and do allege them very frequently. yet doth Gelasius c. sancta. dist. 15. set a mark upon them, as Apocryphal. to him also they ascribe certain recognitions and epistles, which savour not of an apostolical spirit.  
Under the name of Origen they publish certain Commentaries upon job, which contain plain Arianisme. and his lamentation which is noted by Gelasius as Apocryphal. Tertullians' and Russins treatises are diversly cited. yet not allowed by Gelasius c. sancta Romana. dist. 15.  
Under the authority of Abdias, Martialis, Prochorus, Amphilochius, and divers ancient fathers, they cover divers of their own bastardly inventions, no way agreeing with those times.  
Cyprian is said to have written the treatise de revelatione capitis joannis, wherein mention is made of king Pipin, and a book de montibus Zion & Sinah, and divers other treatises, neither according with his phrase, nor with those times.  
Hierome is made to father a sermon de assumptione B. Mariae, a tract. de 7. gradibus ecclesiae; the rule of monks, and divers other counterfeit treatises. and yet the rule of monks is said to be collected by one Lupus in the time of Martin the fift.  
The sermons ad fratres in eremo, and divers others de tempore & sanctis, attributed to S. Augustine, are plainly counterfeit. so are his meditations also and soliloquies. in those meditations the worship of Angels is taught, which Augustine in his book de haeresib. condemneth for an heresy. in the soliloquies we read the fable of Longinus. in his manual c. 16. we read, that it is in man's power to merit the kingdom of heaven: which is plain Pelagianisme, condemned by S. Augustine. the books entitled scalae paradisi, de duodecim abusionum generibus, de vita Christiana, de assumptione beatae Mariae, and divers others of that nature set out under the name of S. Augustine, are but gross devices of slow bellied monks and friars.  
Under the name of Basil and Chrysostome, they have set out counterfeit Masses, and divers epistles, homilies and treatises, that are no where found in Greek, nor any whit savour of the divine spirit of those fathers. nay so shameless they are, that they stick not to set out Masses under the name of james and Mark.  
The like practice they have used in the works of other fathers. but to father bastards upon wrong fathers, is a notorious trick of falsity, as appeareth by the law cum suppositi. Cod. ad l. Corn. de falsis.  
By their expurgatory Indices they cause the father's writings to be changed, not only by false additions, but also by detractions. Sixtus Senensis in epist. ad Pium 5. antè biblioth. sanctam, showeth, how that Pope did handle or rather mangle and change the father's writings. expurgari & emaculari curasti, saith he, omnia catholicorum scriptorum, ac praecipuè veterum patrum scripta haereticorum aetatis nostrae faecibus contaminata & venenis infecta. so under this colour it was an easy matter to take out what he listed. In Bertram they change visibiliter into invisibiliter, and cut out whole lines and sentences. Possevin a shameless jebusite teacheth his scholars, how Hermes, Melito, Cabasilas, Anastasius, Antonius Abbas and other authors were to be corrupted and framed to his purpose.  
Fourthly they have corrupted divers laws, and some they have forged under the name of divers Emperors and Kings. under the name of Constantine the Pope challengeth a right to most kingdoms of the Western Empire. but the donation set out under his name both by testimony of learned men, and by divers arguments is proved counterfeit.  
Likewise the constitution of Ludovicus dist. 63. c. ego Ludovicus, is a plain bastard. for it contradicteth Constantine's donation, was never executed, and differeth from itself, as appeareth by the divers editions of Gratian and Volateran Geograph. lib. 3.  
The law inter Claras. Cod. de sum. Trin. & fid. cath. is not found in ancient copies, as Alciat testifieth Parerg. lib. 5. c. 23. likewise the same is disproved by divers other arguments alleged by me in a treatise of Popish forgeries and lies.  
In the Pope's archives they show a solemn donation of the crown of England, made by king john, and the state, to the Pope. but the same is clearly counterfeit, being neither executed by the king, nor allowed by the state.  
The statute anno 2. Henr. 4. c. 15. is plainly falsified by the Popish clergy in a provincial constitution made at Oxford, by adding, ac etiam communitates regni. whereas in the original role yet extant in the Tower there are no such words found. it appeareth therefore, that by forgery they have made statutes to serve their turns for the burning of Christians, and that they have murdered them hitherto contrary to form of law.  
Finally under the names of ancient bishops of Rome they have published divers counterfeit epistles differing from their form of writing in style, and containing matters not agreeing with the times, when they are supposed to be written. Clement epist. 1. writeth to james of the death of Peter, who died diverse years before Peter. and epist. 2. taketh upon him to instruct james an Apostle.  
Anacletus in his first epistle would have all matters referred to the church of Rome. but at that time the church of Rome had no such prerogative. neither was it reason, that S. john the Evangelist then living, all matters should be referred rather to Anacletus then to him. in his 2. epistle he saith, the 72. disciples were instituted by the Apostles: which the Gospel saith were appointed by Christ.  
Evaristus in his epistle talketh idly of ordaining Priests without titles, and consecrating churches, and stone altars, whereas these customs came not into the church until many years after.  
Sixtus beginneth his epistle thus, Sixtus universalis apostolicae ecclesiae episcopus. but Gregory the first long after him condemneth this title, as proud and Antichristian.  
Hyginus wrote to the Athenians. but it is not like, that a Greek, would write to Greeks' in Latin.  
Calixtus mentioneth those heretics, which denied repentance to such as fell in time of persecution. but this was the heresy of Novatus, who troubled the church long after Calixtus his time.  
Pontianus joineth Christ with Peter. but that was no style in his time.  
Marcellinus in his 2. epistle doth insinuate, that the Emperor then professed Christian religion, and disputeth against the Arians, that were not in the world in his time.  
Melchiades 12. q. 1. c. futuram ecclesiam, telleth us, how Constantine was christened, and gave his seat and other possessions to the church of Rome. and yet it is apparent, that he died before Constantine's Christening, and before any thing was given by him to the church.  
It is an easy matter to show other epistles attributed to ancient bishops of Rome to be counterfeit. but it is needless, considering how Antonius Contius in annot. ante c. viginti. dist. 16. confesseth, that all the decretals of Popes before Silvesters time are counterfeit, and saith, that he hath proved it. Multas supra in praefatione rationes adduxi, saith he, quibus omnium Pontificum, qui Siluestrum praecesserunt, decretales falsas esse manifestè ostendi. but in Plantins edition of the canon law, they have taken away this Preface, with notorious impudence covering their gross falsities.  
Thus we see, how they have forged whole books, treatises, epistles, laws & other instruments. if then they have dealt so falsely in whole instruments & books, we may not think that they are more scrupulous in adding or taking away words, or sentences, and falsifying parts. c. in canonicis. dist. 19 in the rubric they tell us, that the Pope's decretales are numbered among canonical Scriptures, and pretend Augustine's authority. but he saith no such thing, lib. 2. de doctr. Christ. c. 8. they add these words, & ab ea alij: unto the words of S. Augustine.  
Dist. 1. de consecrat. c. jacobus, they say, that james and Basil did deliver to us, missae celebrationem, that is, the form of celebrating Mass, and cite Synodum sextam, c. 32. whereas it is only said, that they taught how in the holy celebration of the Lords Supper, the cup was filled with wine and water.  
C. species. dist. 2. the consecrat. these words species & similitudo illarum rerum vocabula sunt, with the rest following are pretended to be taken ex Paschali Gregorij papae. but most falsely.  
C. utrum. de consecrat. dist. 32. these words utrum sub figura, an sub veritate hoc mysticum calicis sacramentum fiat, with all the chapter following, are alleged as spoken by S. Augustine. yet neither is the place signed, nor can those words be found in any place of S. Augustine.  
In the chapter in Christo. dist. 2. the consecrat. taken as is pretended out of Hilary lib. 8. de. trinit. these words corpus Christi quod sumitur de altari, are foisted into the text.  
Into the words of consecration of the cup they have thrust in these words, & eterni & mysterium fidei, committing falsehood in the very canon of the Mass.  
Durand Rat. divin. lib. 4. c. 4. allegeth Pope Cyprian for proof of holy water. Cyprianus Papa ait, quod ideo aqua benedicta homines asperguntur, quia valet ad sanctisicationem, saith Durand. but neither can he find a Pope of that name, nor any such words in the writings of Cyprian.  
Pius quintus in his Missal out of the 2. book of Machab. c. 12.46. writeth, Peccatis mortuorum, for peccato, and for 2. M. writeth 12. M.  
Turrecremat a lib. 2. c. 12. summae de ecclesia. maketh Chrysostome to call Peter the provost and head of his brethren, and to affirm, that they ought to preach Peter: matters never thought of by Chrysostome.  
Pope Syricius allegeth these words, S. cerdotes mei semel nubant, out of Moses. but no where in all the five books of Moses are any such words to be found. in the 3. action of the 2. synod of Nice, Basil is made to say, that the honour given to the image redoundeth to the original. but such words are no where found.  
Bellarmine's forgeries are infinite. in his 2. book de Pont. Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the words of Hierom in an epistle to Damasus writing, hanc Petram, for illam Petram. as if Hierome called Damasus the foundation of the church, where he expressly meaneth Christ the rock.  
In his book de reliquijs cap. 3. he allegeth certain obscure books and counterfeit testimonies for the proof of the worship of relics. in the same place alleging Eusebius his history lib. 4. c. 14. he maketh him say, that S. james his chain is had in great veneration. whereas he saith no such thing, but rather showeth in what honourable account holy men were holden in ancient time.  
Lib. 1. de sanct. beat. c. 13. citing Eusebius de praeparat. euangel. lib. 13. he maketh him to use these words, nos quotidie id factitamus. nam verae pietatis milites, ut dei amicissimos honoramus. whereas no such words are to be found. he saith only that Christians honour the blessed souls of such as contend for true piety.  
Lib. 2. de pont. Rom. c. 31. he falsifieth the words of the council of Chalcedon making the same to say, that Leo did preside and govern the church, as the head the members. for neither was this epistle, that is cited, the act of the council, nor is it said there, that Leo was head of the church, as Bellarmine would have it, but that he ruled his clerks, as the head the members.  
Likewise in the same book and Chapter rehearsing the titles given to the bishops of Rome, he saith, that Eusebius in his chronicle anno D. 44. doth give them the title of Pontifex Christianorum. but Eusebius doth not so much as once mention the bishops of Rome in that place.  
Lib. de monachis c. 31. he changeth Chrysostom's words in c. 19 Matth. making him to say, that it is easy to abstain from marriage, where he saith only, that it is possible. and in his book de Monachis c. 27. alleging a place out of the 15. homily of Chrysostome, upon the first to Timothy, he addeth these words, id est, Christo nubit.  
It were infinite to rehearse all the places which he hath falsified, and not necessary, considering that I have set down so many in divers treatises written against him already. the false allegations of Harding are particularly noted by bishop jewel of reverend memory. Stapleton is convinced of falsehood both by D. Fulke and D. Whitaker. of Parsons and Kellisons' forgeries and false allegations I have spoken myself somewhat largely, and shall percase have occasion to speak of them further hereafter.  
Wherefore if it be the property of heretics, and not of catholics to mangle the sentences of fathers; then Papists herein do declare themselves to be heretics and not Catholics. non convenit orthodoxis, say the fathers of the 8. council act. 8. circumtruncatas patrum voces deflorare. hareticorum hoc potius proprium est. herein therefore they shall never be able to clear themselves of a special note of heretics,   

CHAP. XLIII. That Popery cannot be well upholden without calumniations and lies.  
AS justice is accompanied with truth, so wicked causes cannot be upholden without lies and calumniations. a matter clearly verified by the practice of the papists, whose false and erromous doctrine is built upon lies and calumniations, as upon two pillars. by their calumniations they seek to bring good men into obloquy and hatred, by lies they would willingly grace their own false religion, and bring a scandal upon the truth.  
To make proof hereof we need not to go farther, then to their wicked libels lately published against Luther, Caluin, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Beza, and all that have been actors in the defence of truth, to the lying traditions, and legends of the synagogue of Rome, to the feigned miracles of supposed Romish saints, to the Pope's decretals and decrees, and to the divers treatises set forth of late time in defence of their faction and heresy.  
Against Luther they have hired one Staphilus a rinegat Christian, and Cochleus a fellow not worth a cochle shell to speak as much shame, as their malicious wits could devise. from these two Surius, Laingeus, Stapleton, and all the kennel of curs let lose to bark against him, have borrowed the subject of their slanders. if any thing more be objected by later libelers, that proceedeth of late invention. Bellarmine de notis ecclesiae & in praefat. de Christo, and others charge him with teaching that Christ suffered according to his divinity. he in his book de concilijs, from whence the ground of this slander is taken, saith only, that he had to do with certain Nestorians, which denied that the divinity could suffer. so it appeareth these words were the Nestorians. and Luther disputing against them showeth, that the person of Christ consisting of two natures could and did suffer. and if he did say, the divinity did suffer, he took the word of the nature for the person, as ancient fathers, and namely Vigilius contra Eutychem have done. Vigilius saith, the divinity of Christ was nailed with nails, consixa clavis.  
Campian rat. 8. Bellarmine in praefat. in controvers. de Christo, charge Luther to have said, that his soul hated this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. which is a mere slander. he saith only, if he should hate the word, and believe the thing defined in ancient counsels, that he should not therefore be an heretic.  
Bellarmine lib. 4. de ecclesia militant c. 13. Cregorius de Valentia, and others say, that Luther learned of the devil, that the Mass was nought. but Luther hath no such words. he saith only, that the devil went about to make him despair having so long said Mass, which long before he had learned to be nought.  
Others add, that in a certain disputation at Lipsia, Luther should say, that the contention begun by him against popish abuses, was neither begun for God's honour, nor would end for God's honour. but wickedly that which Luther spoke of his adversaries, that for to please the Pope, took up the bucklers against him, they apply to Luther himself, and his own actions.  
Some say, that he taught, if the wife refuse, the husband may go in to his maid, whereas he declareth only how husbands use to threaten their froward wives, not commending either any such act, or threats.  
His life is traduced by them commonly, as if he were given to wine. but not only all that knew him, and speak indifferently, testify the contrary, but also Erasmus his adversary, that had reason to reprove him, if there had been cause. Lutheri vita omnium consensu probatur, saith Erasmus in ep. ad Thomam Card. Eboracensem. id non leave praeiudicium est, tantam esse morum severitatem. Luther's life is approved by consent of all, and that is no small prejudice, that such is the sincerity of his manners, that his enemies can not find what to calumniate.  
Finally they object, that endeavouring to cast out a devil he was evil entreated by the party possessed, and that going to bed merry he died the same night. but the first is refuted by Luther's doctrine, who commonly taught, that Christian doctrine is not now to be confirmed by miracles. the second is a slander falsely devised by such, as neither were at Luther's death, nor desirous to understand the truth. Sleidan lib. 16. reporteth, that he was long sick before, and that feeling his sickness to grow extreme, he called his friends, and spending his time in prayer & pious exhortations quietly departed this life. and this is also confirmed by Melancthon in Luther's life, and was testified by all that were present at his end.  
The principal libeler that undertook to rail against Caluin was Bolsec a rinegat friar. who having either himself written, or suffering others to publish divers impudent slanders in his name, did in a public synod in France retract the same. but his recantation they regard not: his first malicious reports they wilfully embrace. Campian rat. 8. chargeth Caluin with saying, that God is the author of sin. but his words instit. lib. 1. c. 18. do evidently discharge him. flagitiorum causa extra humanam voluntatem quaerenda non est, saith he.  
Bellarmine lib. de notis eccles. c. 9 telleth us, how Caluin taught, that hell was nothing else, but the horror of conscience. but no such words could ever yet be found in Caluin. he saith that the horror of conscience is a part of hellish pains: but that Hell should be nothing else, he never said, nor thought.  
Caluin is also charged for speaking contumeliously against Saints, and calling them shadows, monsters, and such like names. but he is much wronged. for either he spoke of Christopher, and Catherine and such like forged Saints, or of Dominick, Medard and such like superstitious fellows, who are rather for their cruelty and other vices to be hated, then honoured for any holiness.  
Possevin lib. 3. de notis verbi dei c. 74. chargeth Caluin with atheism for teaching, that the son of God was God of himself or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but Bellarmine excuseth him, and dischargeth him, confessing he said well, if he spoke of the son in respect of his divine essence.  
The Rhemists in their annotations on the 5. to the Hebrews affirm, that Caluin taught that Christ despaired. and the same slander was also bruited abroad by Campian Rat. 8. but never did any such words pass from his mouth, or his pen. and if the Papists will not believe me, let them believe Bellarmine, who lib. 4. de Christo c. 8. expressly affirmeth that Caluin saith, that Christ despaired not. Calumus dicit, saith he, Christum non desperasse.  
Others give out, that he was convicted of Sodomy, and burned on the back for his offence at Noyon. but the notorious wickedness of those that first devised this slander may be refuted by divers plain arguments. first Sodomites are not burned on the back in France, but burned at a stake. secondly never was he convented before any judge either for that or other matter. Lastly, the sincerity of his life repugneth to such beastliness. neither was it like, that he would have so violently pursued the Romanists for their unnatural abominations, unless he had been clear of all suspicion in that behalf.  
Bellarmine lib. 4. de eccles. c. 14. saith that Caluin went about to work a miracle by compact with one Bruley. but he showeth himself therein miraculously impudent. for in the same chapter he confesseth, that Calum in the preface to his Institutions should complain, that wrong was offered christians by those, that required miracles at their hand, seeing they taught the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, which was confirmed by innumerable miracles. further it is a shameless trick to allege the testimony of Bolsec who was hired to write, what he could, against Caluin.  
Finally Bellarmine and Coster say, that Calum was eaten up with louse, and died blaspheming and calling upon the devil. a devilish slander refuted by Galasius, Beza and the public testimony of the city of Geneva. a little before his death, say they, he called his fellow ministers unto him, exhorted them with many words full of piety and affection, and departed this life rather like to one falling a sleep, then dying.  
Beza is charged for affirming, that Christ had two hypostases or personal subsistences. but his adversaries deal with him calumniously. for he confesseth and teacheth, that Christ was one person, albeit the same Christ was very God and very man, the two natures being united in one person, and the soul and the body being united in one man.  
Fevardentius in jacob 3. and Stapleton in prompt. hebdom. 3. quadrages. and others rail at Beza for his verses, which he made being a young man. But Beza did first condemn those verses himself, as being made while he was an impure Papist. and yet compare them with the Italian rhymes, that are every where extant, and with the verses of Casa and other Italians, they may seem modest and chaste in respect.  
Finally of late time the shameless jebusites of France published a pamphlet of Bezaes' recantation, and reconciliation to the Pope fraught with divers lies. but Beza himself refused their impudent lies, and now the Papists themselves selves will not deny, but that this was a lying and impudent pamphlet.  
This is also the practice of Papists from time to time, to slander and to belly the servants of God. In the 8. session of the conventicle of Constance the Massepriestes charge Wicklesse, that he taught, that God must obey the devil. a matter no where sound either in terms, or in sense in his writings. they said also, how he taught, that Princes being in mortal sin are not to be obeyed. his drift was only to show, that prelate's living loosely were unworthy of their places, albeit he did not detract from the efficacy of sacraments ministered by them. the right of kings against the usurpations of the Clergy he stoutly maintained.  
In the same wicked assembly john Husse was accused, that he taught, that there was a fourth person besides the trinity, and that he called Gregory a rymer, neither did it avail him, that he denied these accusations most constantly. for his accusers were heard, and his defences little regarded. he was also most falsely charged with driving the Germans out of the university of Prague: whereas it was proved, that the Germans did voluntarily departed thence, for that they pretended their ancient privileges to be infringed.  
Against Bucer they give out, that dying he turned jew; and blasphemed the name of Christ. a matter devised without proof or probability, and convinced by all that were present with him at his death.  
Grineus was present at the end of Oecolampadius, and testified, that he died most quietly, godly and christianly. and with him concurreth Wolfangus Capito. yet are not the Papists ashamed to give forth, that the Devil strangled him. of whom I would but ask only one question, to wit, who these witnesses were, that saw the Devil committing this act?  
Our English Papists seek matter to object against bishop jewel of reverend memory, but find none. only they tell us divers false allegations are found in his books. but all their accusations are answered, and rest so without reply, although the shameless adversaries desist not to allege matters divers times answered. they say further, that D. Stephens, and William Raynolds were converted to Popery by reading his books. but the first was a simple fellow, and drawn away with hope, the second ran away forced by despair.  
Against Bishop Granmer they have denised divers slanderous tales, as if he were unlearned, inconstant, and carried about his wise in a trunk. but for the first his learned writings and disputes will testify, that it is untruth. furthermore, very unlike it is, that he should have been employed in so great affairs, if he had not been singularly learned. his constancy appeareth in his continual travails against the Pope's authority and Popish errors. the last is an improbable tale devised by some standrous Popish parasite. and well deserve they to be cased in cloke-bagges, that do believe it. for he had sent his wife away before into Germany. and had he not, yet this devise is improbable, if not impossible.  
, Rishton, Stapleton, Parsons, and their pewfellows have published divers slanders against king Henry the eight, Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory, and divers of their loyal subjects. but it is not to be marveled, if fugitives and traitors rail against their Princes, and all that favour the state.  
The unwritten traditions of the Synagogue of Rome are nothing but lies devised, and falsely fathered upon the Apostles, and their successors. Bellarmine de verb. dei lib. 4. c. 3. esteemeth the canon of the Mass to be a tradition. yet was the same denised since the Apostles times. and is not found in that form of Mass, which is in the old Romish ordinal. in the Apostles time certes Christians neither prayed for Popes, nor for Emperors. nor did Cosmas and Damianus and other Saints, mentioned in the canons, live in the times of the Apostles, or their next successors.  
Innocent the third c. cum Marthae. de celebratione missar. determineth, that these words of the canon, tum levauit oculos in caelum ad patrem, and mysterium sidei, and such like not mentioned in the gospel, are receined from Christ by tradition. but of his assertion he allegeth no proof. neither can he show reason, why Christ should omit words now reputed so necessary.  
The worship of Images in the second council of Nice is called an Apostolic tradition. yet never do we read, that any Apostle, or Apostolic man did teach it. Nay the law of God doth expressly forbid the making of all Images or similitudes, to the end they should be worshipped.  
Some say, that prayers and sacrifices for the dead are confirmed by Apostolic traditions. yet our Saviour showeth, that we are to work, while we have light, and appointed the eucharist to be received of the communicants, and not to be offered for quick and dead.  
The kissing of the altar, and blessing of incense, mass-priests do believe to be commanded by tradition. from the same fountain do issue the washings of hands, turnings of the Priest, the swinging of the chalice here and there, the adoration of the host, the pompous perambulation of the host in the pyx, and other ceremonies of the mass. but these traditions are founded upon lies and fables, and are partly jewish, partly Heathenish, and all of them mere human inventions and devices. nay some of them are fond and ridiculous, as the kissing of stones and stocks; some repugnant to scriptures, as the adoration of the sacrament, with that honour, that is due to God.  
In the missal salt is exorcized for the salvation of such as believe, and water is hallowed for the driving away of the power of the enemy. for the same end also candles are blessed. but that these creatures have these effects, we do not learn, but out of lying traditions, and the authors of them.  
From traditions also the bishops suffragan doth challenge power to baptise bells. and bells so baptised say they, do drive away devils. this is recorded by Martinus de Arles tractat. de superstit. number. 3.9. & 14. and of this abuse the Germans complain in their grievances.  
Agnus dei, as the Papists feign, doth purge sins as well, as the blood of Christ. but this is a lying tradition, and contrary to scripture. for there we learn that sins are purged not by lambs of wax, but by the blood of Christ, the immaculate lamb, that taketh away the sins of the world.  
Such are also the rest of those Romish traditions, which the conventicle of Trent maketh equal to holy scriptures.  
The legends contain more lies than leaves. for proof I report me to the legends of S. George, S. Christopher, S. Catherine, S. Margaret, and the rest. S. George bade the King's daughter of Silena to cast her girdle about the Dragon's neck. which she did, and the dragon followed her like a gentle dog. sequebatur eam, velut mansuetissmus canis. when S. George was put into a frying pan full of boiling lead, making the sign of the cross, he was therein refreshed, as if he had been in a bath. coepit in eo quasi in balneo refoveri.  
S. Christopher's staff being pitched into the ground began to bear leaves, and 8. M. men presently believed in Christ, saith james de voragine. he telleth further, how divers arrows being shot at S. Christopher did still float in the air, and could not come at him: and that one arrow among the rest leapt back and stroke out King Dagnus his cie. matters very improbable, and to say no more, not found in any authentical history.  
Catherine King Costus his daughter, being but 18. years of age is said to have been learned in all liberal sciences. in the legend also we read, how Maxentius the emperor would have forced her to sacrifice to the Gods, and for that purpose prepared a wheel, which was turned by an Angel with such violence, that it killed 4000 gentiles. it is said also, that she converted the Empress, and one of the Emperor's chief captains called Porphyrius. matters contrary to all stories, and not only not spoken of in histories.  
S. Margaret was swallowed of the devil in the figure of a Dragon. but making the sign of the cross the Dragon burst, and out came S. Margaret safe and sound, as we read in the legend. it is there said also, that she took the devil by the hair of the head, and bet him. but how these lies may be believed, that is the question.  
S. Francis, as Bonaventure and Bartholomew de Pisa recount, was divers times taken up into the air, called wolves his brethren, and swallows his sisters, and had the marks of Christ imprinted in his hands, feet, and sides. and these fables the Romanists believe.  
Speculum exemplorum dist. 7. c. 41. telleth how friar Leo saw two ladders reaching from the earth to heaven, and that Christ sat at the top of the one, and threw down all the Friars, that came that way, but that our lady, that sat at the top of the other, received all that came that way.  
Caesarius Hesterbach lib. 7. c. 35. telleth, that a nun called Beatrix, ran away with her lover, and lived certain years in a public bordello. yet because she served our lady devoutly, it is said, that our lady supplied her place, and was taken for Beatrix all the time of her absence, and in the end procured her as good grace in the nunnery, as any of her fellows.  
Thus the Papists can confirm any point of their doctirne with leasings. infinite such like leasings are contained in the legends.  
The miracles reported in the legends are nothing but miraculous lies.  
Alexius stayed so long in the church porch, that the image of our lady spoke, and bad the sexton let him in, as we read Lombard leg. 89.  
S. Christina being placed upon a wheel by her own father, and having fire kindled under her; and oil cast upon it, for her further torment, the legend saith that the flame breaking out burnt 1500. men. there also we read, how Christ descending took her to himself, and baptised her in the sea, and that having her tongue cut out, she spoke notwithstanding, and that her breasts being cut milk issued out for blood. lo I pray you a maid, that gave milk.  
When Eustachius a soldier sometimes of Traian's followed a heart, it is said, that the heart standing still Eustachius saw a crucifix between the heart's horns, which spoke to him through the heart's mouth, and asked him, why he did follow that heart. it is reported also in the legend, that being put into a bull of Brass burning red hot he continued there 3. days without hurt.  
S. Brice being accused to be father of a base child, he caused the same child not being yet 30. days old, to confess, that Brice was not his father. he did also carry hot coals in his bosom without burning his flesh, or clothes.  
Our English Saints also wrought great and strange miracles, if we may believe Capgrave. S. Aidus espying 8. wolves, that were fore hungered, gave them 8. lambs of mere compassion. afterward being sorry for the loss of his lambs, he prayed and had the same 8. lambs safe and sound out of the wolves belly. when wild beasts were hardly pursued, they came to him, as to a sanctuary.  
S. Adrian being called upon by a boy, that was beaten, the master's hand was stayed in the air, and could no more touch him.  
S. Dunstane being in his mother's womb, as is said, wrought miracles, lighting, and putting out all the candles in the church. being a man he took the Devil by the nose, as he looked in at a window, at the least, as we read in the legend.  
S. Eanswide perceiving a piece of timber to be too short for the work, where she would employ it, drew it out to a just length by prayer. the same saint caused also water to run up a mounteine.  
S. Goodric with the sign of the cross tamed wolves and serpents, in such sort that they lay with him by the fire side without offering any hurt.  
I cannot stand long to recount many of this kind of lying miracles. neither shall I greatly need to rehearse more, seeing these do show how much our adversaries rely upon lies.  
Neither do Popes or their agents abstain from lying. In the 3. book of Gregory's dialogues we read, how a bear was commanded to keep the Hermit Florence's sheep. I doubt whether ever Gregory told any such fable. it was sure some later Pope.  
Innocentius in the Chap. quis nesciat. dist. 11. telleth us, that none founded churches in Italy, France, Spain, Africa and Sicily, but those whom Saint Peter and his successors made priests, and that none taught in those countries beside S. Peter and such as he sent. a lie directly repugnant to Scriptures, which testify, that S. Paul preached in those countries being appointed by God thereto, and not by man; and refuted by divers ancient histories and fathers, who writ, that divers others preached there beside S. Peter's priests and messengers. S. Augustine epist. 162. showeth, that the Gospel came into afric out of other countries, than those that belonged to the church of Rome.  
Gregory the 4. c. in praeceptis. dist. 12. saith, that all bishops causes, and the discussing of matters of religion belongeth to the See of Rome, and that religion took her beginning from thence. a matter apparently false. for religion began at Jerusalem, and not at Rome, and Counsels in ancient time determined the differents in causes of Religion, and not the bishop of Rome, who was as well subject to the decision of the general council, as other bishops.  
Anacletus c. in novo. dist. 21. saith, that the rest of the Apostles made Peter their Prince. which is contradicted by the Papists themselves, that derive Peter's authority from Christ.  
Nicolas dist. 22. c. omnes, telleth us, that Christ gave to Peter the right of the kingdom both of heduen and earth. but of this earthly kingdom belonging to Peter, this is the first man that ever told news.  
Anacletus dist. 22. c. sacrosancta. affirmeth, that both Peter and Paul were crowned with martyrdom in one day, and at the some time. but this leasing is refuted by Prudentius peri stephan. Hymno 12. Arator in act. Apost. lib. 2. Augustine serm. 18. de sanctis, and others.  
Innocent the 4. c. ad apostolicae. de sent. & re judicat. affirmeth, that Sicily is the special patrimony of Peter. est speciale patrimonium Petri. but no where do were read, where either Christ gave, or Peter claimed this patrimony.  
Clement the fifth c. Romani. Clem. de jure iurando. most boldly and impudently writeth, that Emperors having the crown set upon their heads swear fealty to the Pope. a matter certes, which Bellarmine the Pope's proctor would blush to affirm. for albeit he would willingly gratify the Pope  any thing, yet dare he not say, that the Roman Empire is holden in fee of the Pope. and thus the Popes run on headlong heaping privileges on Rome, and building the tower of Babel by lies.  
The same is also practised by Bellarmine, as I have showed in divers discourses written against him; by Baromus, as my special exceptions taken to his volumes fraught with lies and fables, do declare; by Parsons and Kellison as by my answers to their books it may appear.  
Turrecremata lib. 3. sum. c. 9 affirmeth, that Helena and 3000. Iewes were converted to Christian religion in a council at Rome under Silvester: but other more true stories report, that she was alwares a Christian, and holp to convert her son Constantine.  
Lib. 2. sum. c. 300. he saith, that Paul did some things, which he afterward retracted. quaedam fecit, quae postea revocavit.  
The Emperor Henry the fourth by the Romanists is most unjustly standred, as if he had prostituted his own wife to his son, and done other such like abominable acts. matters merely devised by the Pope's agents.  
Fridericke the 2. was a most noble Prince and greatly praised by the Cardinal of Cusa, Aegidius Romanus, and others. yet was he most unjustly reviled and standred by Gregory the 9 Innocent the 4. and their agents, as it doth appear by the testimony of Matthew Paris in Henrico 3.  
Capgrave telleth, how a hundred and fifty of joseph of Arimathaea his company sailed out of France into great Britain upon josephes' shirt: a small barge certes for so many passengers.  
Antoninus hist. part. 3. reporteth, how an innumerable troop of the order of Dominske were seen in heaven covered under the blessed virgin's gown.  
Stapleton in his prompruarie dominica 2. adventus broacheth us a barrel of lies. first he saith, that Sebastian a certain musician was put in prison for demanding liberty of conscience, by the last Queen; and that one Gifford was imprisoned by her likewise, for the same cause after he had entertained the Queen very bountifully at his house; and that Shelley was committed for presenting a request in the behalf of the papists. matters merely imagined and devised by lying companions; and foolishly reported by him. the two first we cannot learn ever to have been committed. the third was imprisoned for plain treason.  
The Papists accused the people of Zuricke for teaching, that the virgin Mary had more sons then one, and that james died for them, as we may read in Sleidan lib. hist. 4. and Bellarmine lib. 4. de iustific. c. 1. saith, we little regard good works, and lib. 2. de amiss. great. c. 1. he accuseth the Albrgians, as they are called, and Caluin for holding the error of the Manichecs; which they always renounced and detested. In his bo●ke de Matrimonio c. 2. he blusheth not to charge them, whom he calleth Lutherans, and Caluinists with holding, that matrimony is not of God. a point expressly denied by them.  
Finally it is an easy matter to show, that the foundation of Popery is laid upon lies, and that the charge, which Papists give upon their adversaries, is ordinarily enforced by most wicked imputations and standers.   

CHAP. XLIIII. That the cause of Popery is maintained by fire and sword.  
Much are simple people abused by calumniations devised against good men, and hardly are Christians able to discern falsehood from truth, and to judge what is truly alleged, what falsely, until such time as matters be duly examined. yet neither can truth be utterly suppressed, nor do lies pass always for good payment. Those therefore, whom they cannot abuse with lies, and false allegations, the Pope and his complices seek cruelly to destroy with fire and sword.  
The holy Ghost Apocalyps. 17. showeth us, that the purple whore should be drunk with the blood of the saints. and Apocalyp. 13. that the 2. beast should kill such, as would not worship the image of the beast, that is, that the Pope should persecute to the death such as would not submit themselves to the kingdom of Antichrist, in which the image of the Roman Empire was after a sort revived. and this we see verified by experience in the cruel government of the Popes of Rome and their adherents.  
Their laws against all such as dissent from them in opinion concerning the sacraments are most rigorous. they are degraded, and delivered over to the secular power to be burned, as it appeareth by the law ad abolendam. de haereticis. nay they punish such as are suspected, if they cannot clear themselves, with no less rigour than the rest. all that communicate with them, receive them, or succour them, are in great danger. such as give them counsel are reputed infamous, as is determined c. si adversus. de haereticis. the goods of heretics are adjudged confiscate. neither are they punished only while they live, but also after their death, being deprived of the communion of Christians, and of burial. Alexander the 4. c. quicunque haereticos. de haereticis in 6. excommunicateth, and depriveth of Christian burial all such, as go about to bury heretics, or their favourers. neither do they admit the repentance of such as are adjudged relapsed, but deliver them over to be burnt by their executioners, as we may read in the chapter super co. de haereticis. in 6.  
The spanish inquisition is yet more rigorous, than the former laws of Popes. for upon any wicked or lewd fellows accusation an honest man may be attached, imprisoned, tortured, and, if he acquit himself not the better, either famished in prison, or burnt most cruelly.  
And by these laws we find, that infinite Christians have been done to death in Spain, Italy, France, Flanders, England, Scotland, Germany and other Christian countries. Meterage in his history of the troubles of the low countries reporteth, that fifty thousand persons were executed by the acts of judges and inquisitors in the low countries, during the reign of Charles the fift. In England during the times of Queen Mary, they spared neither old nor yongue, noble nor base, learned nor unlearned. nor did they respect either sex of women, or the simplicity of the common sort.  
Pius quintus testifieth, that Philip the 2. spared not his own and only son Charles, being accused by the inquisitors. in the days of Gregory the 13. a gentleman of Valedolid in Spain cut wood, and set fire to burn two of his own daughters condemned for the Gospel, in that country called heresy. and if king Henry the 8. had lived longer, it is thought the Papists would have persuaded him not to have spared his Queen. so cruel was the Popish faction in prosecuting the innocent. nay if either Queen Mary had longer lived, or Popery longer reigned in England, this bloody crew had caused the daughter to disenterre her own father, and to burn his bones, as some have reported.  
Sometime without form of law they murder infinite numbers of innocent persons, for the least suspicion of doctrine contrary to the opinions of the church of Rome. for this cause Innocent the 3. and his successors proclaimed open war against the Albigians and Valdensians, and ceased not until he had destroyed all, that durst manifestly oppose themselves unto their heresy and tyranny.  
In Bohemia they had not the like success, their armies being often overthrown by the poor people of the country, which defended their lives against their cruelty. but never did they cease to persecute that nation.  
Paul the 3. sent great forces into Germany, seeking by the arms of Charles the fift, to re-establish his antichristian kingdom in that country. the same Pope stirred up rebels both in England and Ireland against Henry the 8. that had shaken off his heavy yoke.  
Pius the fift in his Bull commanded Queen Elizabeth's subjects to rebel against her, and raised many troubles both in England and Ireland, seeking to overthrow the state, if he could. the same man not prevailing by intestine sedition, sought to set both French and Spanish upon the English, as we may read in his life written by Hicrome Catena.  
In the times of Gregory the 13. that bloody massacre, that for ever shall make Papists insamous, was committed in France. Natalis Comes histor. lib. 23. testifieth, that sixty thousand persons were massaacred, at that time. Circiter sexaginta hominum millia, saith he, varijs in locis per illud tempus trucidata suisse dicta sunt in Gallia. and so extreme was their cruelty, that like bloody wolves, they neither spared sex, nor age, nor quality. vel puberes, vel impuberes, saith he, trucidati sunt, neque ullius sexits, vel aetatis, vel dignitatis habita est ratio.  
Anno 1588. they brought upon England great forces, with fire and sword, seeking the utter subversion of this kingdom. but the Lord from heaven blew upon his enemies, and dispersed them.  
In France they conspired against the king, and bound themselves by oath to exclude the house of Bourbon from the right of the crown, and to root out all that should speak against the Pope, & his erroneous doctrine, and for that cause raised great tumults and stirs, as we may read in the memorial of the league.  
The like course for many years have they taken in the Low countries, where the strength of Italy and Spain hath been consumed, and a way made for the good success of the common enemy of Christendom the Turk.  
Finally the Popes and their emissaries the jebusites do delight in nothing more than in tumults, wars, seditions, massacring, and shedding of the blood of innocent Christians. The massacre of Paris is painted in the Pope's palace, as a matter, wherein he taketh chief delight.  
The jebusites, albeit once banished out of France, cease not to sound the alarm against such, as are opposite to their faction.  
Andrea's Fabritius in praefat. in harmony. August. confess. set out 1576. speaking to the Emperor exhorteth him to gird his soured upon his thigh, and to subdue heretics, the most pernicious enemies of Christians. accingatur gladio suo super femur potentissimus imperator, haereticos, & christiani nominis pernitiosissimos hostes sub jugum mittat. Pius Quintus, as we may read in his life, exhorted his Italian troops, that went into France against them of the religion, to kill all, and to take none alive. Possevinus also a choleric jebusite in a treatise entitled ill soldato Christiano, speaking unto the same soldiers affirmeth, that it is their duty to kill all professing our religion, or otherwise, that they shall betray their faith, and lose all hope of salvation.  
In England of late, perceiving themselves to be too weak to prevail by plain force, certain undermining Papists set on and resolved by fiery jebusites and murderous mass-priests, conceived such a treason, as cannot be sampled by any former precedent, nor found described in any old or new history. their intention was at one instant with fire and gunpowder to consume the King, the Queen, the Prince, the Prelates of the Church, the Nobles, Knights, and Burgesses of the realm, the judges and all that attended the honourable court of Parliament. nay not content herewith they had a further practice to destroy the King's royal lineage, to massacre all the professors of religion throughout the kingdom, and to deliver their country as a pray into the hands of Strangers. The principal actors were Thomas Percy, Catesby and Fauxe: the principal counsellors Garnet, Hall, Baldwin, and divers other of the damned crew of jebusites; their aiders the damned crew of reconciled recusants.  
Can we then think these men to belong to Christ's flock, that use this wolvish cruelty? longè diversasunt carnisicina & pietas, saith Lactantius, nec potest aut veritas cum vi, aut institia cum crudelitate coniungi. that is, piety and butcherly cruelty are two divers things, and neither can truth with force, nor justice be coupled with cruelty. Matthew Paris showeth, that in the times of Innocent the third, Christians were accused by a writing sent from heaven for showing no pity upon widows and orphans, and showing less mercy, than did the pagans. viduae & orphani ad vos clamant quotidie, saith that writing, quibus nullam facitis miscricordiam. pagani habent misericordiam, at vos non habetis. but much more reason have we to use these words to the modern jebusites and their complices. for they are more merciless than Turks. the Turks suffer Christians to enjoy their religion, and these do not. therefore the Italians, as Natalis Comes in his history testifieth, say, it is better to live under the Turk, then under the Spaniards and Pope's inquisitors. and for this cause the kingdom of Hungary, and principality of Transiluania hath chosen rather to seek for succour at the hands of Turks, then to endure the cruel and treacherous executions of the Pope, and his bloody inquisitors. up then o Lord and scatter these thy bloody enemies, that seek to scatter and massacre the sheep of thy pasture, and let not those prevail any further, that make wars against the Lamb, and all that follow him, and constantly profess his truth these wolves have conspired and sworn the destruction of the professors of religion. At Bayon anno 1585. a league was concluded betwixt France, Spain and other Princes. the articles were these, as is evident by the French histories. The Spanish king shall war upon the king of Navarre. the dukes of Ferraria and Savoy with the aid of Germane horsemen shall translate the wars into France. the Germans shall hinder all succour to come to them of the religion. the Cantons of Suizzerland, that adhere to the Pope, shall oppress the other Cantons. Monks shall give their names for soldiers. and all shall endeavour to kill the Lutherans. so you see, that the final end of their designs is murder and cruelty. their means, fire, sword and gunpowder their contentment waste and desolation.  
What reason then have Christians to slug and sleep when danger is so near them? do they think, that papists want gun powder, or poison, or that they will not hurt if they recover strength? as well they may think, that wolves will cease from cruelty, and Serpents cast away their poison, and tyrants prove gentle foster fathers, and Turks turn Christians.  
Nay such Princes as are not Papists, are not much to trust them, if they satisfy not the Pope's will in all things. Gregory the 7. killed and empoisoned all, that were opposite to his deseings. he excommunicated the emperor Henry the fourth, because he would not suffer him quietly to sell ecclesiastical prelacies. his successors made wars upon Henry the sift, Fridericke the 1. Philip, Otho and Fridericke the 2. for that they could not be suffered to dispose of the lands of the Empire. Lewis of Bavier was persecuted for no other cause, then for that he would not receive his crown at the Pope's hands. for this cause also Harold King of England became enemy of the Clergy, because he took the crown, before it was delivered by Popish prelate's. Philip the fair King of France was persecuted by Boniface the 8. for that he would not acknowledge himself to be the Pope's subject. and yet did they not know any other religion, then that, which the Pope then professed.  
Finally Henry the 3. of France, albeit superstitiously addicted to popery, yet could he not escape the butcherly hands of the popish leaguers, that suborned a Dominican Friar to kill him, for that he would not at their appointment make wars upon his subjects.  
To conclude therefore this point, there is no way of security for Christians against the Pope's cruelty and his adherents practices, then manfully to resist their usurpations, warily to take heed of their mines and gunpowder, and never to trust their sweet words and guileful promises. with clemency they are not to be mitigated; but with resolution and justice they may easily be subdued.   

CHAP. XLV. That the practices, and treaties of Popes and their complices with Christians, are not to be trusted.  
THe Prophet describing a wicked man saith, he laid hands on such as were at peace with him, and broke his covenant. Among heathen people the Thracians were very infamous for breaking their oaths and promises. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was in times past a common proverb. but neither among heathen people, nor among such as profess to know God, do we read of any more foedifragous' or perjurious sect, than the Popes of Rome and their complices.  
Others percase break both oaths and promises. but no man in time passed ever taught, that faith and oaths given to others ought to be broken, as do the Romanistes. in the conventicle of Constance they not only made void the emperors charter of faseconduct given to john Husse, but also by public act determined, that saith was not to be holden with heretics.  
They absolve subjects from their oaths of allegiance, which as Sigebert in his Chronicle saith, savoureth of heresy. Pius quintus not only absolved the late Queen's subjects from their allegiance, but also denounced them excommunicate, that continued firm in their allegiance.  
julius the second went one point further, and disputed, that the church was not bound with oaths, as Guicciardine in his history reporteth. now every man knoweth, that by the church he understood the Pope.  
With this wicked doctrine their execrable practice very well accordeth. Gregory the 7. by a public sentence of a synod was declared perjured.  
Paschal the 2. confirmed certain covenants betwixt himself and the Emperor by solemn charters, seals and oaths: literis, sigillis, inramentis, saith Otho Frising●nsis lib. 7. but immediately he broke all.  
Fridericke the 2. as Matthew Paris testifieth, accused Gregory the 9 for teaching perfidiousnes and perjury. quod persidiam & periurium doceret. and yet his disciples hold, that the Pope, when he teacheth, cannot err in matters of faith.  
Gregory the 12. as Theodoricke a Niem tract. unionis 6. c. 29. writeth, was charged to be a public forsworn person, and by him called periurus publicus. lib. 3. de schism. c. 3. he saith, he deceived the world with his oaths and vows. votis & iuramentis suis decepit mundum. likewise he saith tract. 6. c. 39 unionis. that Innocentius would not admit the union of the Papacy, albeit he had before vowed, and sworn to do it. Charles the French King chargeth both him and Peter de Luna with breaking their oaths, as Theodoric a Niem writeth tract. nemoris unionis lib. 6. c. 14.  
The Bohemians for this  dealing of the Pope's complices would not come to the council of Basil without good pledges.  
Alexander the 6. was more perfidious, than any Carthagigian, as in his life Onuphrius testifieth. perfidia plus quàm punica.  
When julius the third was in petition, he swore both to the French and Spanish, as is testified in Pelegrino Inglese, but performed neither to the one nor to the other.  
The mass-priests of Trent promised safeconduct to all that would come to Trent. but contrary to the same, Vergerius and others were excluded out of the synod, and divers doctors coming out of Germany, could not be heard to dispute, and hardly escaped with their lives out of the place.  
Charles the 9 of France, anno 1572. with monstrous oaths and solemn promises, drew the Queen of Navarre, the admiral and many other noblemen and gentlemen unto Paris. but it cost them full dear, and lost them all their best men. for there that noble Queen was poisoned, there the king of Navarre was taken prisoner, and the rest treacherously murdered. and so far was the Pope from condemning this fact, that he caused the same to be set out in tables in his palace among the triumphant acts of Popes.  
In France and Flanders upon surrenders of towns seldom did our adversaries regard either oath, or promise. divers edicts have been published by the French king for the pacification of troubles, but they proved nothing, but traps and engines to take men, that meant simply and plainly. the capitulation with them of Sancerre, was megerly performed. The duke of Alva and his complices contrary to promise murdered the garrison of Arlem, Narden, Zutphen, and divers other towns.  
Of late we thought ourselves secure, having peace with all the world. but even then we were nearest danger, and could not have escaped it, if God had not discovered the mine, the powder, the train, and the whole pack of traitors.  
In the year 1588. while the agents of Spain and England were treating of peace, the enemies came upon us, hoping suddenly to overwhelm us with wars being taken unprovided.  
No treaty could be more solemnly agreed upon, or confirmed, than the pacification of Gant, after the surprise of Antwerp. yet was neither promise nor oath kept therein; but rather under confidence of these promises and oaths, many poor people were surprised.  
First then we say, that our hope is, that God will destroy them that speak lies, and not hold them guiltless, that shall swear falsely, dishonouring his holy name. this we are assured, that he abhorreth the bloody and deceitful man.  
Secondly, we may rightly conclude, that such as look for performance of oaths and promises at the hands of the Pope and his complices, further than necessity and profit urgeth them; are very ignorant of their doctrine and practices. we may say also, that they are very weak and simple. for once any plain dealing man may be abused. but to offend divers times in one fault, and oftentimes to run into the same trap, argueth great weakness, negligence and wilfulness.  
Finally albeit princes, that live under the Pope's laws were willing to keep touch, and to perform promises; yet we must remember, how easily the Pope dispenseth with oaths, and how necessary it is for them to break all covenants, if the Pope once declare the contrary party to be an heretic, or schismatic. In the Clementine Romam. de jure iurando. the Popes forbidden all princes unionem, parentelam, confoederationem, that is, peace, contracting of alliance, and confederation with such, as are their enemies. and if any contract be made, then must the same be dissolved upon pain of excommunication, when the Pope pleaseth. so all the assurance, that Christians can have of amity with the Pope's vassals, dependeth on the Pope's pleasure, and his pleasure is founded upon his profit, and necessity: and our security standeth in watching their mines and gunpowder treasons. God grant therefore all Christians grace to beware, that they be not entrapped with false and perfidious promises; nor undermined with their subtleties, nor blown up with treason: and give our adversaries that light of reason, that they may see, that oaths made by the name of God in just and honest causes, are not to be dissolved either by the Pope or any other, nor their treasons to be warranted by any Popish faculty.   

CHAP. XLVI. That the chief founders and maintainers of Popery have been commonly noted for wicked and profane men.  
Faithful Christians and the citizens of the city of God, as the Apostle teacheth us Ephes. 2. are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. but our Saviour Christ was an high priest, most holy, innocent, and undersiled. and his Apostles and Prophets were holy men, and endued with special graces fit for that function. let us then see what manner of men the first authors and principal upholders of Popery have been, that by the different qualities of the one and the other, we may the better esteem of true religion, and more perfectly learn to hate the superstition, heresy, tyranny, and all the abominations of the Popes of Rome and their wicked faction.  
The mystery of iniquity began to work in the Apostles time, as S. Paul testifieth. for then false teachers began to spread their poison, and after the departure of the Apostles, ravening wolves entered into the Church not sparing the stock. by little and little also heathenish and jewish ceremonies began to be received in divers places, and as S. Augustine saith, the world grew full of presumptions. but Antichrist began not to show himself openly before the times of Phocas the emperor, who at the earnest solicitation of 
a Platina in Bonifacio 3.  Boniface the third granted, that the church of Rome should be called and accounted the head of other Churches. so than the principal agent in the erection of the papacy was Phocas, a barbarous Thracian by nation, and a common soldier, by tumult advanced to the empire, and one that began his reign with the slaughter of his master, of the Empress, and their children.  
The next was Irene a proud insolent and cruel woman, that among others, murdered her own son. for unto her time the worship of God continued in the church of Rome without any notable corruption. but she with the help of Adrian Bishop of Rome, and other superstitious persons first brought in the idolatrous worship of images and Saints.  
Gregory the 7. was the first, that by force dissolved Priests marriages, and exalted the mitre of the Pope above the crowns of emperors and kings, taking upon him first to depose them from their seats. but among all the Popes you shall not find any more abominable. Beno testifieth he was a necromancer, a murderer, an empoisoner, and a sacrilegious and impious person. the synod of Brixina condemned him for divers abominable crimes. Matthew Paris in Willelmo conquastore writeth, that being ready to departed this life, he confessed, that by the devils persuasion he had provoked the wrath of God against mankind. he threw the sacrament into the fire, because he could obtain no succh answer of it, as he desired, and lived scandalously with Mathilda. a fit fellow therefore he was to advance the whorish, sacrilegious and murderous religion of the later Rome, that is so much degenerated from the former.  
Paschall the 2. that achieved that, which Gregory the. 7. and others his predecessors had begun, was a perjured person, and a firebrand of sedition and trouble. he set the son against the father, and the subjects against their princes. having prevailed against the Emperor he would not suffer his body to be buried. and having gotten into his hands the body of Clement the Antipope he caused the same to be burned.  
Alexander the 3. a great patron of the Pope's authority betrayed the emperor Friderike Barbarossa to the soldan, sending his lively portrait unto him, and persuading him to destroy him. he trod most proudly upon the Emperor's neck, and abused words of scripture most impiously to his purpuse.  
Innocent the third, that first established auricular confession, and transubstantiation, two principal bulwarks of the Pope's kingdom, and was a principal doer in the decretales, raised bloody wars against the Christians in France, that would not allow his authority, caused the bones of Almericus to be burned, for that he had preached against the worship of Images, and showed himself a bloody wolf and a devourer of Christ's flock, and an impure fellow.  
Thomas Cantipratensis a Dominican Friar reporteth, that this Innocent after his death appeared to S. Luitgard, all burning in flames.  
Honorius the third, that first authorised the idolatrous worship of the Masse-cake, as appeareth by the chapter sane cum olim. de celebrat. missar. was proud, cruel, vicious, and superstitious. he forbade honest marriage to Priests, and maintained the filthy religion of Monks and Friars. Dominike and Francis, and the locusts, that came out of the bottomless pit of hell were first allowed by him. his malice and anger were showed upon the Scots, that had killed Adam Bishop of Catnesse. for he caused 400. to be hanged, among which many innocents were comprehended, and caused their children to be gelded, that he might extinguish their race.  
But one of the principal builders of this Romish Babylon was Gregory the 9 for he gathered the decretales of Popes together, and gave then fierce of law, as appeareth by his preface before the decretales. some say, he was the cousin of Innocent the third. but his manners do declare him rather to have been his son. he excommunicated the Emperor Friderike, that warred upon the Saracens, and stopped the good success, and the course of the victories of the Christians against them. secretly he murdered the Emperor's ambassadors, published lying decretales against him, as we may read in Matthew Paris. finally, to enrich his nephews, or rather his bastards, he set all Italy on a flame.  
Boniface the eight, Clement the sift, and john the 22. who made up the body of the canon law, which is the strength and sinews of Popery, did not degenerate from their predecessors. of Boniface the eight it is said, that he entered like a soxe, reigned like a lion, died like a dog. he caused his predecessor Celestine to renounce the papacy, and afterward imprisoned and murdered him. his own friends confess, that he sought to subdue the world rather by force of arms, then by religion. his unspeakable pride, taking upon him both as Pope and Emperor, & challenging power to translate kingdoms from one to another, of his own friends could not be dissembled. he that continueth the history of Vrspergensis, writeth, that Clement the 5. was a notorious fornicator. hic, ut habet Chronicon Hermanni, publicue suit Fornicator. Villani also in his chronicle testifieth, that he was a filthy fellow. for the wickedness and abominable life of john the 22. Petrarch made the sonnet Fiammadal ciel: wherein he beseecheth God, that flames from heaven might stream down and consume the court of Rome. It grieved him not a little, that the Pope did keep his sister, having with a great price bought her of her brother Gerard.  
john the 23. by whose authority the council of Constance was assembled, was convinced to be an incestuous person, a Sodomite, and a most abominable atheist, denying the immortality of the soul, as appeareth by the acts of that council, and the appendix. and yet this is the synod, that condemned the doctrine of M. Wicklesse, and established the communion under one kind, and the subsistence of accidents without substance, and divers other points of Popery.  
The council of Florence, wherein the Pope's supremacy, purgatory, and divers points of popish doctrine concerning the sacrments were confirmed, had his strength from Eugenius the fourth, that by the council of Basill was condemned as an heretic, and by the citizens of Rome driven out of the city as a public enemy. he was the cause of the perjury of Ladislaus, that broke with the Turk, and of the defait and slaughter of the Christians at Varna.  
The three principal authors of the wicked decrees, and anathematisms of the conventicle of Trent, were Paul the third, Inlius the third, and Pius the fourth: whereof the first was a parricide, a lecher, a necromancer and an empoisoner, as is testified by Vergerius, Sleidan and other. julius the third was a sensual epicure, and a filthy sodomite, as is testified in a certain preface before the story of iovius, and declared by certain rhymes and verses made upon him, and Innocentius de Monte, a boy made Cardinal by him. Pius the fourth, as the common report went, died betwixt two concubines, and was infamous for lechery and villainy, & odious to the Romans for his vices.  
To speak generally of later pope's the only founders and belmelters of Popish religion, we find, that they have been the greatest scandals of Christian religion, and the principal authors of the calamities of Christendom. Bernard in serm. 1. in conuers. S. Pauli complaineth, that iniquity taking his beginning from the Popes of his time, was spread out over the world. egressa est iniquitas, saith he, à senioribus judicibus vicarijs tuis, qui videntur regere populum tuum. Petrarch in his epistles without title, saith, the court of Rome was not a city, but a house full of devils, and wicked spirits, and a sink of vice and shame. non civitas, sed lemurum, & laruarum domus, & ut breviter dicam, scelerum & dedecorum omnium sentina. john of Sarisbury in Polycrat. lib. 6. c. 24. saith, that Popes do therefore die the faster, lest they should corrupt the whole church. ideo mea opinione papae frequentius moriuntur, ne totam corrumpant ecclesiam. Warnerus in Martino 2. Adriano 3. & Stephano, crieth out, heu, heu, quomodo obscuratum est aurum! alas, alas, how is the gold obscured! he compleineth also of the scandals, that happened in the papacy, and of their emulations, sects, and contentions, and saith, that truth failed among the children of men. Theodoric a Niem de schism. lib. 3. c. 42. saith, that so much iniquity was gone from the Popes, that the catholic faith was darkened thereby, and religion suffered shipwreck, and all virtues were departed from all sorts of men, ut catholica fides obnubiletur, & omnis religio naufragium patiatur, virtutes ab omnibus recesserint. Platina in Sergio 3. saith, that Pope's getting their places by bribery neglected God's worship, and persecuted their enemies like most cruel tyrants, that afterward they might with more security satisfy their lusts, when there was none to control them. joannes Marius de schism. part. 3. c. 5. testifieth, that all the evils of christendom have proceeded from the malice, ambition, and avarice of wicked Popes. a malitia, ambitione, & avaritia sceleratorum paparum omnia mala in mundo proveniunt. Robert Grosted, as Matthew Paris testifieth in Henrico 3. did bitterly inveigh against the covetousness, usury; simony, rapines, excess and luxuriousness of the court of Rome. neither doth Budaeus de Ass, or Valla contra Donationem Constantini, say less against the Popes, than he.  
Next to the Popes the Cardinals, mass-priests, Monks and Friars, and of late years the Dominicans, Franciscans and jebusites are the chief advancers, teachers, and defenders of Romish heresies. of which if we say little, men may suppose, there is no more to be said; if we say what they deserve, and is in authentical books reported of them, it would exceed the proportion of this short Survey. only thus much we say of many things, that may be said. Brigit in her revelations testifieth, that Cardinals are excessive in pride, covetousness, & all delights of the flesh, 4. Brig. 49. cardinals, extenti & effusi sunt ad omnem superbiam, cupiditatem & delectamentum carnis. Pelaguis lib. 2. de planct. eccles. art. 16. saith, they are increased in riches, but much diminished in piety. aucta est possessio, diminuta religio.  
The same man lib. 2. de planct. leccles. art. 20. saith, the prelate's of the church have declared their sins like Sodom. Peccatum suum, sicut Sodoma praedicaverunt. Mantuan Alphonsi lib. 6. saith, that the priests hate their flocks, and care not to feed them, but to poll them and mock them.  
pastors, saith he, odere pecus, nec pascere curant,  
Sed tondere greges, pecorique illudere tonso.  
Catherine of Sienna c. 125. saith, that religious men pretend angels lives, but for the most part are worse than devils. Religiosi collocati sunt in religione velut angeli, sed quam plurimi sunt daemonibus deteriores.  
What the jebusites are, I report me to the French carechisme of jesuits set out by a Papist, and a learned man; and to the discourses of the secular priests against them. they show they are covetous, false, proud, cruel, malicious, and devils incarnate. for the rest, I refer them over to the 2. book 2. chap. of my answer to Rob. Parsons his Warn-word, a man, in whom most of the capital vices of the jebusites may be specified.  
The chief maintainers of Popery in our times, if we speak of lay men, were Charles the 9 of France, Henry the 3. his brother, Philip the 2. of Spain, the duke of Alva, the duke of Guise, and his brethren, the earl of Westmoreland, the head of the rebellion in the North. but if we seek all histories, we shall hardly find worse men. Charles the 9 was a notorious sweater, a perfidious and licentious prince. Henry the 3. was superstitious and altogether given to carnal delights. What Philip the 2. was, his wives, and son, and the innocents done to death by him for religion will speak one day. the Duke of Guise and Alita were cruel and bloody men, perfidious, and wicked atheists. the first more given to pleasure, the second to avarice. Charles of westmoreland was a rebel to his prince, and a man consumed with his own delights and pleasures.  
Is it not then a matter ridiculous, that mass-priests should so excessively commend this religion, that had such founders and favourers, as these are, and which, as we see, was invented and confirmed by wicked men, and upholden by fraud and force?   

CHAP. XLVII. That Popery in many points is more absurd and abominable, than the doctrine of Mahomet.  
THe impieties and abominations of Turkish religion are so many, that hardly can we recount them, and so odious and horrible, that no Christian can take pleasure to hear them. and yet if we please to look into the secret mysteries of Popery, and to examine all the odious and abominable doctrines of the Romish synagogue, we may well make question, whether of the two religions deserveth more to be abhorred and hated. for first the Turks do speak well of the law and the Prophets, and handle books of scriptures with great reverence. Antony Geoffrey in his 2. book of Turkish ceremonies reporteth, how the Turks account the gospels among holy scriptures. inter sacras literas habent nostra evangelia, saith he. but the Papists speak evil of scriptures, and call them sometimes a dead and kill letter, sometimes a matter of strife, sometime a nose of wax. they do also handle them very rudely, and without respect.  
Lastly they will not have them to be authentical in respect of us, without the Pope's consignation and testimony.  
The Turks never burned their Koran, or the writings of the Prophets and Apostles upon pretence of false translations. but the Papists have often times burned holy scriptures, as appeareth by the ecclesiastical histories of France, England, Germany and other places.  
postel in his history of Turks showeth, how they teach that perfection is contained in the gospel. and Gifford lib. Caluinoturcis. 3. c. 9 confesseth, that they believe all religion to be therein contained. but Papists do rather hope to find perfection in the rules of Monks and Friars, then in the gospel, and therefore account rather the state of Monks to be a state of perfection, than the lives of Christians after the rule of the Gospel. the mass-priests of Trent do make traditions equal to scriptures, and commonly they deny scriptures to be a perfect rule of life and doctrine.  
The doctors of Turkish religion were never so simple, as to think the traditions of their church to be equal to the Koran of Mahomet. But the mass-priests of Trent will have traditions not written, and holy scriptures to be received with equal affection.  
Such as blaspheme Christ, are punished by the Turks most severely. but Papists tear him in pieces with their blasphemies, and such are thought to be most clear of heresy, which swear most wickedly, and blasphemously.  
Averroes of all religions accounteth Popery to be most absurd, for that Papists worship a piece of a Masse-cake for their God, and yet presently devour him, and swallow him down into their bellies.  
No Turks ever allowed the eating of man's flesh, or believed, that it were possible for a man to swallow down a whole and perfect man without hurt, or diminution, or bruising of his body. but Papists make their followers eaters of man's flesh, and say, that every one eating the sacrament doth eat up Christ's body whole and entire, and yet believe that they neither break his flesh, nor digest it.  
Every Mahometan, albeit he believeth not Christ to be God, yet would be ashamed to say, that dogs and hogs and other brute beasts may eat Christ's body. but the Papists, albeit according to the Christian faith they profess Christ to be true God, yet they teach, that dogs and hogs do eat his body, as oft as they eat consecrated hosts.  
The Turkish Priests believe, that Christ was true man, & that his body is visible and palpable. but the mass-priests give him a body in the sacrament, that is neither visible, nor palpable, nor in any respect like to our bodies.  
The Turks do teach, that after this life some are placed in paradise, some damned to hell, as postel writeth in his history of Turks: a third place they know not, nor do they believe, that their Calipha or high Priest is able to deliver souls out of the neither part of the earth by his indulgences. but the Papists believe a third place beside heaven, and the place of the damned, and suppose that the Pope is sovereign lord of purgatory, and can deliver souls thence by his indulgences.  
Among the Turks we do not read of any, that ever doubted of the immortality of the soul, as Menavinus de relig. Turc. testifieth. but among the Papists many doubt of it. for else why should Leo the x. lateran. council. sess. 8. forbidden men to dispute against the immortality of the soul? some deny it, as did john the 23. as is testified in the appendix to the council of Constance, and many other atheistical Papists, who have nothing of religion, but an outward bare profession.  
Turks do believe, that God hath a body. yet do they not suffer any image or similitude of God to be made. but Papists albeit they profess God to be a spirit, yet most absurdly they do make divers corporeal Images of God.  
The law of God prohibiting the making and worship of graven images and other likenesses, is diligently observed of Turks. Georgevitz in his book de moribus Turcarum saith, he never saw any images in the temples of Turks. with him also in effect concurreth Zigabenus in elencho Ismaelit. and showeth, that such as worship images by the Turks are called idolaters. but Papists fill all the corners of their churches full of images, and idolatrously do they worship them. nay because they perceive their practice to be contrariant to the law of God, therefore in their brief catechisms they raze out the commandment against images.  
Mahomet never called himself God, but the Prophet of god only. neither did his followers ever give him the title or honour of God. nay some of them believe, that Cosdroes' was vanquished by the romans', because he called himself God. but Papists call the Pope God, as we read in Baldus in c. vlt. cod. sent. rescind. and the Pope calleth himself God after a cunning sort c. satis. dist. 96.  
The Turks are not so absurd, as to believe, that their Calipha, Mufti, or high Priest cannot err, because he succeed Mahomet, and sitteth in his chair. but the simple Papists most absurdly think, that their Pope, albeit he be ignorant and foolish, yet cannot err, as long as he teacheth out of the papal chair. In all the histories of Turks we cannot find, where any janisars or Turkish Friars thought it lawful, or attempted to blow up the Turks palace, or parliament house. but Thomas Percy, Catesby and their consorts attempted and thought it lawful to blow up the parliament house, the king and principal men of England. the Papists therefore pass Turks in barbarous and perfidious cruelty.  
We do not read, that any Calipha of the Turks did skin any of his Priests. but john the 22. as Platina recordeth, did pull the skin from the Bishop of Cahors. happy had he been, if his body had been invisible and impalpable, as the Papists make Christ's imaginary body in the sacrament.  
Mahomet, as Zigabenus in Saracenicis telleth us, wrote only 113. fables. but the Papists in their legends, and breviaries, and Caesar Fabulonius, I would say Baronius, have written more than x. M. fables, and commend to their followers most fabulous fooleries.  
Among the Turks the Priests may not beg. but the jebusites and other mendicant Friars count beggary a piece of perfection. and much it were to be wished, that they did only beg. for oftentimes they either take by force, or steal most cunningly.  
Septemcastrensis de relig. Turc. c. 14. testifieth that the Turks in their fasts abstain from all meat and drink. doth it not then appear, that they fast better than Papists, that drink wine and eat all dainty fishes and banqueting meats, upon their fasting days.  
The Turks do not believe their religion to be true, or their Alcoran to bescripture, because their Calipha doth tell them; but because they take it, to have come from God. but the Papists neither believe scriptures, nor the articles of faith, unless the Pope doth particularly tell them, that the scriptures came from God, and that their Christian faith is Apostolical and most true.  
The Turks believe not, that any can be justified by extreme unction, or eating red-herrings and saltfish. but the Papists both teach it, and believe it, and burn all that shall hold, believe or teach the contrary.  
The Turks albeit servile in their manner of life, yet neither kiss the feet of their Calipha, nor heave him up to be adored by his followers are not then the papists in this point more slavish and miserable, than the Mahometans?  
Finally Mahomet never taught his followers to kill Kings excommunicated by the chief Priest of Turks, or to rebel or take arms against the Sultan or Emperor of Saracens, as oft as their chief priest should command them. nor did he teach his followers, that the Calipha of Turks could dispense with the law of God, or assoil subjects from their oaths made to princes. but the Pope's bastardly children the jebusites do give all this power to their holy father, and he is nothing nice in taking it upon him. and so far have they proceeded in this damnable doctrine, that no prince can stand assured of his life, that hath any of this generation about him. this doctrine cost Henry the third of France, and the prince of Orange their lives, and put both Henry the 8. of England, and his daughter Elizabeth, and Henry the 4. of France to their plunges, and brought them into great danger. And of late time the King, the Queen, their children, the Nobles, and prelate's of England and the Commons assembled in parliament were deseined to the slaughter, and had been destroyed, if God had not discovered the treachery.  
Were Christians then so patiented, as to tolerate heresy; yet it argueth great stupidity, if they should endure a religion more absurd, foolish, and abominable than mahometry.   

CHAP. XLVIII. That Christians are less oppressed under the Turk, then under the Pope.  
HOw great miseries they endure, that live under the Turks government, those can best relate, that have travailed Turkey, and have experience of their laws and customs. we doubt not but they are many and extreme, considering the rigour of the Turkish tyranny. yet if we will believe those, that are as well acquainted with the government of the Pope and his vassals, as with the government of the Turk, we may assure ourselves, that it is less grievous for Christians to live under the Turk, then under the Pope, or his vassals. and this also may be proved by assured demonstrations.  
For first the Turk forceth none to embrace his religion, nor punisheth any for professing other religions. but the Pope and his faction in France, Flanders and other countries useth all manner of enforcement to draw men to Popish religion, and punisheth with all severity such, as be contrary to him.  
Secondly Mahomet commanded his disciples to be reconciled to Christians, if they desired it, as Zigabenus saith in Saracenicis. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. but the Papists admit no leagues, or treaty, or pacification with the true professors of religion, but seek their destruction, whensoever they can prevail against them.  
Thirdly Turks have no inquisitors, nor racks or torments for such, as hold Christian religion, but suffer them quietly, if they be not tumultuous and troublesome to the state. but the Pope & his complices search out poor Christians by their inquisitors, that have as good sent, as blood hounds, and suffer them not to hide themselves either in woods, holes or deserts. and such as they find they rack and torment, and some they poison, some they famish, some they burn, by all means purposing to destroy the race of their adversaries.  
Fourthly Turks do not use to massacre Christians, or to murder them without sentence of Law, and lawful proceeding. but the barbarous and bloody executioners of the Pope in France at divers times have massacred many thousands of harmless and disarmed Christians, killing them neither by lawful war, nor by any form of justice.  
5. Commonly the Turks having vanquished Christians, do spare such as yield, and take them captives, and seldom is it seen, that they kill women and children. but the Papists in France massacred men, women, and children, & like fierce wolves have sought the blood of all manner of Christians opposite to them.  
6. In the Turks dominions Christians are burdened with tribute, but paying the same they are quit. but that is nothing to the oppressions of Christians under the Pope, and his vassals. for there they pay both to the Prince and to the Pope. and neither are they free alive or dead from payments to mass-priests. but if any Christian differ from them in matters of faith, no tribute can acquit him so, but his goods are confiscate, and his person seized. and this is evident both by the chap. vergentis. de haereticis. and by their common practice.  
7. The Turks deal not so perfidiously with Christians, as do the Papists. they empoison not men by treachery, nor commonly break solemn oaths and promises. but the Popes and their complices teach their followers to keep no faith with such Christians, as they call heretics. nay whether they be excommunicate or no they respect not, but murder all that are opposite to them, if they can, as appeared by their late bloody practice against the King and parliament.  
Lastly the Papists do prohibit burial to Christians, as appeareth by the chapter sicut. de baereticis. they judge them also being dead, and dig them out of their graves, and burn their bodies. and so they dealt with Wickleffe, Bucer and Phagius in England, and with Almaricus and others in other places. but this inhumanity the Turks will be ashamed to practise against their greatest enemies.  
What Christian then, that is not past all feeling, will not abhor this inhumanity, & more than Turkish cruelty of papists that neither dead nor alive can endure true Christians?   

CHAP. XLIX. That the ambition, covetousness, contention, and practise of Popes is the principal cause of the decay of the Christian empire, and a great occasion of the good success of the Turks.  
AS the strength of the Roman empire was the bulwark, that kept off the Turk, and other barbarous nations, from the invasion of Christendom, and the most potent means, to unite Christians in the common defence of Catholic religion, and to defend those countries, that professed it; so it is apparent, that those, that have weakened the Emperors, and caused dinision among Christian princes, have also given way to the conquests of Turks, and decayed the strength of Christians. but no man needeth to doubt, but that the Popes above all men in the world have through their ambition, contention, and tumultuous practices both ruinated the Empire, and set Christians at contention among themselves.  
For first the spirit of God Apocalyp. 13. showeth, that antichrist figured by a lamberising out of the earth and speaking like a dragon, should succeed the Emperor, and after a sort repair the empire figured by the beast like a leopard, that rose out of the sea. S. john saith, he did all the first beast could do. he also caused the earth to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. all which is perfectly fulfilled in the Pope. for he possesseth Rome, and although he calleth himself the successor of Peter; yet taketh he upon him to manage both the swords. he also healed the wound that Rome received by the decay of the Empire, making all Christians to worship the Roman See, and calling his followers Roman catholics.  
Further the Apostle 2. Thess. 2. declareth, that one thing did withhold the coming of Antichrist, which through the working of the mystery of iniquity was then approaching; and that Ambrose, Hierome, and other fathers do interpret of the Roman empire. so we see still an opposition betwixt the Roman Empire, and the kingdom of Antichrist, and that the decay of the one, should be the rising of the other.  
Thirdly we see by practice, that the Popes by all means have gone about to divide, and to weaken the Roman Empire. for first under colour of the contention about the worship of Images they caused Rome and Italy to rebel against the Emperors of the East, as we may read in the histories concerning Leo Isauricus, & divers that succeeded him. next they brought the Gauls into Italy, and diminished the empire, dividing as much, as in them lay, the West from the East, and confirming the right of Charles the great, and his successors, but always keeping Rome, and a good part of Italy to themselves. Afterward having prevailed against the Eastern Emperors, they set upon the Emperors of the West, and by setting the subjects against their kings, and the sons against the fathers by their anathematisms and excommunications, they have brought the Emperors to that pass, that they receive their crowns from the Pope, and are not able to defend themselves and their subjects from the common enemy without the aid of other Christian princes. further, if at any time the Emperors warred against the Saracens and Turks abroad; then did the Popes by all means endeavour to take from them and their agents their towns and castles at home. they did also withdraw their supplies, and employ those, that had vowed to serve against the Saracens, to serve against the Emperor, as Matth. Paris in Henrico 3. doth testify. Alexander the third sent the soldan Fridericke Barbarossaes' portrayt, then serving against the Saracens, persuading him to kill him, if he would settle his affairs. Gregory the 9 invaded the emperor's dominions in Italy, and drew Fridericke the 2. out of Asia to defend his own possessions at home, when he was almost in possession of the victory abroad. Lastly it is publicly known, that they have set French and Spanish together about the quarrel of the kingdom of Naples. Innocent the third by his excommunication of king john set both his subjects, and the French against him, and was the cause of the loss of Normandy to the English. julian the Cardinal set the Germans against the Bohemians. Paul the third was the principal motive of the wars of Charles the sift against the Germans. and to shut up this discourse in few words, not only Nicholas Machiavelli in his Florentine history affirmeth, but also all histories testify, that the Popes of Rome have been the principal causes of all the wars and stirs of Europe, that have been for this 4. or 5. hundred years last passed. they are the causes of the massacres of France, of the troubles of the low-countries, of the late rebellions in England, Scotland, and Ireland, of the contentions betwixt French and Spanish in Italy, of the persecutions in Germany, and Spain, and other countries.  
Fourthly the Popes of Rome by devising and confirming many orders of Monks and friars, by admitting such swarms of idle lozel's into orders, and maintaining them by chanting of Masses for souls, forcing them to forswear marriage, have not only caused many unnatural murders, but also hindered the propagation and increase of men. they have also withdrawn men from defence of the commonwealth, and placed them in dens of licentious idleness, and laid the charge of the common defence upon few.  
Fiftly exempting both the goods and the persons of religious men and clerks from common charges of the commonwealth, they have weakened the states of princes, and laid all the burden upon the weakest part.  
Finally by their idolatries they have displeased God, and by their perjuries have made good the lewd cause of the Turks. Therefore we are not to marvel, if the Christians have not prospered in their expeditions into the holy land. for what success could Christians look for, considering the notorious abuses committed in the army by worshipping idols, blaspheming Gods holy name, violating Christ's institution of the Eucharist by celebration of profane masses? Can Ladislaus king of Poland, and his army prevail against the Turks, having begun the war contrary to articles of peace solemnly sworn? but let us maintain the religion of Christ, and not of antichrist, and let us abolish the idolatrous worship of images, and the invocation of saints, and let us abandon the damned Mass, and serve God as he hath appointed, and finally let us not violate our promises and oaths, nor abuse gods holy name; and then, no doubt, but we shall prosper in all our enterprises against the Turk, or other enemies of the Church. for hitherto not the Turks forces, but the multitude of the sins, idolatries, blasphemies and other abuses of Christians, have made them fly before their enemies, and overthrown their armies.   

CHAP. L. That the modern church of Rome is much degenerated from the faith and manners of the ancient Romans.  
THe Church of Rome, when Paul wrote unto it, excelled in all piety and virtue, and was famous throughout the world. but as all things else, so both faith and virtue through tract of time fainted, and in the end began to fail in that city. of late time we find, that neither that zeal in matters of religion, nor that integrity and honesty of manners which was in the ancient Romans, doth continue in their posterity. Adrian the 6. in his instructions given to his legate, that was sent into Germany, confesseth freely, that many and grievous offences for many years have been committed at Rome, and from the top of the Pope's crown passed down to the inferior governors of the church, and that no man did his duty, but that all went astray, and none was void of faults. Plurimis nunc annis, saith he, graviter, multisque modis peccatum est Romae, & inde à Pontificio culmine, malum hoc, atque lues ad inferiores omnes ecclesiarum prafectos defluxit. neminem enim esse, qui suum faciat munus, aberrasse omnes, & ne unum quidem ex omni numero vacare culpa.  
Duarenus in praefat. in lib. de eccles. minist. & benefic. confesfeth, that the manners of such, as were called churchmen, were decayed, and that the later constitutions of Popes were worse, than the first. illud, saith he, fateri velinuiti cogimur, mores hominum ecclesiae titulo insignitorum ita paulatim degenerasse, ut posteriores constitutiones Pontificumfere anterioribus cedant.  
Guicciardine lib. hist. 2. showeth, how the authority of Christian religion grew every day less and less, by reason, that in the affairs of the church men were altogether departed from ancient customs. Le cose della chiesa, saith he, allontanatesis totalment dalli antichi costumi facevano ogni di minore l'authoritâ della Christiana religione.  
Machiavelli in his Florentine history directed to Clement the 7. confesseth, that by reason of the mutation, that had happened in Christian religion, great scandals and discords had grown in the world.  
Many of the chief rulers of the church, saith Picus Mirandula in orat. ad Leon. x. after whose example others ought to conform themselves, have either little or no religion, no order in their living, no shame nor modesty. apud plerosque religionis nostra primores, ad quorum exemplum componi & formari plebs ignara debuisset, aut nullus, aut certè exiguus deicultus, nulla bene vivendi ratio, atque institutio, nullus pudor, nulla modestia.  
Platina in Gregor. 4. wisheth, that Lewes Pius in his time had been alive. so much did the church stand in need of his laws.  
Res & pietatemiampridem perdidimus, saith Aventinus lib. 3. annal. Boiorum. virtuti nullus est honos. invicem invidere, fraudare, fallere, longinqua consuetudo est. that is, we have long since lost our substance, and piety. there is no honour given to virtue. we have used to envy one another, and to practise fraud, and deceit a long time together.  
Primitivi Theologi, saith Petrus de Aliaco lib. de reformat. eccles. ecclesiam aedificaverunt, quam nunc quidam Baritatores destruxerunt. the Divines of the Primitive Church, built the church: but now certain later barators have destroyed it.  
And that this is true, it may be proved by divers particulars. in time past the bishops of Rome suffered for true religion. now they cut the throats of all such as profess truth.  
The ancient bishops of Rome fed Christ's flock, and were subject to Christian Emperors. now the Popes kill Christ's lambs, and set their feet upon the necks of emperors.  
In the primitive church holy scriptures were read in the church, and taken only for the word of God. but now in the Romish church lying legends, and fables are read in the church, and lying and uncertain traditions are made equal to scriptures.  
In time past it was accounted folly, to read scriptures in tongues unknown, and the Apostle showeth, that it is unprofitable to pray in a strange language. but now the Romanists both read scriptures, and pray in languages not understood of the multitude. and yet defend it as well done.  
In ancient time no man ever believed, either that the scriptures were made to us authentical by the Pope's determination, or that the Pope's determination in matters of faith was certain. now all is turned upside down. scriptures are made uncertain and obscure, and the Pope's determination is made most liquid and certain.  
The ancient bishops of the church preached diligently, lived uprightly, dealt with their people mercifully. now the Popish bishops preach not, nor lead their lives according to their profession, but contrariwise live scandalously, and are the only bouchers to murder all, that shall either reprehend the abuses of the church, or their corruptions in manners. and the powdermen and undermining Papists follow their steps.  
Ancient Christians suffered most cruel torments and death, because they would not worship images. now the Romanists put all to death, that will not worship images.  
The ancient Romans according to S. Paul's doctrine believed not to be justified by the works of God's law. the late Romanistes hope to be justified by the works of the Pope's Laws.  
They looked for no peace by their own satisfaction, but by the redemption wrought by Christ jesus. these modern fellows believe, that they can satisfy for their own sins, and trust in the redemption procured them by the Pope's indulgences.  
The Romans, unto whom S. Paul wrote, were obedient to Kings. these lose the bonds between kings, and their subjects, and stir up traitors to blow up their princes.  
They diligently observed Christ's institution in administering the sacraments, and neither spit in the faces of Christians baptised, nor stole away the cup from the communicants. the modern Romish priests spit on those, whom they baptise, and refuse to administer the cup to others than themselves.  
Finally they are digressed from the ancient Romans in all those particulars both concerning faith and manners, wherein I have showed, that they differ from ancient Catholics, and have devised mere novelties,   

CHAP. LI. That the Romish Church, that now is, was invisible in old time.  
Much do our adversaries boast of the visibility of the Romish church, supposing, because the scriptures speak much of the glory of the kingdom of jesus Christ, that all that honour belongeth to the church of Rome of late times. but while they mistake things spiritual for things corporal and external, and suppose things untrue, all this their boast and glory will turn to their great prejudice and shame. for first the beauty of the church consisteth rather in inward virtues, then in outward shows and apparel. Secondly, be it, that the church is always seen and apparent to the true members of the church; yet the modern Romish church, and the glory thereof was never seen either of the Apostles or ancient fathers of the Church, or of ancient Christians.  
For what, I pray you, is the church of Rome, but a multitude of people professing the modern saith of the Romish synagogue, & communicating with the same in sacraments, and subjecting themselves to the Pope's holiness? this is confirmed by the testimony of Bellarmine in his book de ecclesia, and of Canisius in his catechism c. de fide & symbolo, and I hope will not be denied by any Papist. but such a church shall never be showed in ancient time. and that we shall prove by invincible reasons. for first we find not, during the time of the Apostles, any such head of the church as the Pope, nor any such shoulders, as the Cardinals, nor any such rotten members, as the chantry priests singing Masses for souls departed, as Monks living in herds like swine, as friars begging for fashion sake, and yet abounding in all things necessary.  
2. The Pope with his triple crown, two sword, crossed pantofle, and his guard of Suizars, and purple Cardinals following him, began only of late time to be visible. if such a sight had appeared in the time of the ancient fathers, they would have wondered at it, as a thing most monstrous, and unbeseeming him, that pretendeth to be the successor of Peter.  
3. While S. Peter lived, no man ever saw a church persecuting of Christ's disciples, and delivering them over to have their throats cut by the secular power. nor did either the bishops of Rome, or the ancient fathers for more than a thousand years after Christ, imprison, torment, or kill such Christians, as were not of their faction and opinion.  
4. The ancient church of Christ did neither excommunicate kings, nor assoil their subjects from their obedience, commanding them upon pain of excommunication to rise up in arms against them, and to depose them. the Romish church therefore, which doth all these things, was not then visible. neither can any masspriest show us where in old time miners and powder-men sought to blow up the principal men of the state.  
5. So long as the primitive church continued in the doctrine and steps of the Apostles and ancient fathers, the same was ruled by the holy Scriptures, and canons of counsels, and then the decretales of Gregory the 9 Boniface the 8. Clement the 5. john the 22. and other later Popes were not in the world. who can then say, that the Roman church ordered by these decretales was then visible?  
6. The moderno Romish church, beside the two Sacraments instituted by Christ, believe other 5. Sacraments, and hope as well to be saved by greasing, when they lie a dying, as by Baptism, and the lords Supper. but such a church was altogether invisible both in the Apostles time, and long after.  
7. Now Papists believe, that Christians receiving the Sacrament, swallow down Christ's body into their stomach: nay they teach that dogs, hogs, and brute beasts, eating consecrated hosts, do also devour Christ's body. but such a company of Cannibals, and blasphemers against Christian religion were never taken for Christ's church, for more than a thousand years after Christ.  
8. The Roman church commandeth Christians to keep the feast days of monks and friars, and other saints, to hear Mass, upon ember days in Lent, and fridays to abstain from flesh, to go to auricular confession at the least once a year, and not to celebrate marriage upon certain days. but if all the monks and friars in the world were set to seek such a church, and if the mass-priests of the Romish. church were joined with them; yet could they not find such a church for a thousand years after Christ.  
9 In the Romish missals the priest prayeth, that God would be pleased to accept of the body and blood of Christ, and that for the merits of the blessed virgin, of Cosmas and Damianus and other saints. but where such a wicked and blasphemous company, as make not only saints, but also the idolatrous mass-priests mediators for the body and blood of Christ, have been reputed the church of Christ, and was visible before these wicked missals were framed, we find not in any ancient record.  
10. The Romish church worshippeth the cross and the images of the Trinity with Latria, or divine worship. but such a church for a thousand years was never visible in the world.  
11. In the missals, breviaries and other ritual books of the Romish church we find divers prayers and confessions to Angels, to the virgin Mary, and other saints, nay to the cross and the image given to Veronica. and these prayers are both practised and defended by the church of Rome. but if all the Pope's lanterne-bearers, and disciples were set to seek for such a church in the time of the ancient fathers, they should but lose their labour, and spend their wits in vain.  
12. The Apostles canons, as is said, do excommunicate such, as do not communicate being present at the celebration of the Eucharist. we may not therefore think, that the Romish synagogue was visible in those times, seeing they think it sufficient for their disciples, to be present at the Mass, although they receive nothing.  
13. In the primitive church no man ever heard, that Christians gaped and gazed on the priest administering the Lords supper, or that they received the one kind, and not the other. the Popish church therefore in those times was invisible.  
14. In those times also neither was the Eucharist celebrated, nor the Scriptures read in tongues not understood of the multitude. nor did the people pray in strange tongues, which they understood not. the missifical congregation therefore of papists, which pray, not knowing what they say, and being present at the reading of Scriptures, and celebration of Sacraments in strange tongues, understand nothing, was not yet crept out of Cacus his den, nor apparent in the world.  
15. The modern Papists believe, that such as in this life satisfy not for their sins committed after Baptism, are to satisfy for the same in Purgatory. They believe also, that the Pope by his indulgences is able to redeem souls out of Purgatory, and to remit all the temporal pains due for sins. but such a church as this, was never to be seen for a thousand years after Christ.  
To abridge this discourse, it were an easy matter, by divers other points of faith, and divers other customs in administering the Sacraments, and divers other forms of government all newly invented, practised and maintained by the synagogue of Rome, to declare and prove, that the same is a new model of a church never seen, nor known to antiquity. but by these few particulars the same doth most clearly appear already.  
If the Papists then seek to bring us back to the forms of the ancient church; then must they abandon the Pope and his adherents, embracing the modern faith and doctrine of sacraments lately broached by the idle schoolmen, and confirmed in the late conventicle of Trent, and adhere to the church of England, which as it professeth the Apostles doctrine published by ancient counsels of the church, so it renounceth all heresies and nouclties brought in by Papists and other heretics. and as it renounceth their false doctrine, so it detesteth their treacherous practices.   

CHAP. LII. That the marks of the church, and motives to the modern Romish faith alleged by Papists, may as well be alleged by heathen men and Turks, as by them.  
ALL this notwithstanding, the Papists challenge to themselves the name, title, and authority of the church, and bring forth a whole squadron of motives to draw simple souls to like of their sect, and to entangle them with their errors. Bellarmine de notis eccles. c. 3. saith, that the proper marks of the church are these: the name of Catholics, antiquity, continuance, universality, succession of Bishops, consent in doctrine, miracles, prophecies, temporal felicity, and such like. others bring unity, universality, holiness of life, and such like. Bristol in his Motives standeth upon the names of catholics and Heretics, miracles, visions, scriptures, traditions, fathers, martyrs, going out, rising afterward, succession, immutability, unity, judges infallible, obedient subjects, visibility, and other marks of like nature. But as well may the Turks and idolatrous heathen nations allege these marks and motives, as the Papists: and some of them do better agree to Turks, and idolatrous Paynims, then to idolatrous and heretical Papists.  
For as Papists call themselves Catholics, and give the name of heretics to others; so do the Turks call themselves mussulman, or true believers, and heathen idolaters called themselves Pious worshippers of the gods. and in regard of themselves both Turks and Paynims take Christians to be impious persons, and heretics. the Turks call Papists idolaters, and the heathen in time passed called Christians Atheists.  
As for antiquity, it agreeth far better to Paynims and Turks, then to Papists. for heathen idolatry was long before the doctrine of Popery, and the Alcoran is more ancient than the Pope's decretales, that being published by Mahomet within 630. years after Christ, these being commended, and confirmed by Gregory the 9 who entered an. D. 1227.  
3. Idolatry, as it began soon after the flood, so it hath ever since continued. the blasphemous religion of Turks har● continued ever since the time of Mahomet. but Popery never received a perfect form, before the conventicle of Trent, and in most places now is decayed.  
4. The heathen idolaters allege for themselves amplitude and universality, as well as the Papists: and so may the Turks also. for in time past all nations worshipped idols, save the jews: and in our times far more nations are deluded by Mahomet and his priests, then by the Pope and his mass-priests, the Pope's doctrine being confined within a few nations of Europe, Mahometisme poslessing the greatest part of Asia, and Africa, and no small parts of Europe.  
5. The Turks ever since Mahomet have had a succession of Caliphaes' and priests, and among the heathen there never wanted a descent of sacrificing idolaters. but the Papists cannot derive their succession from the Apostles either in doctrine or descent of Popes. for neither is their doctrine apostolical, nor are the Popes the Apostles successors. beside that, they are uncertain, both who were true Popes, and which succeeded after Peter, and divers bishops and Popes of Rome.  
6. The Paynims with one consent in time passed worshipped idols, neither did any one among them call the matter in question. the Turks are so resolute in religion, that they will have no disputing against any point of their doctrine. but Popish schoolmen call all points of their religion in question. neither do they so well agree in any article, but there be some, that hold singular opinions. the Scotists differ from the Thomists, and divers opinions are holden by the canonists contrary to the schoolmen. of late in England the jebusites and secular priests did contend about divers questions, and now the difference is rather stopped, then ended.  
7. In the Koran the Turks pretend, that Mahomet did divers miracles. we read also, that the gentiles tell of divers wonders done by their gods, and their soothsaiers and Priests. Navius, as Livy telleth us, cut a whetstone in sunder with a razor. the papists therefore have no reason to stand so much upon miracles.  
8. Mahomet also is said to have foretold things to come, and the gentiles allege innumerable oracles of their gods concerning future matters, which as they say were verified by the events. if you compare the prophecies of the legendary saints, there is no reason why they should be preferred before the other.  
9 In temporal matters both Turks and heathen emperors have had far better success than the Papists. the Roman Emperors being pagans ruled the world, and now the Empire of Turks is more large, then that of the Pope; nay of late time the Popes have made few attempts against the Turks, that have prospered. if then we judge of matters according to outward success; then are the Papists utterly overthrown.  
9 The Turks and Paynims have been better united among themselves, than the Popes of Rome and their adherents. In the Romish church we read of 27. or more schisms. but neither have the idolatrous priests, nor the Caliphaes' and priests of the Turks been so divided.  
10. Neither if we look among the Emperors of Rome, or the Turkish priests, shall we find more perjured, luxurious and abominable persons, than john the 12. Landus, Sergius the third, Gregory the 7. Sixtus the fourth, Alexander the sixth, Paul the second and third, and the bougerly Monks and mass-priests. holiness therefore can no more be a mark of the Romish church, then of the Turks and Paynims, and their congregations. nay among the Turks and Paynims we never read any such bloody execution, as was intended by the popish faction in England against the king, and his house, and the whole state.  
11. The Paynims and Turks being judges, the Papists will be taken for heretics, as well as others are condemned for heretics by the Papists.  
12. It is before showed, that Turks do as well esteem of scriptures as Papists, and no less do value their traditions, than they. The heathen also with great solemnity looked into their oracles, and books of Sibylles, and had them in more reverence, than the Papists have their legends and decretales.  
13. The Turks no less esteem their Saints and martyrs, than the Papists esteem such as died in the Pope's quarrel. heathen men also stood always much upon their forefathers, and had more reason to brag of old customs, than the Papists, whose fashions for the most part have but a late beginning.  
14. The Papists, we know, are a sect going out of Christ's church, and rising long after Christ's time, having not perfected the confused Babel until the times of the conventicle of Trent. but the heathen idolaters do fetch their pedigree from men, that lived before Moses his law, and the Turks pretend great antiquity, and aver, that the idolatrous papists are gone out of the church of God, and not they.  
15. The mutability of Popery is easily proved by their change of Laws, alteration of govemement, variety of old and new missals, breviaries and other ritual books, by the difference betwixt the doctrine of schoolmen, and canonists, and faith of the fathers, by their mutable rites, Saints, Saints days, and calendars. but the heathen allege, that they and their ancestors have always persisted in the worship of their gods. and the Turks do firmly observe their Koran without addition or detraction.  
16. Where the Papists talk of their infallible judges, the heathen idolaters and Turks have cause to laugh at them. for who is so devoid of sense, to suppose, that a Pope, that is ignorant of matters of faith, learning, and virtue, is a judge of the mysteries of Christian religion, and of matters of learning? do blind men judge of colours, or dease men of sounds? the Turks assure themselves, that Mahomet is a far better judge, than the Pope, and the old Romans doubted not, but that their Augurs, and Priests knew more in religion, than the later Popes.  
Finally while the Papists leave the doctrine of faith consonant to holy scriptures, and the administration of sacraments and worship of God according to Christ's institution, and other proper marks of the church, standing wholly upon the lustre of the world, and outward marks and signs of their Satanical Synagogue; they allege nothing, which the very heathen idolaters and Turks, cannot bring with better reason, than they.   

CHAP. LIII. That true Papists cannot be true, nor loyal subjects.  
AMong other marks of the Romish church and motives to Popery Bristol allegeth this for one, that it maketh obedient subjects. but if we look either into the practices, or laws of the Romish church, we shall rather find this allegation to be a mark of the whorish impudence of that strumpet, that hath abused the world with her false doctrines and abominations, than obedience of subjects to be a mark of the Romish church.  
For first, who I pray you were they, that divided Italy from the eastern Empire, and caused the Italians to withdraw their obedience, and to seize on the Emperor's revenues? were they not the Popes of Rome, and their complices, who upon pretence of the Emperors dislike of the worship of images, caused the Emperor's subjects to rebel, and began to advance the authority, credit and state of the Pope? Again, who called in the French against the Greeks and Lombard's, but the Popes of Rome? Thirdly, who caused the sons of Henry the 4. and Frederick the 2. and of Lewis the piteous, to rebel against their parents, but the Pope and Popish prelate's? Fourthly, who stirred up the subjects of Henry the 4. and 5. of Frederick the 1. and 2. of Lewis of Bavier, of Philip, Otho, and other Emperors, to take arms against their sovereign Lords, but the Popes of Rome and their agents? Finally who oppugned king john of England, and fought against the Emperors formerly named? were they not all Papists, and the Pope's vassals, and the former Emperors and kings subjects? it cannot be denied. For by the Pope's excommunications, they were deterred from their obedience and duty; and honouring antichrist for Christ's vicar, at his commandment they oppugned their lawful princes.  
To come nearer to ourselves and our times, we find that the rebels of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire in king Henry the 8. his days, were papists. for their ensigns were chalices and masse-cakes, and the five wounds, and their principal stirrers were monks and mass-priests, and their leaders men superstitiously affected. likewise the rebels in Devonshire and Cornwall in king Edward's days, were men wholly addicted to Popery. they would have their Masses and their dirges, their crosses and their banners, their greasings and their Popish trinkets and ceremonies; or else they would have their heads broken.  
Against Queen Elizabeth our late dread sovereign, upon the roaring of the Pope's bull, the Northern rebels anno 1569. fell into arms. both leaders and followers were the Pope's dear children. this was also the motive of all the troubles and insurrections in Ireland.  
His Majesty also, that now reigneth, hath not found any so troublesome, disloyal and treacherous, as his subjects popishly affected. the Earl of Goury had brought too much popish levaine out of Italy to be a good subject. Watson and Clarke, that conspired the destruction of the king and state, were mass-priests. Brooke, Marcham, and Copley their adherents were Masse-lovers. Faux and the late powdermen were zealous Papists.  
Henry the 3. of France, was oppugned by no other than the popish leaguers. the duke of Guise and his house were therein principal agents, and all the rest were affected and devoted to the Pope's service. the Dominican friar, that most shamefully murdered his liege sovereign Lord, was the Pope's vassal, and set on by the jebusites. the same faction stood in arms against king Henry the 4. now reigning, and not being able to resist by force, by treason sought to destroy him. john Chastel a scholar of the jebusites, and Ghineard a jebusite were therefore executed. so also was Peter Barriere, that incited by jebusites and Massepriestes came with a full resolution to take away his Sovereign's life.  
Parsons, Campian, and other mass-priests and jebusites, were sent into England by the Pope for no other cause, then to make a side for the execution of the Pope's bull, as appeareth by the Pope's faculty granted to Campian and Parsons.  
Neither were Parry, Savage, Ocollen, York, Lopez, Squire and others, that have been executed for attempting either by the sword, or by poison to take away the late Queen's life, set on by others, than the Pope and his bloody faction. God grant that his royal Majesty may escape their treacherous plots, whose heads, no doubt, are as busy plotting against him, as they ever were against his predecessor. and that he need not to doubt of it, they declared the same evidently in the treacherous plot of Brook, Watson, Clerk executed for the same at Winchester. but most clearly was the same resolved by the practice of Catesby, Percy and Fauxe, and their intended rebellion and fiery treason.  
It may be the Pope and his faction will deny, that they are the authors of these stirs, rebellions and treasons. but the Pope's bulls, their own handwritings, their confessions, their evident acts of treason, the deposition of witnesses, and the defences made by divers Papists, who maintain these rebellions and treasons, shall always plainly convince them.  in his book de visibili Monarchia doth maintain the rebellion in the North against Queen Elizabeth, and both he and Bristol and others do number those rebels among Popish martyrs. Thomas Becket, that stirred up foreign enemies against his prince and country, and stood against his Prince, is worshipped by the popish faction for a great saint. james Clement that killed Henry the third of France was highly praised by Sixtus Quintus in his consistory. and all the seditious mass-priests, that came into England to stir rebellion are by little and little put into the catalogue of Martyrs, as dying for Popish religion, or rather for practising treason.  
Neither do these acts of rebellion and treason proceed from sudden motions, but rather from the laws & rules of Popery. for first they hold, that the Pope is above the King, and hath power to depose him and to give away his kingdom. if then the Pope do depose the king, and give away his Kingdom, all his Popish subjects must forsake him.  
Secondly they teach that if the Pope do command the subjects to take arms against the King, that they are bound to rebel against him, and to lay hands upon him, if they can, upon pain of damnation; and this is meritorious in the opinion of the Pope. if then rebels be good subjects, than these fellows may be reputed good subjects.  
Thirdly Cardinal Como in his letters written to Parry in the Pope's name showeth, that it is meritorious to kill a king excommunicate; and so was both he and james Clement persuaded by the jebusites and mass-priests. and may a man, trow you, believe them to be good subjects, that think it lawful to kill their leege-Lords upon the Pope's warrant?  
Lastly they hold, that every king, that is by the Pope excommunicate and declared a tyrant, ipso facto is deposed, and may be slain by any man. for so Emanuel Sa the jebusite doth determine in his aphorisms. some say further, that an heretical king ipso facto loseth his kingdom, and those, that are not so forward, affirm notwithstanding, that the Pope may assoil subjects from their obedience, and dispense with oaths. but all such deserve the title of rebels and traitors, and those kings stand in great danger, that trust such trustless and pretended subjects.  
But it may be said, that all Papists in England are not of this opinion. I grant it may be so de facto. but if they be true Papists, and truly devoted to their holy father; then must they obey the Pope's bulls and acknowledge his doctrine. and this the mass-priests and jebusites, that lurk in divers places of England attending their prey, both know and practise. for, as traitors, they teach conditional obedience until the Pope's further pleasure be known, they entertain intelligence with foreign enemies, they receive their authority from the Pope, they depend upon him and not upon the king, they are governed by the Pope's laws, and not by the king's laws. Finally the 5. of November last the jebusites, mass-priests, and their adherents of the popish faction in England, determined to destroy the King and state, and to make a general insurrection and massacre throughout the whole kingdom; and had done their uttermost, if God had not prevented their malicious dessines and purposes.  
They may also allege in excuse of papists, that to kings, that be of their own religion, they are most obedient, and devoutly affected. but first this obedience and devotion is conditional and temporary, that is, if, and so long, as the Pope commandeth not the contrary.  
For if the Pope excommunicate the King of Spain, called by them the Catholic King, he is in no better terms than others.  
The Emperors that were excommunicate by the Pope within these 3. or 4. hundred years were of the Pope's religion. yet did it not avail them. Henry the third of France was superstitiously addicted to Popery; yet was he murdered by a Dominican Friar. and Henry the fourth being reconciled to the Pope and scornfully whipped in the person of his ambassador, scaped not the blow of john Chastel.  
Secondly, kings professing Popish religion are not obeyed in ecclesiastical matters. For as Bellarmine teacheth, they are no governors of the Church. others say they have no power to make laws concerning ecclesiastical causes. so it appeareth they lose half their authority.  
Thirdly, Bellarmine and others exempt the persons of the Clergy from the jurisdiction of temporal Lords. doth it not then appear, that popish kings are Commanders but of one half of their subjects?  
lastly, they do exempt the goods of the clergy from the disposition of the Prince. so we may see, that the King loseth half his revenues, where popish religion beareth sway.  
To conclude therefore it is apparent by the premises, that all true Papists professing and practising the Pope's doctrine, are utter enemies, and in heart evil affected to Kings professing a contrary religion, and depend on strange and foreign Princes, rather than upon their own Kings. well they may temporize having dispensations for it: but if opportunity be offered to the Pope and his faction, to show their malice; we may assure ourselves, we shall find them like our English powder-men, that is traitors and enemies of the prince and state. and Kings professing Popery are but the Pope's vassals, and underlings, and during the Pope's good will and pleasure. further they have but half their kingly authority, and rule but half their subjects, and lose half their revenues. which whosoever either teacheth or alloweth, he may say and swear obedience in temporal matters, as long as he list: but wise men will never hold him for other, than a temporary, and undutiful subject.   

CHAP. liv. That such Papists, as positively hold all the heretical and false doctrines of the modern church of Rome, cannot possibly be saved.  
THere are many false prophets gone out into the world, saith S. john 1. epist. 4. speaking of his times. and Revelat. 9 he telleth us, that in the later times of the church, a star shall fall from heaven, and that he, that is signified by that star, shall open the bottomless pit, out of the smoke whereof shall come locusts, that have hair like women, teeth like lions, habergeons of iron, and tails like scorpions. we may not therefore think, but that now also false prophets are stirring abroad, and that swarms of locusts are flying in every kingdom, seeking by glozing pretence to deceive the simple, by viperous calumniations to bite true teachers, with arms to oppugn princes, and with the poison and relics of their herolies to sting and hurt all that shall profess the truth.  
The jebusites and their consorts the friars and mass-priests pretend the saving of men's souls, but they are false teachers, and the very locusts mentioned by S. john, and sent forth by the Pope designed by the star Apocalyps. 9 let all Papists therefore beware, how they listen to their heretical and damnable doctrine, which who so believeth and followeth positively, cannot be saved.  
The word of God is true. If any man, saith john Ren. 14. worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God: afterward he saith, he shall be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy Angels and before the Lamb. but whosoever is reconciled to the Pope, and submitteth himself to the laws and kingdom of antichrist, doth worship the beast and his image. whosoever openly professeth Popery, receiveth the Pope's mark in his forehead. whosoever yieldeth to the practice of Romish religion, receiveth his mark in his hand. let Papists therefore stand upon their guard, and look well to their consciences. for albeit Sanders and Bellarmine with all their skill have endeavoured to prove, that the Pope is not antichrist, yet all Bellarmine's wrangling discourse is refuted in my fift book, de Pontif. Rom. and Sanders his demonstrations stand also dissolved by M. whitaker's of pious memory. beside that, neither they nor any of their consorts can assign any other state, unto whom these prophecies may so well agree, as to the Pope, and his kingdom. if then our reasons cannot resolve them, yet the perplexity of our adversities in this controversy may help to inform them and persuade them, that the beast there spoken of, is the Pope, and that his image is the Romish government, whereby the old empire of Rome is in a certain sort represented and restored.  
Furthermore Apocalyps. 22. we find, that dogs, enchanters, whoremongers, murderers, idolaters, and whosoever loveth or maketh lies, shall be excluded out of the kingdom of heaven. but like to dogs the Pope and his adherents refuse God's word preached unto them, and tear them in pieces, that seek to feed them with the bread of life. divers of the Popes have been great Magicians, Necromancers, and Enchanters, as Benet the 9 Gregory the 6. and 7. Sylvester the 2. Paul the 3. and many of their followers follow also but too much this damnable practice. the mass-priests like cunning enchanters, suppose that bread and wine is turned into flesh and blood in their magical Masses, they permit public stews, keep concubines, and to monks, friars, and mass-priests forbidden lawful marriage. they have murdered and massacred millions of Christians, to erect and uphold their antichristian kingdom. the 5. of November last, they attempted a treason never before heard of, minding to murder the King, his Lords, and the Commons assembled in parliament, and to massacre all opposite to them throughout the realm. they erect idols in churches, and every corner of their streets, and in high ways, giving latriam and divine honour to the cross, and to the images of the Trinity, and calling the Sacrament their Lord and God, and making vows, prayers, confessions to saints, and burning incense to images, and saying Mass in the honour of saints and angels. finally they do not only forge standers against M. Luther, Zuinglius, Caluin, and other true teachers, but also against us all, as if we taught, that God is the author of sin, and that Christ despaired, that there is no hell but horror of conscience, and such like abominable doctrines, which we expressly detest. they give out also, that we condemn good works, and teach rebellion, and their hearers delight to hear these lies.  
S. Paul having rehearsed divers works of the flesh, Gal. 5. and namely, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, wantonness, idolatry, witchcraft, and divers others of that nature, and among the rest, heresy, seditions, he concludeth, that those that do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. but never was any sect more subject to these works of the flesh, than the Papists. their idolatries, heresies, rebellions, murders, and witchcraft, I have before noted. adultery and fornication they account to be small sins, c. at si clerici. de indicijs. their unnatural lusts are testified in divers records and books. their clergy cannot choose but be unclean, when they refuse marriage, and forswear it. their massacres and murders, and rebellions are recorded in many histories. and the memory thereof will now be recorded in acts of parliament. that they allow public stews, themselves deny not. and do they think, that wallowing like swine in their fleshly works, they shall be saved?  
Athanasius in the end of his Creed saith, it is not possible a man should be saved unless he believe the catholic faith. but this catholic faith the Papists believe not entirely, for neither do they give to Christ human flesh, nor make him a perfect man, thrusting his body into a small piece of bread, or rather into the accidents of bread, where it is neither seen nor felt, as other men's bodies are. further they do not believe his ascension, or that he shall come from heaven to judge quick & dead, as is contained in that Creedo, making their followers believe, that his body is upon every altar, and not being able to deny, that he shall come out of the pyx, seeing they teach he is there.  
Our Saviour Christ Matth 15. teacheth us, that such worship God in vain, as teach for doctrines men's precepts. but the doctrine of Popery, as it addeth to ancient Catholic religion, is nothing but a mass of human inventions, devices, and precepts: their decretales are the Pope's devices: their forms of worship contained in the missals and breviaries are merely human.  
From man's devise proceeded the popish worship of Angels, Saints, Images. the most part of the resolutions of cases of consciences is grounded on the Pope's laws, finally the turnings, skippings, heave, greasing, spittings, and other ceremonies of mass-priests and their followers proceed from man's invention. Popery therefore by Christ's rule is nothing but weariness and vexation of men's souls, while they seek to serve God by those means.  
By the chapter si Papa. dist. 40. we learn, that the Pope may be remiss and negligent in his office, and silent in teaching, and lead innumerable people with him into hell. but if the Papists are to adhere to the Pope, and to follow him; how can they escape when he leadeth them into hell, that they run not headlong into hell themselves also? If then they will not believe scriptures, nor fathers; yet their own decrees may teach them, that following the Pope innumerable Papists run headlong into hell.  
Besides the testimonies of scriptures and fathers and the confession of Boniface in the chapter si Papa. dist. 40. divers reasons teach us, that the Papists holding firmly and positively the erroneous doctrine of the modern church of Rome, cannot be saved. for first no man can come unto the father but by Christ jesus, as he testifieth of himself john 14: he showeth also, that he is the way the truth and the life. the Apostle 1. Tim. 2. teacheth us, that there is no mediator betwixt God and man, but the man Christ jesus. but the Papists as they pretend, come to God not only by Christ, but also by the Virgin Mary, by Angels and Saints. they seek out also new ways, & content not themselves with such, as Christ taught us. finally they believe, that the Pope by his indulgences, and every masspriest by his Masses is able to redeem men's souls.  
Secondly he that buildeth his faith upon other foundation than the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets, doth build upon sand, and not upon a firm foundation. but the Papists build their faith upon the Pope's decretales, upon unwritten and uncertain traditions, upon the doctrine of the Romish church, upon miracles and prophecies reported in the Romish legends, and such like fables. do they not then build upon rumours foundations?  
Thirdly the papists hope to be justified by the law, and to be saved by their works. But the Apostle Rom. 3. teacheth us, that man is justified without the works of the law, and Rom. 6. that eternal life is the gift of God through jesus Christ our Lord.  
Fourthly the law of God pronounceth him accursed, that abideth not in all the words of the law to do them. and a plain matter it is, that no man can be saved, that wilfully breaketh God's law and never sorroweth, nor craveth pardon for his transgression. but the Papists teach doctrine contrary to God's law, and enforce their followers to break it, and that in divers points. God commandeth us to have no other gods but him. but they honour the Sacrament, and the images of the Trinity, and cross with divine worship. they do also impart God's worship to the virgin Marie and to saints. he forbiddeth the taking of God's holy name in vain. the Popes of Rome do dispense with oaths, and enforce men oftentimes to break them. God commandeth us to honour our parents. the Pope setteth the children against their parents. finally, they allow public stews, and set up shops of usury, and massacre innocent Christians, directly against God's commandment, and that without all remorse of conscience, or feeling of their sins.  
Fiftly, papists hope to obtain remishon of sins by their own satisfactions, by indulgences, by the pains of Purgatory, by masses, by auricular confess. on, and popish absolution of Massepriestes, and divers human devices. but relying upon these broken reeds, there is no hope for them to be saved for without the only sacrifice of Christ jesus applied to us by true faith, there is no hope of remission of sins.  
Sixtly, without true faith it is not possible to please God. but their perverse doctrine of faith, and the innumerable heresies of papists do declare, that they have no true faith.  
Seventhly, the Prophet David Psal. 15. demanding who shall rest upon God's holy mountain, answereth among other things, he that slandreth not with his tongue, nor doth evil to his neighbour. but the Papists, as is formerly showed, have no other means to uphold their ruinous state, but by lies and slanders, treasons, rebellions, murders, and massacres of innocent Christians.  
Finally, it is not possible, they should be saved, that are ignorant of the means of their salvation, and hold heresies repugnant to the apostles doctrine of the law, of the gospel, of repentance from dead works, and other articles of the faith. but the Papists believe, that Christ is only the meritorious cause of their salvation, as if he had merited only, that they might sauce themselves, they teach also, that men are justified formally by their own works, & that their supposed sacraments, and their pilgrimages, and voluntary observances of the precepts of the Romish church, and works performed according to the Pope's decretales, and conventicle of Trent, do justify. Lastly they teach and believe doctrine contrary to the law, to the gospel, to the Apostles doctrine of repentance and good works. are they not then in miserable case?  
Now if any man ask, what is then become of all those, that either now die, or in time past are dead in places where Popery is, or hath been professed? I answer: that of those, that held the foundation, and lived well, we hope well. but we deny that such as lived before the conventicle of Trent held Popery positively. we hope also, that many there are among the papists now, which conform themselves to them in outward ceremonies, and yet believe not the errors of Popery positively, but hold themselves to the old Apostolic saith. and of these men's salvation we have no cause to despair. God grant that the rest also may revoke their errors, see their deformities, return with a sincere heart to God's true church, and so be saved.   

CHAP. LV. A brief recapitulation of the principal points of the former discourse, and an exhortation both to Papists and true Christians.  
THus we see, and I pray God all Christians may diligently consider, what is meant by popish religion. briefly, it is a collection of divers corruptions and errors maintained by the Pope and his adherents, either contrary, or above the Apostles doctrine. this religion we have showed to have been built upon weak, uncertain and  foundations; and aver, that it is contrary to the doctrine of God's law, and of true faith and justification through Christ. the same also teacheth erroneously of the Gospel, and diminisheth the merits of Christ our mediator and redeemer.  
Further, it hath corrupted the doctrine of the sacraments, and brought in many old and new heresies. it is compacted of divers impieties, blasphemies and idolatries, and never came from Jerusalem. it was never taught by the Prophets or Apostles, nor professed by ancient Christian Kings.  
It is not that religion, to which the ancient Britan's and English were converted, nor doth it deserve to be called Catholic, or ancient. it is found to be repugnant to ancient counsels, and to the faith of the ancient fathers.  
It is a religion divers from that of the ancient Martyrs of Christ jesus. A religion devised by man, and not derived out of holy scriptures. A religion whose founders & defenders do wickedly wrest and abuse scriprures, fathers and other writers. A religion consisting of heathenish and jewish observances. A religion full of contradictions and contrarieties. A religion stained with many fooleries and absurdities. A religion keeping Christians in ignorance of true piety, and losing the reins to all voluptuousness and disorder. A religion devoid of good works and piety. A religion that maketh a base account of God's people, and teacheth doctrines of Devils. A religion of whose grounds and doctrines the professors thereof have no assurance. A religion repugnant to laws of nations, of kindred, alliance and common civility. A religion prejudicial to the authority of Kings, and dangerous in regard of their states and persons. A religion that layeth grievous burdens on men's consciences, and eateth up Christians through manifold exactions. A religion without true bishops and priests, and wholly maintained by false allegations, forgeries, calumniations, lies, fire and sword, perjury and breach of covenant. A religion whose chief founders and maintainers have been commonly noted for wicked and profane men. A religion more absurd in divers points, and that oppresseth Christians more grievously, than Mahometry. A religion by whose practice the empire of Christians is decayed, & the power of the Turk enlarged. A religion professed by degenerated Romans, neither for faith, nor life comparable to their ancestors, and by a church, that was never visible until of late time, nor can show better marks, or bring better motives to induce men to embrace her doctrine, than the Turks and Paynims. To conclude, a religion, whose professors can neither be esteemed true subjects, nor true Christians, nor justly pretend either assurance, or hope of their salvation.  
I do therefore exhort all true Christians, as they desire either that the true faith of Christ jesus may be publicly received, or that doctrines contrary to piety, Christian charity, policy, reason and common humanity may be suppressed, to beware of the levain of Popery, & to concur with those, which both teach and set forward the true Catholic faith according to the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets, and which seek to resist all corruptions, false doctrines, sects and heresies, and to root up the seeds of all treachery and rebellion.  
On the other side I beseech all Papists, to cast away all prejudice and passion, and diligently to consider of the premises: that as they profess themselves true subjects, & well affected to Catholic, & the ancient religion of the church of Christ; so they may abhor their former treasons and rebellious, detest the mass-priests and powder-men their consorts, reject all heresies, errors, and false doctrines masked with glorious titles of universality and antiquity, and set forth by the Pope and his complices, teaching a late particular faith, and finally endeavour to be gathered together into that society, whereof Christ is the head, and without which there is no salvation.  
The God of all truth confirm and establish all true Christians in truth, and discover all treacheries and errors, that such as now are disloially minded, and wander astray, may acknowledge their former disloialties and errors, and embrace the true Catholic faith, and that such as stand may be confirmed in the truth, that so both they and we jointly may live loyally under our Princes, and truly serve one true and everliving God, and glorify his holy name through Christ our Lord, to whom together with the Father and the holy Ghost, three persons and one God, we render all praise and honour now and for ever.    

A brief note of the contents of every Chapter of the former discourse.  

Chap. 1. WHat is meant by Popery or popish religion in this whole treatise.  
Chap. 2. Of the grounds and foundations of popish religion.  
Chap. 3. Of the wicked doctrine of Papists concerning the law of God, and the performance thereof.  
Chap. 4. Of the damnable doctrine of Papists concerning faith and justification.  
Chap. 5. What Papists do mean speaking of the Gospel.  
Chap. 6. Of the impious doctrine of Papists concerning Christ our Saviour.  
Chap. 7. The strange contradictory and false opinions of Papists concerning the Sacraments.  
Chap. 8. That Popery is a mixture of old and new heresies.  
Chap. 9 A catalogue of divers notorious impieties and blasphemies contained not only in popish books, but also in the corpse of popish religion.  
Chap. 10. That Popery is a sink of heathenish idolatry.  
Chap. 11. That popish religion never came from Jerusalem.  
Chap. 12. That Popish religion was never taught either by the old Prophets, or by the apostles of Christ jesus.  
Chap. 13. That Popery was either condemned or not know ●s by kings professing Christian religion in old time.  
Chap. 14. That the ancient Britanes and English were not first converted to popish religion.  
Chap. 15. That popish religion is most falsely termed catholic religion; and papists, Catholics.  
Chap. 16. That popish religion is not the ancient religion of the primitive church.  
Chap. 17. That Popery is repugnant to ancient Counsels.  
Chap. 18. That popery is not the faith of the ancient fathers of the church.  
Chap. 19 That popish religion was never testified by the blood of Christian martyrs.  
Chap. 20. That popery is a mere human device, and not in any sort to be deduced or proved out of holy scriptures.  
Chap. 21. That popish religion in divers points is directly contrary to holy scriptures.  
Chap. 22. That the founders and desenders of popery do most wickedly abuse holy scriptures.  
Chap. 23. That the Pope and the principal proctor's of his cause are great forgers and falsifiers of fathers, profane writers, and of public records.  
Chap. 24. That Popery standeth much upon heathenish observances and customs.  
Chap. 25. That popery borroweth also divers fashions from the jews.  
Chap. 26. That popish religion is full of contradictions and contrary opinions.  
Chap. 27. That popery is a most absurd and foolish religion.  
Chap. 28. That popery keepeth Christians in blindness, and ignorance of God, and godliness.  
Chap. 29. That popish religion giveth the reins to licentiousness of life, & leadeth Christians the broad way to destruction.  
Chap. 30. That popish religion bringeth forth such bitter fruits, that the professors thereof have no reason to boast of their works.  
Chap. 31. That in popery a base account is made of princes and all laymen.  
Chap. 32. That popery is a doctrine of devils.  
Chap. 33. That Papists can have no assurance of the truth of their religion.  
Chap. 34. That popery is repugnant to the laws of nations.  
Chap. 35. That popery dissolveth the bonds of kindred all 〈◊〉 and civility.  
Chap. 36. That popish religion either disannulleth, or greatly preiudiceth the authority of kings and princes.  
Chap. 37. That Kings professing popish religion are either no kings, or but half kings.  
Chap. 38. That kings live not in any security of their lines, where popery is professed by their subjects.  
Chap. 39 That Popish religion layeth grievous burdens on men's consciences.  
Chap. 40. That popish religion is very grievous in regard of the pope's and the mass-priests manfolde taxes and exactions.  
Chap. 41. That the popish church hath no true bishops, nor priests.  
Chap. 42. That popery cannot be maintained without forgery and falsehood.  
Chap. 43. That popery cannot be well upholden without calummations and lies.  
Chap. 44. That the cause of popery is not maintained without fire and sword.  
Chap. 45. That the practices, and treaties of pope's, and their complices with Christians are not to be trusted.  
Chap. 46. That the chief founders, and maintainers of popery have been commonly noted for wicked, and profane men.  
Chap. 47. That popery in many points is more absurd and abominable, than the doctrine of Mahomet.  
Chap. 48. That christians are less oppressed under the Turk, then under the Pope.  
Chap. 49. That the ambition, covetousness, contention & practice of pope's is the principal cause of the decay of the Christian empire, and a great occasion of the good success of the Turks.  
Chap. 50. That the moderns church of Rome is much degenerated from the faith, and manners of the ancient Romans'.  
Chap. 51. That the Romish church, that now is, was invisible in old time.  
Chap. 52. That the marks of the church, and motives to the modern Romish faith alleged by Papists, may as well be all dged by Turks and infidels.  
Chap. 53. That true Papists cannot be true, nor loyal subjects.  
Chap. 54. That such Papists, as positively hold all the heretical and false doctrines of the mederne church of Rome, cannot possibly be saved.  
Chap. 55. A brief recapitulation of the principal points of the former discourse, and art exhortation both to Papists and true Christians.