A LETTER APOLOGETICAL OF GEORGE BRISSE Lord of Desgrutieres, wherein are set down the reasons that moved him to turn to the Reformed.  
WRITTEN TO MONsieur TOURAINE, Advocate in the Court of Parliament of BRETANY.  
A WORK VERY PROFITAble for those to read that desire to know the grounds of their Religion.  
Translated out of French.  
LONDON, printed by G. ELD for RICHARD LEA, and are to be sold at his shop at the North entry of the Royal Exchange, 1616.   

The Epistle to the READER.  
AS to serve GOD is the part of a Christian, so how to serve him aright is the part of a wise Christian to learn. I am deceived if this Book do not teach that; and therefore cannot receive too much applause. This superstitious age is linked in Marriage to heresy, who have begot many impious Infants, I mean books both ridiculous and blasphemous written by Sectaries, but especially by the Romish writers. The most gross errors of whom this Treatise unfolds. Thank the Author for the Work, Me for the translation, and GOD for both. Farewell.   

SIR  
IF heretofore you have done me the honour to repute me a man of desert, and have been desirous of my salvation, I desire that now also you would have me in the like esteem. To the end therefore that my alteration of religion imprint in you no hard conceit of me, I have thought it fit to set down the motives, and reasons which have induced me to this change; beseeching you to believe (and my GOD knows that I lie not) that I have not had regard to any human considerations, but on the contrary have not hearkened to the promises and promotions which the Roman Church offered unto me; and have lost the friendship of many personages, whom nevertheless I will not leave to love, and honour, and you principally, Sir, whose virtue, and good opinion I have ever much esteemed, and desired. These considerations infuse a hope into me that you will relish well my reasons, which briefly, and summarily I will here set down.  
Give me leave then to tell you, Sir, that when I was the most zealously addicted to the Roman Religion, I had notwithstanding this persuasion that Religion is not subject to men, how great and learned soever they be, but that they are subject to Religion. I also then held Religion to be the Rule of salvation given by GOD to men, to which every man ought to be subjected, it being not permitted to any one to exempt himself, or to change, or diminish it. And thereupon inquiring of some of the Roman Church (whom I reputed the most learned) where this Rule was given by GOD, they answered that it was contained in that book commonly called the Bible, and that it was peculiar to this book only to be styled the Word of God. According to their information (having first invoked GOD for increase of knowledge) I set myself to read this book, and having read intentively all the Gospel, I was much astonished to find almost nothing in it that had been taught me. I plainly perceived that it was not there commanded to invoke the Saints, nor to render any service to Images, nor to sacrifice JESUS CHRIST, nor to adore the Host, nor to pray to GOD without understanding: I also clearly saw that there was no mention made of Purgatory, nor of Lent, nor of Masses, nor of Merits, nor of Monks, nor of diverse Orders of Religion, nor of the Primacy of the Roman Church. In a word, I found few things there, which I thought to be expressly commanded in the Word of GOD; nay quite contrary, I found many passages contradictory to those things which in former time I had learned.  
Being in this Labyrinth, I thought the next way to get out was, to address myself to some of the greatest Scholars of that Religion, and to implore their aid. Which I did, and received this answer from them, that it was not for me to read the Holy Scripture, and to inquire after things which passed my capacity. Also they told me that the Catholic Roman Church had so ordained, to which the holy Scripture sends us, saying that it is the pillar and the prop of Verity. 1 Tim. 3. vers. 15. Who hears not the Church, aught to be held for a Pagan, and a Publican. Mat. 18. and JESUS CHRIST saith to S. Peter, I have prayed that thy faith fail thee not: which manifesteth unto us, that the Roman Church founded upon Saint Peter cannot err in faith.  
Discoursing of these things with myself, I thus said to myself. I believe that JESUS CHRIST died for me, and that the promises contained in the word of GOD appertain to me as well as to any other of the Church. Wherefore then should I not dare to look into those things which appertain unto me? If I had books of love or fables, they would not take them from me, and yet they will deprive me of that book, which they themselves affirm to be the word of God. And if (as they say) it be not to be read but by the learned, no man should ever read it, since that no man can be learned in it before he have read it. I had thought that men had read the Scripture to become learned in Piety, and to attain to that heavenly wisdom, which outshines all human wisdom as much as the Sun a candle. I also assure myself that the Scribes and Pharisees were as learned as any now alive, and as conversant in the Scriptures as any of the Roman Church, and yet we find that CHRIST being demanded by his Disciples why the Scribes, and Pharisees understood him not, answered; that to them was not given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God. Yet the Papists would persuade us that a man may be learned in the Gospel before he read it. Why do they allege to me passages of Scripture, since they will not permit me to see whether they allege them faithfully or no. I would have them to show me the places which they cite to prove the authority of the Roman Church. As for that passage where the Church is called the pillar, and the prop of Verity, I find that there is no mention at all made of the Roman Church, no more then of the Greek, or Syrian. I may add also, that there is no likelihood that the Divine truth should be founded upon men, it being more convenient that men should make the word of GOD their foundation. S. Paul by these words meaneth only that the Church is established by GOD on the earth to maintain, and defend the Truth against infidels, and enemies of the Truth: so that these words represent to the Church her duty, and not her authority. So the Syrian Church founded by jesus Christ, and his Apostles was a pillar of verity against the jews and Pagans, but this did not free it from error. The same may also have happened to the Church of Rome.  
As concerning the passage, which says, that he who hears not the Church ought to be held as a Pagan, and a Publican; he that reads the precedents, and subsequents shall soon perceive that these words serve not to prove that the Roman Church, which they call Catholic (that is to say Universal) should be judge in deciding controversies of Religion. First, because in that place the Roman Church is not named. Secondly, because that there it is not spoken of controversies of religion, but of a quarrel between two brethren. Thirdly, it is evident that the Catholic, or universal Church is not there meant; for to take up a quarrel between two brethren we should in vain expect the judgement of the Church universal: by the Church then in this place is meant the Pastors, and Conductors of some Church particular, endeavouring to appease the malice of particular men: and it is according to the precept of GOD in his word, that he, who will not consent to what they shall decree, be put in the same rank with Pagans, and Publicans.  
The third passage is that which most offends me; for this seems to me to be a hard consequence; I have prayed that thy faith fail not, Peter: then the Roman Church cannot err. By the reading of the whole passage it does appear most manifest that CHRIST speaks not at all to the Church, nor of the Church, but that he directs his speech only to the person of S. Peter, preparing him for the temptation, into which he was shortly after to fall, that is, to deny his Saviour. JESUS CHRIST promiseth him by these words that his faith shall not fail him in this temptation, but that he should no sooner fall, but that the hand of GOD should raise him up again. Secondly, and if CHRIST should there have meant the Church of Rome, is it possible that neither that place, nor any other passage of Scripture should mention it? Thirdly, which more is, if our faith be built upon this supposition, to wit, that Saint Peter is the head of the Church universal, and that he hath made the Bishop of Rome his successor, not only in the Bishopric of Rome, but also in the charge of being head of the Church, and that this charge hath succeeded in a direct line without variation of doctrine, and without interruption of succession; If all this be true, I demand how the people shall be assured of it, since that to know it, many histories, and authors ancient, and modern are to read; which are written in a tongue which the people understands not. In this point also then I remain unsatisfied.  
I must needs confess to you also that after I had learned that the Roman Church held, that consecration, and Transubstantiation is not at all in the Mass unless the Priest have intention to consecrate, I feared much I might at one time or other commit Idolatry, knowing that oftentimes the Priest hath his mind otherwise busied, or does not believe himself that which he does, or is a derider, and a profane man: from whence it necessarily followeth, those who adore that which the priest lifts up, adore bread, and call it their creator, and their God. I fell into this perplexity by reading the Gospel, where I found the institution of this Sacrament no way to be considered by the Papists. First, for I found that in the Gospel all the assistants did communicate; but in the Mass ordinarily the Priest alone eats. Secondly, likewise every one received both the species. Saint Paul 1 Cor. 11. speaking to the people commands every one to prove himself, and to drink of this cup; but in these days the cup is taken from the people. Thirdly, JESUS CHRIST did not lift up the Host as do the Priests. Fourthly, the Apostles did not adore the Host, as in these times the people do. Fiftly, in the whole institution of this Sacrament there is no mension at all made of Sacrifice, nor is it commanded that JESUS CHRIST be sacrificed for the living, and for the dead. Sixtly, JESUS CHRIST spoke in a tongue which the people understood. Seventhly, the Gospel saith that JESUS CHRIST took bread and broke it: clean contrary, the Roman Church affirms that the Priest does not break bread, but the accidents of bread, to wit, the colour and roundness of bread, etc. Eightly, the Gospel witnesseth that JESUS CHRIST took bread, broke it, and gave it on the contrary, the Roman Church holds that the Priest gives not bread. 10. I find also in Saint Mat. 26. vers. 29. and in Saint Mar. 14. vers. 25. that JESUS drank of the fruit of the vine, that is to say, wine; it was then wine when he drank it: for although two cups are mentioned, as appears by Saint Luke; yet Saint Matthew, and Saint Mark speaking only of the cup of the Sacrament cannot questionless understand by the fruit of the vine the wine of a cup, of which they speak not. 11 I also find in S. Paul, Cor. 10 ve. 16. & cha. 11. ve. 26. that we eat and break bread: but the Roman Church says that we neither eat, nor break bread. 12. It is apparent that Saint Paul expounds these words in form of a Paraphrase, in this manner, the bread, says he, which we break is the Communion to the body of CHRIST.  
But the Roman Church denies all this, and says that it is not bread, and that we break not bread, but the speeys, and apparences of bread: from whence it followeth that these appearances of bread should be the Communion to the body of CHRIST. 13. I find also in the Acts of the Apostles that the Disciples assembled themselves to break the bread. Chap. 2. vers. 46. and Chap. 20. vers. 7. It would seem a thing ridiculous to the Papists if one of their religion, going to receive the very body of CHRIST at Easter, should say that he goes to break bread.  
14 I see that the Gospel according to Saint Luke Chapter. 22. and the Apostle Saint Paul 1 Corinthians. Chapter. 11. informs us how these words (this is my body) are to be understood: for when they come to speak of the cup, in steed of (this is my blood) they thus expound, this cup is the New Testament in my blood. The bread than is the body of our Saviour in like manner as that which is in the cup is a Testament; which is not in substance, but in a Sacrament, As also JESUS CHRIST calleth it a commemoration, And as ordinarily in Scripture, signs and Sacraments take the names of that which they signify. 15 If the Cup be the Testament in the blood of CHRIST, as says Saint Luke, it is not then the very blood of CHRIST; for it were absurd to say that the blood of CHRIST is in the blood of CHRIST.  
I will further confess unto you that when I was at the height of my ignorance this manner of speaking (as to lift GOD, to carry GOD, and by the mouth to receive the creator) seemed to me harsh, and gross. Also, I could not hear without grief some of the reformed religion to upbraid us with our Priests making GOD, and that they sold GOD for a little money in private Masses; and that if JESUS CHRIST be in the Host, he which steals away the Host, must necessarily steal away JESUS CHRIST. They also in way of mockage told us that our greatest Doctors held that the body of CHRIST might be carried away by Mice, which would make any man's hair to stand an end, that hath in a dear esteem the honour of JESUS CHRIST, our blessed Saviour, the eternal Son of God. Moreover, to affirm that CHRIST'S body is in so many places, and that it is in every crumb of the bread, is not agreeable to the Gospel, which gives him a body like to ours, that he might be our brother. They who allege that his body is now glorified do not consider that when he made this Sacrament his body was yet infirm, and not glorified. Further, his glorification hath not changed his human nature, but hath only taken away the infirmities of it.  
There is also another inconvenience in the Roman Church, which drove me from it, which is, that whereas Saint Paul in the 10. Chap. to the Hebrews saith that we are sanctified only by the death of JESUS CHRIST, the Romish Priests say that the Mass is the same sacrifice with that of the Cross, and that they sacrifice JESUS CHRIST really, and truly for our redemption. Which I utterly dislike; for whereas at first the Romish Priests taught me that the death of JESUS CHRIST was the only price of our redemption, now they give me for the price of my redemption the sacrifice of the Mass, which notwithstanding is not the death of jesus Christ. It cannot be said that the Mass is the continuation of the sacrifice of the Cross; for than it should be the continuation of the death of Christ, and so CHRIST should die continually. To conclude, they which affirm that the Mass is the sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST, say withal that it is the application, and commemoration of the sacrifice of CHRIST on the cross: from whence this consequence may be derived, that it is not the sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST: for as the application of a plaster, is not a plaster: or as the application of a medicine, or a rule, is neither a medicine, nor a rule: so the application of the sacrifice of JESUS CHEST is not the sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST. The same may also be said of commemoration.  
Purgatory is another cause of my separation from the Romish Church. I learned at last that the Popish Purgatory was built upon this tenant, to wit, that JESUS CHRIST by his death, and suffering hath satisfied for the punishment of sins before Baptism, but that he hath not satisfied for the punishment of sins committed after Baptism. I was very inquisitive after this doctrine; as judging it to be a point most behoveful of all for a Christian to understand, since that it explains unto us what CHRIST hath done for us. But though with all diligence I read the Scriptures yet could I not find there any mention at all made of Purgatory. I than grew bolder, and thus questioned some of the Romish religion. Hath not JESUS CHRIST paid enough to deliver us from Purgatory? And if he have paid enough, why does not GOD accept, and take this payment for as much as it is worth? 2 And since that Christ makes intercession for us in heaven, why should not the souls be rather quit of Purgatory by his intercession, then by the indulgences of the Pope? 3 And if (as the Papists hold) none of the faithful which shall live at the day of judgement shall go to Purgatory, why cannot GOD as well exempt us, without violating his justice? 4 It is true, that nothing defiled shall enter into Paradis: but Saint john in his 1 Epist. chap. 1. saith that the blood of jesus Christ doth cleanse us from all sin. 5 The Roman Church also holds that in Purgatory sins are not purged away but punished; it may therefore more fitly be styled a Tormentary, than a Purgatory. The ordrus, and blots of our souls are not punishments, or pains, but sins, of which jesus Christ doth cleanse us. 6 It is necessary that the satisfaction of our Saviour be applied to us: but it is GOD that must prescribe the means how to apply it, for to us it is not permitted to invent them. Moreover, the ineanes applied to a thing ought to be contrary to the thing, there being no medicine which is applied with poison. In like manner the way to apply unto ourselves the remission of our debts by jesus Christ, is not to make us pay them. The means to apply to out selves his grace, and mercy, is not in tormenting us in a fire. Truly the holy Scripture produceth us examples of persons received into Paradise, and entered into peace, and glory, incontinently after their death; as the thief. Luke. 2.29. Saint Paul 2 Timo. 4.8. and Esay. 57 vers. 1. and 2 Apocal. 14. vers. 13. But we find no example of any man sent to Purgatory. 8 The only light which hath directed us to find out the error of this Purgatory is experience, which shows us that it is a thing merely invented for gain: for no man sees particular Masses but for those that give money: poor men must content themselves with general prayers, in which the rich have also a part. The Mendicant Friars never go to the funeral of a poor man, and yet his soul hath cost as much, and is no less precious in the eye of GOD then an Emperors. The letters of Indulgence, and personal dispensation, which the Pope grants, is not but for persons of quality.  
Another thing also much moved me; to wit, that a man cannot be assured of his salvation; which made me thus to reason with myself. Shall I any longer remain in a religion which (after I have made a hurde of merits, and satisfactions, nay, have bought the satisfactions of others) cannot assure me after all this whether I be the child of GOD, or of the Devil? what religion can this be which teacheth such distrust? On the contrary, through the whole Scripture GOD exhorts us to trust in him, and to come to him with a full certainty of Faith. Heb. 10.22. and bids us with boldness to trust in him with a lively faith in jesus Christ. Ephe. 3.12.  
Consider also, Sir, with me, that the commandments of the Roman Church are much more honoured & observed then the commandments of God. 1. Because it is there taught, that the Roman Church authorizeth the holy Scriptures, that is to say, that the ordinances of men authorize the commandments of God. 2 To eat flesh upon a good Friday is a greater sin then to commit murder, or adultery; yet is this the Friday, on which ordinarily Christ did eat the Paschall Lamb. 3 To blaspheme the name of GOD in this world is a small offence; but to speak ill of the Pope (especially in Italy, and Spain) is an unpardonable, and a burnable offence. 4 The jews have a religion which affirm Christ to be a cozener: but to say, that there is no other Purgatory but the blood of jesus Christ is a crime deserves the Inquisition. 5 Every Bishop of France may give absolution for faults committed against the law of GOD, but cannot absolve men of sins committed against the Pope, and his Sea. Also in the Roman Church they teach things absolutely contrary to the word of GOD, in his Gospel. 1 GOD saith Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make the likeness of things which are in the heavens, or in the earth, thou shalt not bow down before them, etc. But in the Roman Church they paint the Trinity, and kneel before the images of Saints. 2 GOD says in his law, Six days shalt thou labour: The Pope says thou shalt not labour six days, but shalt observe the feasts of every week. GOD says by his Apostle. 1. Tim. 3. vers. 2. & 4. that a Bishop should be a husband of one wife only, and that his children should be subject to him in all reverence: but the Roman Church willeth that a Bishop have neither wife, nor children. 4 GOD commands by his Apostle. 1 Cor. 10. that when we are invited to the houses of Infidels we should eat of all that which is set be, fore us, without making any scruple. On the contrary, the Roman Church commands thee, when thou art invited into the houses of Heretics, not to eat of all that which is set before thee in Lent, and on Good-Friday. 5. GOD says by his Apostle, 1 Cor. chap. 14. that it is better to speak five words in the Church in a tongue understood of the people, than ten thousand in an unknown tongue: On the contrary the Roman Church serves GOD in an unknown tongue. Neither doth she only err in this point, but in many others also. But it may be, Sir, you think that the Multitude warrants a religion. I find that jesus Christ. Mat. 7. vers. 13. would that we enter in by the straight door, saying that the way is large through which the multitude passeth, and leadeth to destruction. If you argue against me with signs, and miracles; I must answer you with my Saviour, that an adulterous nation demands signs; and in the 13 of Saint Mark he saith that false Doctors should come, making signs, and miracles to seduce. If you seek to convince me with the chair of the Pope, I answer you that the Pharisees objected to Christ the chair of Moses, and their succession, and yet were the enemies of jesus Christ. Also jesus Christ sends us not to Chairs, but to his word, saying in Saint john 10. that his sheep follow him, and hear his voice. And in the 8 chapter he saith. If you persever in my word, you shall be truly my Disciples. Moreover, at this day the Syrian, and Greek Churches, more ancient than the Roman, vant of the like succession, and condemn the Roman Church.  
If you reply that in the word of GOD there are difficulties, and obscure passages, I answer that I make myself in such things neither judge, nor interpetor, but this I am sure that I understand enough in the Scripture to save me. And I assure you that since I turned to the true religion of jesus Christ, I have learned more in two months than I did in all my life before. I have learned since to believe no longer by another man's faith. The consideration of these odious errors makes me exhort you, as you tender your salvation, to think of these things, and to deliver your soul from this captivity, to the end that you may glorify GOD on the earth, if you desire to be glorified in heaven. I beseech GOD that you may be, Sir and rest.  
FINIS.  
Your humble friend, and servant. DISGRUSTIERES.