AN EXAMINATION OF THOSE PLAVSIble Appearances which seem most to commend the Romish Church, and to prejudice the Reformed.  
DISCOVERING THEM to be but mere shifts, purposely invented, to hinder an exact trial of doctrine by the Scriptures.  
By Mr JOHN CAMERON.  
Englished out of French.  
OXFORD, Printed by john Lichfield and William Turner, for Edward Forrest. Ann. Dom. 1626.   

To the Reader.  
COurteous Reader: for preventing mistakes, give me leave to advertise thee, that in many passages of this book beside the running title, I have used the word Prejudice in a sense, not very usual in English, make it answer to the French word Preiugè, which my Author useth, not for an ill preconceit, as we commonly take it, but for such a plausible appearance, as before due examination, ma● be a probable ground for any preconceit of a thing, either good or bad. So Antiquity is a Prejudice for the Papists, and against us, because that before a judicious examination, it is a probable ground for common brains to conceive well of their Religion, and to mistrust ours. Secondly, I have not been so superstitious in expressing my Author's word, as I have observed some translators to be: I have not construed, but translated, keeping (as near as I could) an even course between a Pedant & a Paraphrast: For when the Original is not to be learned by the Translation, I tbink it not only lawful, but also convenient to make use of that liberty. The neglect of it, I take to be the reason, why commonly Translations are thought to taste flat in respect of the Original. I shall not wonder if some slips have escaped me, seeing a man may be as absurdly over seen by too much animadversion, as by none, and (which is the misery of the most circumspect diligence) a man may dote as much by gazing through a thing, as by staring beside it: yet I hope there are none so gross as that they may abuse either my Author, or his Reader.  
Farewell.   
AN EXAMINATION of the Prejudices of those of the Romish Church, against those of the Reformed Religion.  

CHAP. I. That passion blindeth the judgement of man, and hindereth it from assenting to the Truth.  
IT's a matter worthy astonishment, that not only vulgar brains, but even the most eminent wits, should suffer themselves to be so easily won, by the outsides of lies, to bear arms against the truth. Albeit the spirit of man, the more excellent a temper it is of, the more natural, and eager an appetite it hath after the knowledge of the trut●: by the same instinct loathing ignorance, and especially disdaining to be cheated. So that even the most artificial flatterers, instead of humouring it, would offend it, if it once conceived itself to be but flattered: as on the contrary, if it once completely apprehended the truth, it would stoop to it, how harsh and bitter soever it were. So hard is it but that the complete representation, the inside of a lie will offend us, and that of the truth affect us.  
But the cause of our mischief is the perverseness of our passions, which oftentimes so overheat, and distemper the heart, that out of it, as it were exhaling thick, and black vapours upon the understanding they either disturb our judgements, or altogether dull our apprehensions. Neither deal they so well with us as those piercing smokes, which bereaving man of his bodily sight, yet leave him still this uncomfortable privilege, that as he seeth nothing, so he cannot be gulled by any lying apparitions. Whereas when a heart chafed with passion, hath dimmed, yea extinguished the light of the understanding, yet that takes not from it a presumptuous conceit of its own clear sight, and real comprehension of the truth. Whence it cometh to pass, that man compassed about with thick darkness, confidently dreameth that he walketh in the Sun shine, and is strongly conceited that he hath then fast hold of the truth, when he huggeth an absurd, ridiculous fable. This corruption is almost universal, and like to a general distemper of all the humours in the body, it's dispersed into all the passages of man's life. In a word, it's the Epidemical disease of our souls which maketh us easily induced to believe all that for true which we desire should be so, as being more suitable to our dispositions, and convenient for the accomplishment, and execution of our desires, and designs. Upon this we invent unto ourselves probabilities, and readily entertain such as are presented unto us, to make us believe that matters are so as passion willeth us to conceive them: as on the contrary that which we desire should be false, as thwarting our aims, crossing and encumbring our enterprises by the like natural flattery of ourselves, we persuade ourselves that it is false indeed, or suffer ourselves to be easily so persuaded by another.  
The first vein of this corruption may be espied even in the infancy of man. Children are cheered, and delighted, if one tell them that the tale which pleaseth them is true, and they willingly believe it how strange, and fabulous soever it otherwise seem unto them: contrariwise they are vexed and discouraged, if one plainly tell them that it was feigned only for pleasure; it will be a hard matter to stick this impression into them. So naturally familiar is the power which passion hath, to darken, and blindfold the understanding.  
After the same manner whosoever loveth with a fit of passion, he will descry many shows of arguments to encourage his affection, in the discourse of him who extolleth that upon which he doteth. And as he desireth that that which he loveth should be praiseworthy, beholding it through this cloud, he vieweth it in a shape and colour far different from the natural. Parents ofttimes curbed by civility from an outward expression of their indiscreet affection, yet in themselves give the lie to those who freely tell them the truth of their children: for it being a just cause of extreme grief unto us to be the parents of untoward children, so is it hardly believed by us, so long as there remaineth any probability of the better contrary. He who is desirous to enter into a lawsuit will conceive a precious esteem of weak, and frivolous counsel, which persuadeth him that his cause is good: chose he will disesteem, and be much displeased with the solidereasons of a sage Counsellor, who out of the goodness both of his conscience, and skill, certifieth him of the weakness of his cause, and dissuadeth him from entering into law. All this proceedeth from this passion which entangleth his understanding, and hindereth it from a steady view of those cozening semblances, from an impartial examination of them, and from comparing of them with the truth. Even so some one sick of an ignominious disease, against all other Physicians he will willingly approve of him who shall judge him to be sick indeed, but of an honest disease. Imprinting according to his desire this false conceit into his mind, under the superscription of truth: for so a lie is never approved of, but masked with the looks of its opposite. Yea our own passions varnish it over, or at least hinder us from tearing of its veil, for fear lest we beholding it with a narrow eye, stripped of the borrowed face of truth, should be affrighted by its ugliness.   

CHAP. II. That this imperfection of judgement, proceeding from passion, is discovered principally in the cause of Religion.  
IT may be that in the civil part of man's life where (if the worst come to the worst) it toucheth but the temporal good: this affected winking of the understanding is not altogether hurtful. But in Religion it fareth otherwise, the danger here is dreadful, and the loss beyond recovery: when all here is embarked, and carried away, the body & the soul, not to be no more, which would be at least a forlorn kind of happiness, but to be everlastingly miserable, which is the woeful compliment of all unhappiness.  
And yet for all that this mischievous quality hath so encroached upon our nature, and insinuated itself into such good footing, that it's never more domineering, and peremptory, then when the question is concerning Religion, the salvation of the soul, and the worship which God requireth of us. 
a Vid. epist. de progress. Rel. Christian, ap. Jndos.  The poor Indians so long as they are showed brave ensign, or curious picture (because the embroidery, and painting ravish the sense, and man is naturally idolatrous) run to them like birds to the fowler's cry, even to adore them, as if they enshrined some Deity. But otherwise, let o●e tell them of their errors, of the errors of their forefathers, they will demand (
b Munsler in, Cosm. descrip. F●is.  as did the Prince of Friesland) What is become of their progenitors, and friends, formerly dead in their errors? And if one answer them, that they are in hell, they will reply, that they will go thither also, secretly giving us to understand, that there is no likelihood they should be there, The love which they bear towards them maketh them mistake this sad truth for a lie, because it implieth the condemnation of those whom nature, or acquaintance hath most endeared to them.  
If by reasons so sensible, that mere sense might comprehend them, it be strongly endeavoured to make the folly of the Turkish Religion visible unto a Turk, all this while the Sun is but showed to a beetle, the Turk sees not a whit: not as if that had impaired his senses, but it being an irksome business to acknowledge the horrid absurdities of his superstition, his passions grow furious, & either besot his understanding, or divert it from a discontenting speculation of such a truth, which being assented to, would force him to pronounce sentence of condemnation upon his countrymen, his Sultan, his friends, and kindred. This is so torturing a grief unto him, that nature will not suffer him to believe it, and so it remaineth as incredible unto him, as it is unpleasant, unless God work above nature.  
Let us accuse the obstinate jews of blasphemy, by testimonies of Scripture, we shall stop their mouths, we shall convince them, but yet for all that not convert them. 
c Rom. 1●. 2.  An inconsiderate zeal without knowledge (as the Apostle hath observed it) 
d Gal. 1.14.  a superstitious reverence of the traditions of their fathers, 
e Rom. 10.3.  a sottish doting upon their own righteousness, 
f joh. 6.15. Act. 1.6.  a desire of the restauration of their state, of their restablishment in the land of promise; 
g 2. Cor. 3.16.  overspread their eyes, as it were, with a veil, so that they cannot behold the glory of God in the face of Christ; 
h Mat. 15.3 6. Marc. 7.8.9 & 13.  who nullifieth their traditions; 
i Luc. 18.9.8.  teareth from them the false covert of righteousness; 
k joh. 6.15. Act. 1.7.  who confoundeth their hope of an earthly kingdom, and prosperity; 
l joh. 18.36.  who frustrateth their expectation of a King, a Messias triumphing in secular pomp: 
m Mat. 11.29.  who bindeth them to the taking up of his Cross, 
n 1. Cor. 1.23.  presenting himself to them crucified, 
o Act. 2.23.  and in his Cross the shame, & horror of the rebellion of their Ancestors.  
All this is thus, and more harsh to the natural apprehension of the jew: and therefore he is no less blockish, and backward to believe it. In as much as he considereth not, neither alloweth the true, & full poise to those means whereby this truth should be proved unto him. It is then from his passion that this his 
joh, 9.39. & 49.  affected, voluntary, and in consequence malicious ignorance proceedeth.   

CHAP. III. That the understanding troubled by the affections of the heart, always findeth pretences, to make itself believe that which it desireth should be true.  
IT is not so, for all this, that this ignorance wanteth colour, which giveth it at least the aspect, and complexion of a true knowledge, insomuch that it deceiveth him who hath it, and oftentimes others also. 
a 1 Cor. 1.23.  The Paynims puffe● up with a conceit of their own wisdom, esteemed the doctrines of Christian Religion to be mere dotages. 
b Videses Apolog. Ch●●stian. 〈◊〉 Ge●t●s viz: duas Ap●log. justini d●s●er: Tatiani ●heoph C●em. Alex. Tertul. in Ap●log. Arnob. Minut. F●lic. Lactan. joseph. cont. A●pion. Cyprian cont, Dem●t. N●zi●n co●. ●ulian.  To this purpose they alleged all that which reason blinded with passion could furnish them with, albeit that in their superstition they believed many things much more repugnant to humane reason. They alle●ged Antiquity, and yet all the Pagan superstition sprang up long after the truth. Had we but the ●earned discourse of josephus against Appion, it is enough to instruct us that that wisdom so much vaunted of was of late birth in comparison to th●t of God, to that of the Church. They alleged also their 
c Minut. Fel. Arno● lib 7. Te●tul Apolog. cap 22·  miracles, their prodigious wonders, their oracles, t●e 
d Arnob. lib. 1. Cyprian. contr. Dem●t. Maxim. Im●er. in edict. ●useb Eccles. 〈◊〉. ab. 9 c. 7.  disasters which befell the world after the publication of Christianity: as if it had not been confirmed by many, and most admirable miracles against the contemners of it: as if it had not been promised, & spoken of long before by oracles far exceeding theirs in clearness, antiquity, and truth: as if whilst the Pagan superstition flourished the world had not smarted under the same evils, which it felt since the preaching of th● Gospel, or as if it had felt more tolerable plagues. And as i● this multiplication of evils were not rather to be attributed to the contempt of so excellent a gra●e t● t●e butchery, and martyring of so many poor souls guilty of nothing but Christianity, blameless in all other respects, living not so much like men, 
Symmach li 10. epi●t. 〈…〉.  as Angels.  
If you please but to read the relation of Symmachus to t●e Emperors Theodosius, Valentinian, and Arcadius apologizing for Paganism, you shall find there were never grosser untruths invented, nor yet more like unto truth: that nothing could be spoken with more impiety, or more plausibility, the author being as eloquent, as he was irreligious.  
These poor Paynims little thought they maintained a bad cause; their affection to it made them mistake it for good. 
e Tertul Apol. cap. 49.  They excused that in Paganism, which in Christianity they esteemed a folly, a crime, a sacriledge· For Paganism they enslaved their understandings, & busied them to search out reasons against reason, in it they swallowed even Elephants. On the contrary in the Christian Religion they accuratly strained, and sifted every circumstance: the propension of their affections swayed them to an approof of the Religion of their 
f Sym. in rel●●  Ancestors, forbade them to condemn so many brave spirits of ignorance, to remove the bounds which the renowned Ancients had fixed, to tumble into the hazard of ruin, and confusion (so they imagined) their Empire, and 
g Mecaen. apud Dion. lib. 52.  Commonwealth which never receiveth such violent tosses, nor ever feeleth such furious shaking-fits as when alterations in matter of Religion are stirring in it. Having upon these considerations conceived a hatred against Christianity, it was easy for them afterward to invent more prejudices against it.  

h Act. 3.17. 1. Cor. 2 6.  The jews for the most part blindly condemned Christ, and his doctrine. 
i joh. 7.17.  But if any one will do the will of my father (saith the Lord unto them) he shall judge of the doctrine: noting thereby, that the primary cause of their malicious ignorance was the corruption of their hearts. Yet they were not to seek for pretences. They opposed against him 
k Mark 7.5. Math. 15.2.  antiquity, 
l joh 8 33.  succession, 
m R●m 11.  the promises made unto them, 
n Ma●k. 1.27.  the strangeness, and novelty of his doctrine, 
o joh 6 42. Mat. 13. ●5. joh 7 49.  the contemptible condition of himself, his disciples, and followers. But the cause of this evil lay deeper, inveterated even with in their marrow, 
p Act ●. 5.  an invincible hardness of heart, 
q Gal. 1.14.  an obstinate resolution not to let go their hold of the superstition of their forefathers.   

CHAP. FOUR That Passion in the cause of Religion produceth at this day the like effects, and covereth itself with the like plausible pretences.  
WHo doubteth but that at this day, the same passions cause us to conceive the same prejudices against the same truths? It's a very harsh point to condemn our forefathers for Heretics, this is to putrify their memories, it seemeth to be an impious, and unnatural act towards them. The Pagans had this consideration, the jews had it, and have it at this day. We who are men as they are, subject to the same passions with them, have the very same inclination, willingly to believe that the Religion of our Grandfathers, was the only holy, and divine Religion.  
It● insupportable to nature (because tempered with little sweetness) to incur●e disgrace, to procure the displeasure of parents, kindred, neighbours, countrymen, superiors. These respects are able to produce in us at least this effect, to make us wish that the religion of those to whom nature, and the civil laws have obliged us were the true. This desire afterward can it not stagger the judgement: and this staggering can it not terminat itself in a firm resolution to hold ourselves fast unto it: and not to examine whether it be as sound as it is favourable? Because that coming to discern its imperfections, our conscience will not suffer us to be any longer at quiet, until we change it for a better, even upon condition of running into inconveniences so cumbersome, and unwelcome unto the sense of our nature.  
So then, when the ambitious spirit of man perceiveth itself taken up already on the one side, by a religion propitious to his ambition, and invited on the other side by such a one as bindeth him to renounce the honour, and embrace the infamy of the world, shall we doubt of his partiality in the choice? Is it not easy to judge on which side he will turn the balance? Certainly man cannot strip himself out of all affection of religion; in the same proportion he doth that, he unmanneth himself, and is at best, but a monster of nature in humane shape. Perforce than he is to make profession of some kind of religion, the profession of irreligion being more infamous than that of a brutish, stupid sensuality. But amongst so many religions when he cometh to the choice of the True his affections, his particular interests accompany him to the balance, and there sway all. The truth how sound soever propounded, how evidently soever manifested, how powerfully soever urged is not able to make the counterpoise. For this cause St. Paul recommending the Gospel, and wishing the knowledge of it to King Agrippa, excepted his bonds: as knowing right well, what a stumbling block the bonds, and cross of the Gospel are to Potentates.  
We are wont to excuse at least, if not to defend a wicked person if favourable, and beneficial unto us, and we think the carriage of a good man to be peevish, froward, and cruel if he oppose our ends, & thwart our purposes. Just so it is with our affection towards religion: if it favoureth us, and apply itself to our humours we are curious in inventing tricks to adorn it, and artificial colours to beautify it. If we do already, or are like to make profession of it upon good advantageous hire, in this case probabilities are unto us so many convincing, & irresistible demonstrations: the grosser and more palpable heresies in it are but petty mistakes: the horrible abuses, and enormities are but such slips as should be borne with in the spirit of meekness. But towards the religion cross to his affections, and which is is an enemy to his ambition man behaveth himself after another fashion: he stretcheth, and straineth his wits to espy some faults in it▪ in it a small wrinkle, a wart, a superficial spot seemeth unto him an hideous deformity. Oft times he will not or dares not so much as look upon it, for fear of being captivated by its beauty. He willingly openeth the ear to him who is a deadly enemy of it, to him who slandereth it; he stops it against them who only can represent it to him in its native purity, never considering but in hasty, and prefunctory thoughts, the firmness of its grounds, for fear lest a truth so evident, and powerful should come to master, and tame the rebellion of his understanding.   

CHAP: V: That to be throughly assured of the truth of a Religion, it is necessary to examine the nature of the reasons, upon which it is grounded.  
seeing that such is the inclination of our nature, it concerneth him who desireth to be throughly settled in the assurance of the truth of his Religion, narrowly to consider, whether they are bare prejudices, plausible pretences, respects merely carnal which make it pleasing unto him, or whither the truth of it be so clear, and evident, that the conscience remains convinced with it, the soul satisfied, the mind resolved and content. This disquisition, this meditation will be of excellent use in making way for the discerning in matter of Religion, of truth from error, superstition from piety, of the abuse from that which is legitimate, custom from law. For it will furnish us with proofs, not drawn from the circumstances of the accessary, and that which is merely accidental: but such as are grounded upon the principal, and which result from the nature, & essence of the thing itself. Proofs infallible, and enforcing a necessary conclusion, whereas the other either conclude not at all, or if they do, the most the conclusion can do, is to make the cause for which the proofs were produced plausible, and g●acious, the contrary suspected, and odious, being nothing else (if we esteem of them as they are) but likelihoods of truth, pretty conjectures. Now is it not well known that the most plausible, and gracious causes, are not always of their rank, which being not commended but by their own proper right, have that for the only ground, & reason not of the favour, but of the justice they demand? And those which by reason either of the ignorance, or partiality of men are suspected, and hated, have they not ofttimes the laws, and equity on their side? Certes the most pure, and (as I may say) the most innocent innocence would be punishable, were it enough to make one guilty, to be thought so.  
But we may proceed farther, and affirm that the suspicion of falsity, is a calamity ordinary to truth. Under an uncomely mask, their may be hid an admirable beauty. Should the diamond lose its invincible solidity, or the inward fountain of its bright, and sparkling lustre if sometimes it be found so outwardly discoloured, that at the first view, it can hardly be known for a diamond?  
In the Courts of justice it's ordained that accusers should bring in their indictment of the largest, that the court may be fully informed concerning the accused parties: yet this is not called condemnation, but it only presupposeth a suspicion. Let then preiudices, exceptions, and pretences be employed to the uttermost, to make a religion suspected, so that upon them without more ado the accuser's ground not its condemnation, so that they tarry upon terms of suspicion until they proceed orderly to a larger enquiry, and a stricter examination, so that the question be not a whit spared, nor if it be possible, the most vigorous proof. If a rich diamond suspected of bastardy had sense, it would call for the touchstone, and desire to be admitted to a trial. Truth also being suspected, rejoiceth and presuming upon victory, triumpheth already, if she be put to a serious examination, and her last trial. The decree which imposeth this upon her, is not against her, but for her, this disgraceth her not but helpeth her to the only means by which she may redeem her credit. This is that she most earnestly desireth as being a passage, and introduction to her glory. It is her affliction to be suspected, but she maketh not that her complaint, this is not the subject of her grievances, custom hath sweetened this unto her, and made it tolerable. Her complaint and grief which she cannot so easily digest is that she seeth herself condemned upon surmises, her cause not being sifted to the bottom, where lieth the main point of her defence, and where she hath reserved all her strength. For other wise by reason of by matters in the form of proceeding, circumstances, appearances, conjectures, she would be quite lost, & ofttimes borne down by a lie. Is it not too well known that by such means the better causes are lost? That by such tricks bad causes almost commonly in corrupt times seek and obtain the victory? Excellently then to this purpose spoke Tertullian. 
Apolog cap. 1.  Truth entreateth not to have her cause favoured because she wondereth not at her condition. She knoweth that she is a stranger upon earth, and that amongst strangers she easily meeteth with enemies. But she hath her kindred, residence, hope, and dignity in the heaven. One thing yet she affectionately beggeth, that she may not be condemned unheard. What can the laws lose here where they have absolute authority, if she be vouch safed a hearing? Shall not their power be with more credit increased, if they condemn her even having heard her. But if they condemn her without hearing her, beside the hatred of manifest unjustice, they will incur also the suspicion of a bad conscience, in that they would not hear that which having heard they could not have condemned.   

CHAP: VI That the cause of those of the Reformed Religion hath been condemned in the Romish Church, upon bare preiudices, without ever being throughly examined.  
THey of the Church of Rome have incurred this suspicion, in condemning the Reformed Religion without considering it, and examining it to the bottom. They avoid both the hearing of our sermons, and reading of our writings: they neither read, nor meditate upon the holy scripture. The high esteem which they have both of the learning, and honestly of their Doctors, hath prevailed thus far with them, that they have chosen them for judges, in a cause wherein themselves are parties. Parties accused not of a petty fault, but of a crime, a sacrilege, an impiety in causing the revolt of Israel. If this accusation be false it were an easy and effectual course to silence it, if they would but lay open to the public view the weakness, and impertinency of the reasons. Why are they so afraid to hear it? why is it a kind of sacrilege amongst them to be busied in so serious, and so holy a meditation? Why is it made a shriving matter to have but thought of it? Who made these ordinances? Who instituted this so wary a discipline? What was their plot in it? What benefit expect they from it? If the Pope be innocent, why made he this prohibition? Is it the part of innocency, or of guiltiness to entreat, yea command that the accusation should not be heard? This manner of proceeding tends it to justify himself, or rather to avoid, and escape judgement? doubtless he doth as good as openly confess that he is afraid of it. If we had used such a subtle method in our proceedings, we should have afforded just matter of presumption against ourselves, that we went not that way to work honestly, bona fide, but driven to it by an ill conscience.  
It's true indeed that in their schools, and writings they sometimes mention our accusation, but for that they ought the more to be suspected of it. For he who hindereth his accuser from being understood, and taking the accusation out of his mouth, will propose it himself, secretly giveth us leave to presume, tha● he disguiseth it, that he may the more easily shift it off.  
It's also the common and continual complaint of those of the Reformed Religion, that their accusation is never proposed but mangled, and counterfeit, that their faith is represented by its enemies, out of its natural shape. That their Adversaries in their disputations against them, do but quarrel with their own fictions, and combat with puppets of their own making. That they represent some prints, and lineaments of our doctrine, but not in their true decency, and proportion, like certain looking-glasses which representing the visage mishapen, yet after a sort preserve something of the hue and complexion. So they having under taken ●s they say to paint our deformities yet they will not suffer any one to look us in the face. What may be thought of the cunning, or ingenuity of that Painter which would have us judge of his picture without comparing it to the original? They cite, and read our books in the chair, as the false accusers of Christ, with their cavilling sophistry, alleged his words to a contrary sense. But if they deal fairly, and say no more than what is true, why give they not their people leave to look, and consider at their leisure whether matters are so or no? Why is the mere curiosity of reading, and hearing our works accounted a sinne●? What a wild contradiction, what a strange confusion is this, to cite our books and forbid the reading of them? But the natural laziness of men maketh this both excusable, & plausible. For to refer the people to our writings seemeth unto them, a token of assurance in their Doctor, this assurance, or rather boldness serveth them also for a note of conscionable dealing, and withal the prohibition of troubling themselves about this matter, easeth them of a labour. They are glad to hear our books cited, that they may not seem so unreasonable, as to condemn us upon other men's words; they are as glad to be forbid to examine the citations, that they may be discharged of such a trouble. So the lazy merchant relieth upon his factor, and the unworthy Councillor upon his clerk, so long as the one looketh now and then to some accounts, the other to an extract of the process, but carelessly, hand over head: and both of them say, the one of his factor, the other of his clerk, that they are sufficient, and conscionable men made both for their Master's profit, and ease, they willingly persuade themselues so, that they may sleep the quietlier.   

CHAP. VII. Upon what Preiudices we have been condemned in the Church of Rome.  
WE could easily demonstrate that which we have said, particularly running through all the points of the Reformed Religion, and manifesting the disguisement put upon it, to expose it to hatred, and suspicion. But our aim is to examine under what pretences, it hath been & is endeavoured to hinder those reasons from being at all, or duly considered which have made the reformation of their abuses necessary.  
Their masterpiece, or chief-trick of policy hath been, to decline the will and law of God speaking in the scriptures. And as wicked Magistrates, and the corrupters of justice in a commonwealth, make th● authority of the laws to depend upon theirs, under good and popular colours of a pretended obscurity, & imperfection in them, that so there may be a gate opened to all liberty, in substituting in the room of the laws, their own wills, and particular passions. So in the Church wicked Pastors, not daring to accuse the Scriptures of falsehood, or to r●fuse subjection to their authority directly, have contrived diverse means by which they may avoid their sentence & determination, charging them with all those defects, which make a writing mee●ly humane, defective, & imperfect in its own kind, denying the efficacy and majesty of the Scripture while they call it 
a. Coster. En●hir. controu c. 1  a dead letter, 
b. Boards de abus Missae.  of white, and black: its clearness, and simplicity, whilst they blame it for 
c. Cens. Colon. p 9 And●ad. explis. orthodox lib: 2. p: 69 Eckius in Enchir p●op: 4 pag 69.  obscurity, and 
d. 
Pe●rus a so●● in defe●s de uno praes. jud. E●cles. p. 108. co●: 2.  
Pighius de Hiera: Ecel. 1. c 4.   ambiguity: its 
e 
Card. p●rro in t●●ct. de i●suffiScript.  
Pistorius cont. disp. Mentz f. 27   sufficiency, while they dare to accuse it of insufficiency: its authority in respect of us, when they make no scruple to teach that it hath no more authority, over us without the authority of the Church, than 
f Herman. laudatus à Card. Hosio. lib 3 the author scrip.  Aesop's fables, 
g Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 4.  or Mahomet's Alcoran.  
But we suppose that we have by God's assistance elsewhere sufficiently showed how false these censures, or (to speak more fully) these blasphemies are; we have at least wise performed it in such a manner, that the adversaries of this truth hitherto have not replied any thing. Only the vexation and desperate rage, to see the vanity, and villainy of their ungodly policies exposed stark-naked to the view of the world, hath forced them instead of dissembling their extreme grief, to vent it in injuries, and outrageous insolences worthy indeed of their persons, and well befitting so desperate a cause, so accursed both of God and men: but doubtless most unbeseeming a Christian, a Doctor of Christians, unsuitable to the gravity, the sweet demeanour, and gracious mildness of truth.  
This event sad in itself, hath notwithstanding afforded us joy, in affording us a new example of the prevailing force of truth, which faileth not to convince, even then when she persuadeth not, and if she cannot bend her adversaries, yet she so trample●h them, and so sorely bruiseth them, that albeit they submit not themselves unto her, they are nevertheless constrained to testify the ulcer, and wound of their consciences by furious railings, like those proceeding from a woman surprised in the shameful act of adultery. In the mean time this joy hath encouraged us to proceed farther, in discovering by what devises they hinder an examination of the conformity of our Religion, with the rule of faith, as 
Tertul de praescrip. advers. haeret c. 13. & alibi.  Tertullian calleth it; whilst God enableth us in the means to show how they have ma●e it an impossibility, to consider religion in its own natural guife, representing it so counterfeit, & unlike itself, that as they portray it for the most part, it is prodigiously misshapen.  
Now to make our religion so obnoxious to hatred and suspicion, that none should vouchsafe to consider its harmony, and concord with those maxims, and principles which have been at all times, and are at this time unquestionable amongst Christians: they have pronounced it an impossibility for any Christian to discern the truth by the spirit of God dwelling in him. And having once appropriated to themselves the title of the Church, ●nobled with so many eulogies, privileged by so many promises, that no man may presume to question her authority, unless he forthwith profess himself a jew, Turk, or Pagan: it was easy for them afterwards, to shuffle the doctrine contrary to their abuses besides all examination.  
But they, seeing that it was not enough to usurp a magnificent title, unless it were after some sort justified; and that contrarily the presumptuous rashness of such proceedings might pull upon them the general hatred, and universal detestation of all Christians: they have found out (as they imagine) notable pretences to colour this usurpation, and verify their title.  
All th●se pretences may be reduced to ten heads, which they propound unto us after this manner.  
1 The magnificent state of their Church: opposed, to the contemptible condition of th●se who call for a reformation of their abuses.  
2 Her unity, and the division of her adversaries.  
3 Her antiquity: and the novelty of the Reformation.  
4 They urge us to confess, that sometimes they h●ue been the true Church, if we yield that, than they cry out: that therefore they are so still, because the Church perisheth not, as certainly she cannot either perish, or change in that which is essential.  
5 They stand upon a quotation of times, places persons, when, where, by whom this change was wrought, this defection begun?  
6 They demand, where our Church sojourned so long time, in what city, yea into what valley, what desert did she retire?  
7 They except against the commission of the Authors of the Reformation as false, and sergeant.  
8 They make great brags of their succession continued without interruption.  
9 They boast of having the substance of Christianity amongst them, even by our own confession.  
10 They dazzle the eyes of the world with the show of a multitude of religious persons, which they say have renounced the world, trampled under their feet the delights, riches, and honours of earth that they may aspire unto heaven.  
So in the upshot they make their conclusion, that where these notes are, there is the Church: and where they are not, she cannot be. And so presuming that they may with good right take these notes unto themselves, and that we can pretend nothing for them: albeit this truth received amongst us, dart her most clear, and lively rays into the most passionate, and partial eyes, yet they always condemn us upon these prejudices.   

CHAP. VIII. A consideration of the outward glory of the Romish Church, and of the mean estate of the true Church.  
NOw albeit these considerations might make the world doubt, whether we were the true Church or no, yet they should not have made them to condemn us. The Lord jesus was surnamed the Nazarene, this very surname made Nathanael to doubt, whether he were the Messias or no. Can any good come out of Nazareth? (said he to Philip) but as soon as Philip answered him, come and see, he went and saw him. What shall we lose by it, if we take a stricter view of these appearances, that we may see whether there be no cozenage in them? The most rigorous examination will not make them false, contrarily their truth the more it's tried, it will become the more illustrious. But if they are but cheating shows, what honest heart will not be content that the imposture should be detected?  
To this purpose we are now busied. And for as much as the matter we have in hand is large, that our discourse may not rove, we will severally examine these pretences in the same order we propounded th●m.  
Of all these appearances, the Magnificence of the Roman Church, is the first with which she presents herself to the view of people being remarkable by three principal circumstances. 1 Her outward glory. 2 Her ceremonies. 3 Her policy.  
But what will become of this main point if all these circumstances ought to make us the more suspect her: and if the Church which in this respect is opposite unto her for the want of these shows deserveth to be better esteemed of by us?  
Surely 1 The nature of the Church. 2 Her condition. 3 The dangerous inconveniences which these circumstances draw along with th●m, forbid us to admit them for characters, and badges of the true Church: for the glory and lustre of the Church is not outward, bodily, visible: but inward, spiritual, invisible. All her beauty is within, 
b Ps. 45. v. 54.  she is like unto the Tents of 
c Cant. 1.5.  Kedar, as soon covered with dust, and well nigh burned with the heat of the Sun: as soon be●t●n & shaken with storms, and tempests: but in the mean time, inwardly all glittering in glory and magnificence. Like in this unto her 
d Ephes. 1.21. & 4.15. &. 5.23 Colos. 1.18.  head the Lord jesus, as being 
e Rome 8.29.  predestinated to be made conformable unto his image: who, during the time of his conversation here below, had nothing without 
f Esay. 5● 3.  him that could make him amiable; being 
g Phil. 2.7.  contemptible in his own person, in 
i Act. 4.13.  his Disciples, 
k joh. 7.49.  and followers, in the judgement of him who saw but his outside. Who would have compared him in this respect to Tiberius, or Pilate, or Caiphas the high Priest? 
l Luc 2.7.  Born in a Cratch, not in a Palace: 
m Math 2.5.  in a blind village, not at jerusalem, not at Rome: 
n Mat. 1. Luc 3  of the Royal stock indeed, but then when the glory of it was quite eclipsed; 
o Luc. 2.1.2.3.  amongst the Israelites, but at a time when they were slaves to the Romans: 
p Mat. 1.18.23.  of a Virgin, but so poor, that she was betrothed to a 
q Mat 13 55. Marc. 6.3.  Carpenter: at his birth indeed adored by a company of 
r Luc. 2.8. etc.  shepherds, but by a 
s Mat. 2.  few wisemen: persecuted by 
t Mat. ●. 12.13.  Herod, living in such a 
u 14. ●5. joh. 1.31.33.  retired obscurity, until the time of his Baptism, that john himself knew him not. 
* Mat. 4 1.  Then was he led by the spirit into the Wilderness, tempted by Satan, by him carried up to a pinnacle of the Temple; and after all this having begun his preaching 
x Luc. 9.58.  continually, and unmercifully persecuted even to death: but by whom? Surely by the Princes of the world, the Magistrates, the very same which pretended the title of the Church, the authority, succession, and chair of Moses: oppressed always with these prejudices, Have any of the governor's, and Phar●ses believed in him? Behold to what the pomp and state of jesus Christ is brought, to ignominy, and poverty. But in the mean time consider him inwardly, 
z Colos. 2 3.  in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom, and knowledge: 
a Colos. 2.9.  in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily: 
b Act. 3.15. & 5.31.  he is the Prince of life: 
c Apoc. 19 16.  the Lord of glory: 
d Math. 3.17.  the Son of God: 
e Thes. 1.14.18 & 3.18  his only son: 
f Phil. 2.6.7.  who being in the form of God, but made himself of no reputation.  
Should i● then be seemly for the Church, 
g Ephes. 2. 1●.  the workmanship of his hands, 
h Esa. 64.8.  the clay which his fingers have fashioned, 
i 1 Pet. 1.19.  the slave which he hath ransomed by his blood, 
k Ephes. 5.17  the spouse which he hath sanctified by his spirit, to we●re any other livery than his own, to be handled more daintily, and after a more delicate manner than himself? Is it possible that the body should not be made conformable to its head, that the glory of the head being invisible, that of the body should be visible: that the magnificence of the head being heavenly, & spiritual, that of the Church, the mystical body of that head, should be earthly and secular? Yea her condition is to 
l Rom. 8.17. 2. Tim. 2.11.  suffer with him, that she may reign with him. Moreover, stateliness, & gaietie in apparel doth not commend, but prejudice chastity, which either is of mean condition, or else as modest in her deportments as if she were.  
This pomp which invites and feasts as it were, the eyes of the body, is but carnal; and seeing it doth so much humour the flesh, it should rather be taken for a mark of pride, then of virtue. 
m. Luc. 16.19.  The rich glutton is clothed with purple and fine linen: he fares deliciously: contrarily Lazarus is sick, ulcerous, exposed to the injuries of the weather, and scorn of men, beholding to dogs only for relief. Yet Lazarus is an Emblem of the Church; the glutton of the world.  
Moreover, hath not the Lord advertised 
m Mat. 10.16.  his own, that he sent them abroad as sheep amongst Wolves, 
o Luc, 21.17.  that they should be hated of all men for his name's sake. That as the 
p joh. 15. 17.1●  world had hated him, so it would hate them. 
q joh. 6.6.  That they should be cast out of the Synagogues: questionless out of those Synagogues which had the succession, and pleaded antiquity. That they should be 
r Luc. 12.12.  haled before the Magistrates, 
s joh. 16.2.  that they which put them to death, should think they did God good service, in a word, that 
t Ma. 10, 24.25  the Disciple being not above his Master, they should expect the same welcome and entertainment in the world which he had formerly received. 
u 1. Cor. 1.26.  You see, saith the Apostle, your calling, not many wise according to the flesh, not many noble, but God hath chosen the weak things of this world, and things which are not, to confound things that are, that no flesh might glory before him. 
* Mat. 11.25.  Agreeably to the thanksgiving of our Saviour, I thank thee O father, Lord of heaven and earth, for that thou hast hid th●se things from the wise, and prudent and hast revealed them unto babes, & to his exhortation 
x Luc. 12. 3●.  Fear not little flock, for it is your father's will to give you the kingdom.  
And indeed if that outward pomp were a note of the true Church, and its contrary of the false: the true Church for the space of three hundred years, and more, during the time of her persecutions, should have been the false. After that, when arianism had so ove●-runne the world, that it 
y Hier. cont. Lu●if●r.  groaned, and wonto see itself become an Arrian. When the Emperor 
z Th●odor●t. Eccles. Hist. lib. 3. c. 16.  Constantius tauntingly demanded of Liberius Bishop of Rome, How great a part of the world he thought himself to be, that he alone should take the part of one wicked fellow, (such a o●e w●s Athanasius in his esteem) that he should so disturb the peace ●f the whole world. When Liberius was fain to con●e●se indeed that he was alone, but replied withal, that his being alone could not weaken the cause of the true faith. When he alleged an example from former times, that once there were but three which resisted Nebuchadnezars' decree, commanding them to worship an Idol. 
a Athanas. in 〈◊〉 ad eos qui ●eg vit. soliter.  When the same Liberius was carried down by the impetuous stream, & subscribed to arianism. 
b Greg Naz. in orat. cont. A●●ian.  When Nazianzen was angry that the Church was measured by the multitude: and when he said, speaking of the Arrians, they have the people, and we the faith; they have the gold and silver, and we the doctrine; What? was the true Religion all this while the bravest, and most illustrious? Was it amongst them which bore the greatest sway in those times? Was it removed from obscurer places of abode, to reside in more famous and imperial cities?  
Let us remember the advertisement which 
c In lib. cont. Arri. & Auxent  S. Hilary gave indeed to those of his own time, but which extend●th its use also to ours. Of one thing I advise you, take heed of Antichrist. It is not well that you are so taken with the love of walls, that you reverence the Church of God in consecrated houses and goodly edifices, that under these you settle the name of peace [and presume on it] Is it a matter to be questioned (a remarkable speech) that Antichrist must sit in them? The mountains, woods, lakes, prisons, caves, dungeons, seem safer to me, for the Prophets either abiding in them, or being driven, and cast into them, have prophesied by the spirit of God▪  
This outward glory then, is incompatible with the nature of the true Church, and cannot possibly be taken for one of her marks: on the contrary, the want of it being more natural to the Church, it doth more distinctly set her forth to the notice of intelligent beholders.   

CHAP. IX. What kind of tranquillitiy belongeth unto the true Church? How Kings are her nursing fathers? And that Kings are not the nursing fathers of the Romish Church.  
But what then? Shall the Church never enjoy a quiet estate? And those promises that 
a Esa. 49.7.23.  Kings shall be her nursing fathers, that they shall lick up the dust of her feet, shall they be frustrated? God forbid. True it is that God 
b joh. 14.27. & 16.33.  giveth peace to his Church: but it is such as 
c Philip. 4 7.  passeth all understanding. That 
d Rom. 5.1.  peace towards God, by which she glorieth in afflictions: being 
f 2. Co● 4.8.  pressed, but not oppressed: 
e Rom. 5.2.3.  in perplexity, but not comfortless: persecuted, but not forsaken: cast down, but not destroyed. And these promises that Kings shall be her nursing fathers, that they shall lick up the dust of her feet, are of the same nature with those other promises; that she 
g Esa. 60.16.  shall suck the milk of the nations, that 
h Esa. 46. 1●.  Kings shall walk before her in chains, as it were in triumph: nations enemies, King's enemies of the Church. Promises then of earthly things, for types of heavenly: promises of fading and transitory commodities, to represent those everlasting honours & pleasures. In this manner God hath promised that he would set her upon Carbuncles, 
i Esa. 54.11.  and build her upon Saphires, pronouncing that there should be no mo●e tumults, nor clattering in her gates. Because the jewish nation at the time of these prophecies, was most in love with such matters, therefore the holy Ghost used them in the expression of the happy, but spiritual estate of the Church. In the same kind the Lord promiseth, 
k Esa. 43.2.  that when the Church should pass through waters, they shall not overflow her, that being in t●e fire, she shall not be burnt. Promises according to the letter, figurative; according to the sense, mystical, and real. It's true that God sometimes gives to his Church 
l Psal. 125.3.  an outward prosperity, 
m Prov. 30 8. 1. Tim. 4.8. & 6.6.  but in a mediocrity, 
n Act. 14.22.  but for a time. It appertains not unto her, to enjoy a complete peace on earth, being 
o 2. Cor. 5.6.  a stranger in it, & a 
p Heb. 11.13.  pilgrim, out 
q Heb. 11.14.15.  of her element, and 
r Heb. 13, 14. Apoc. 14.13.  heavenly country. 
s Prov. 30.6.  A continual, and undisturbed peace, is uncompatible with her nature, and doth not cherish, but change it, and at length quite corrupt it. Even as the outward heat of the air, continued without moderation, first slacks the vigour of the inward, and natural heat, & maketh it faint, at last stifles and quite extinguisheth it.  
It's true, also that kings are the fosterfathers' of the Church, but this is seldom. 
t 2. Chron. 36.22.23 Esd. 1.11 Esa. 49.28. & 45.1.  Cyrus was a father to the jewish Church, yet no part of it. So many Pagan Emperors have suffered their kingdoms to be receptacles of Christians. Then was it when the Church sucked the milk of the Gentiles: then, if ever, was this prophecy, that Kings should be her sustainers, fulfilled liberally. Yet we deny not but God raiseth up Princes in his Church. But when these Princes in striving to show themselves Patrons of his Church, with more affection, than discretion, have fostered her even with superfluity, they have procured her ruin, by the same means they sought her advancement.  
It was not a Poet only, from whom the pride and surly pomp of the Romish Church, extorted this speech, 
u Petrarch. in Sonnet. beginning Fontana.  Hor Constantin non torna, Let's have no more Constantine's. St Hierome 
* In vit. Malch. Monac. ad ini●i.  himself observed in his time, (mark Reader how long since it was) that the Church attained to her full growth, became adultae by persecutions: but being cherished by Christian Princes, she increased indeed in riches and power, but decreased in virtues, and graces. What would he have s●id in our days? Wherefore a too pompous magnificence in the Church, is at the first a presage of a future alteration, and at last a certain note of a change to worse. But the times are now otherwise, & matters are crept into another extreme. There is not a Prince at this day, which, to speak truly, sustaineth the Romish Church: she rather upholdeth them, by whom she is said to be upheld. So they cannot properly be termed her Patrons. She domineers over them, even in temporal matters: she holds their authorities and estates fastened to her beckand pleasure. It's a small matter for her to usurp the power of excommunicating them, unless she also take upon her the authority to deprive them of their sovera●gneties. When it pleaseth her, she plucks away the sceptre, & tramples the crowns under her feet: so that now (a strange alteration) the nursing father trembles before his nursling, and the Guardian stands in fear of his pupil's; not with such a fear, wherewith ofttimes God strikes his enemies, a fear proceeding from a secret cause, 
Psal 100L. 15.  when he hath caused his voice, Touch not mine anointed to give a startling sound to the most inhuman and savage hearts; but with an affrighting apprehension of conspiracies, poyniards, powder-plots, the ruin of their estates, and revolt of their subjects. O barbarous, and unnatural pupil! o unfortunate and ill-rewarded Protectors. What? shall the Church which usurpeth this authority, practiseth this cruelty be the true Church? surely he hit the point well, who was the first that said, that devotion begat wealth, but the daughter devoured the mother. A prodigious child delivery that Religion should send forth so unnatural a monster, so contrary to the disposition of its mother. But it was the purpose of God. He had foretold that Kings, 
Apoc. 17.17.  should give their kingdoms to the Beast, that they should undergo its yoke. This prediction was to be accomplished.  
Now then l●t the Romish Church proceed, and prank it lustily, let her triumph in this imperial greatness, seeing it is the greatness of the Beast: let her scorn at our homeliness, and scoff at our penury, seeing it is the condition of the Church.   

CHAP: X. That the Ceremonies of the Romish Church, do not Commend, but disparage her.  
But let us examine, whether the multitude of ceremonies in the Romish church, can give her that title, which her pomp cannot, and whether the want of such a troop amongst us, will procure us that disparagement, which the meanness of our estate cannot. Certainly all alike, one as much as the other. So that we still stand upon the same terms with them: their glory shameth, them our ignominy honoureth us: their ceremonies make them superstitious: our simplicity notifieth that we have the true Religion·  
This will clearly be discerned, if we consider, that there was indeed 
a. Gal. 3.23.  time when the ceremonies, & the rudiments of the world had place, and were useful in the Church of God: who then 
b. Cols. 2 17.  manifested himself in types, and shadows. But this time 
c. Colos 4.1.2 3.4.5.  lasted no longer, then whilst the Church was in her infancy, while the heir was a child, he was to be governed as a child, his tenderness being not capable of a full liberty, and of a manlike instruction. The 
d. Luc 1.78  day spring from on high, 
e. Malach. ●. 2   

e..  the sun of righteousness was not yet risen. The body of the shadows, 
f Col 2 7.  
g. Ioh: 1.17.  the truth of the figures was not then exhibited. But the 
h. Gal. 4.1. et seq.  fullness of time being accomplished, the time of the Church's infancy being expired, the heir being come to a perfect stature, the Sun of righteousness being already risen, the 
i. Col●s. 2.17. Heb: 10.  body and rea; l truth being now represented; the 
k. Gal. 4 3.  rudiments of the world took their leave, the shadows vanished, the 
l. Gal 2.35.26  types gave place to truth, the carnal schoolemastership yielded to a spiritual liberty, 
m Heb. 7.16.  obscurity and imperfection, to clearness and perfection.  
For this cause, the Apostle said, 
n. Colos. 2.19.17.  Let no man condemn you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an Holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, the reason was, because these things were shadows of things to come, but the body (as he adds) is of Christ· Proceeding farther, he comes even to cut off a●l those ceremonies, which were got into the Church by humane institution. If ye be dead (saith he) with Christ, from the rudiments of the world, why, a● though living in the world are ye subject to ordinances. (Touch not, taste not, handle not, which are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men, which things have indeed a show of wisdom, in will worship and humility in that they spare not the body, and have no regard to the satisfying of the flesh.  
What could be more effectually and urgently spoken, for the banishment of ceremonies out of the Church? for by this we see that they are altogether incompatible with the nature of the Church under the Gospel: 1 the Church is dead with Christ, and so to live spiritually, 2 these ordinances are a burden, the Lord hath eased her of it, 3 they are perishable, true piety is permanent, 4 they are doctrines of men, the doctrine of God's worship is divine, sent down from heaven: 5 They have a flash of humane wisdom, some show of humility, but they are indeed will-worships& Vainly then, and impertinently in this case are the pretences of a good meaning used, mere fig-leave coverings. It is for Princes to prescribe rules according to which they will be served, not for subjects to invent them to themselves, he is a ●ebell who attempts it. How much more rebellious shall the bowl sacrilege of them be accounted, who either bring in to, or keep in the church a service of God patched up merely of humane institutions? The more these ceremonies increase, the more unmannerly presumption and sacrilege, there is in the Church, and shall they be the marks of a true Church?  
Let us consider the Primitive Church flourishing more in times of the Apostles then ever it did afterwards, who will not admire her great simplicity in all points, and especially in ceremonies? For excepting the celebration of baptism by washing of water; and of the holy supper, according to the lords institution, in taking the bread and wine, and distributing them after thanks giving: excepting also, the imposition of hands upon those which extraordinarily received the holy Ghost, whether it wear in a 
Heb. 6.2.  general calling, or a 
p 1 Tim. 4. d●e 5· 22.  particular to a charge in the Church, 
q mark. 6.13. jam. 6, 14. Aug. ep. 118. ad januar.  and annealing for a miraculus effect of healing the sick, I say these excepted, their will not be found any other ceremony in those primitive times, so admirable was their simplicity. But the number of them was multiplied after wards, not by divine but by humane institution. St. Austen entering in to discourse about ceremonies with januarius, skies well, that our Lord hath subjected us to Turrian easy yoke and a light burden; and therefore hath united his new people, by the sacraments very few in number, v●ry easy to be observed, very excellent in their signification, as is Baptism consecrated in the name of the Trinity, and the Communion of his body and b●ood▪ and if their be any other thing commended in Scripture, not comprehending the ceremonies which are to be read in the Pentateuch, which made the servitude of the ancient people heavy and toil some. If he add that it is to be presupposed, that those things which are observed by the whole world, 
Aug. Jbid.  although unwritten, have notwithstanding been ordained either by the Apostles, or by the Counsels, this he restraineth nevertheless to a small number of feasts, of the passion, Resurrection, and ascension of our Lord, of the coming of the Holy Ghost, yea in closing his discourse with this supposition, and if their be any thing observed by the whole Church, he plainly gives us to understand, that their were very few things, beside those by him specified, and those to of very small moment. The doubting particle, If their be any, imports that necessarily. And truly if the ceremonies had amounted then as they do now, to an heavy burden by reason of their number, the difficulty and trouble of observing them. If in obscurity of signification, they had matched the jewish ceremonies, yea if they had been taken from the ceremonies of the law (as the Popish are all, excepting those which are borrowed from Paganism) this good father should have contradicted himself, if he had thought that either the Apostles would, or Counsels could have imposed them upon the Church. He had said that our Lord had subjected his Church to an easy yoke, and a light burden, should he then say, that the Apostles and Counsels had been willing to make this yoke irksome, and burden heavy? 
Aug. 119. Epi. c. 9  Elsewhere he complaineth of the excessive number, and intolerable multitude of ceremonies admitted into particular Churches: bemoaning the condition of the Church, by this means more slavish, then that of the jews. But this number was not so insupportable in respect of the servitude it brought upon the Church, as dangerous in regard of the superstition it begat.  
And certainly here is the venom incorporated into humane inventions, 
Aug. ib.  which under some well composed looks of piety and devotion, insinuating themselves into the true service of God, they stifle that, and advance themselves into its room. Our Lord marked ou● this evil when his Disciples being accused of transgressing the traditions of their fathers, he not only justifieth them but also condemneth their accusers, for having made void the commandment of God by their traditions. who is so blind that hath not seen, that sees not daily that the commandments, but falsely called the commandments of the Church, are more religiously respected, and with more scruple violated, than those, which all confess to be the commandments of God? Notwithstanding the infiniteness of their number and variety, the sottishest, & dullest amongst them have them at their finger's ends: the spiritual service of God in the mean time, and the manner of its performance is unknown unto them, the precepts which enjoin and teach it are strange to the greatest part of them. A pregnant argument of the hypocrisy and corruption of man's nature, which is delighted in that which is fleshly and outward: neglecting that which is spiritual, and inward. This is that which gave occasion to that ancient and grievous complaint of the Prophet, conceived in the name of God. This people draweth near unto me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, 
Esa. 29.15.  for their fear and service is the commandment of men.  
A man continuing without any exercise of religion, can hardly be at peace with himself, and therefore he ventureth upon some kind of devotion, but the mischief is, that he is not pleased, but in that which is outward and sensual, carnal as he is in that which is carnal. the more than that a religion is sensible, and mechanical (as we may term it) the more acceptable it is unto him, the more intellettuall, and spiritual, the more uncouth and harsh. For this cause even under the new testament, and under grace, 
Ioh: 4.21.23.  now when the Lord hath advanced his Church to an estate merely spiritual, he hath left her nevertheless some ceremonies, by reason of her infirmity, but few in number, and without bravery, accompanied with the preaching of the word for fear of danger, namely, the Sacraments of Baptism and the holy supper. 
Colos. 3. ●.  For he would elevate our hearts unto a sublime pitch, and set them on high, and fix them upon their Principal object, drawing them from sensible and material objects, to more refined and purified affections and meditations.  
Pondering these reasons, we make no more apologies for ourselves to those who cast in our teeth our penury of ceremonies. Nay we think this our glory, seeing in this point we stand upon the same terms with the blessed Apostles, we have the same defence which they had, the condemnation of our accusers, for that by their trumperies, they have smothered the sincere simplicity of true worship. We tell them that this multitude of rites, and traditions is more suitable to the superstition of Turks, jews, and infidels, amongst whom all these vanities have been, and are still in request. Christian religion is not capable of them, they cannot stand either with the spiritual estate, or poor condition of the Church. Superstition the mother of ceremonies is lavish, & prodigal, Spiritual whoredom as it is, it hath this comonn with the bodily. Both of them must have their paintings, their trinkets, their inveaglements & this cannot be without charges. The Church cannot afford such cost upon ceremonies, and babbles, her stock is so employed in succouring the living images of Christ, that she cannot t●inke upon wooden babies: the world is so hard w●th her, that she hath nothing to cast away in the guilding of Altars, in erecting proud edifices, in adorning walls with t●pe●lrie, in majestic and stately processions through the streets.   

CHAP: XI. That the policy of the Roman Church, serves all for prejudice against her.  
WE have seen then, that neither the pomp, nor the ceremonies of the Church ●f Rome can do her any service, but only to make her the more suspected, the more she stands upon them: even as the riotous luxury, a●fected postures of countenance, and multitude of compliments in a woman make her chastity more questionable. But peradventure the policy, government, and authority which she takes upon her, having a visible head, si●ting in a throne more than imperial, in the city of Rome, heretofore the Queen and Empress of the universe: and now by usurpation greater than ever she was, having succeeded the Empire, and in this succession surmounted it in greatness of sovereignty which she takes upon her: exercising dominion over the body, and the soul, in this life and after it, in this world, & without the circuit of it; without being accountable to any, submitting all to herself, not only the outward man, but the inward also, even the conscience. Peradventure, we say, this consideration may make us both to reverence, and admire her. This doubtless may set her out most amiably to carnal eyes: but the spirit judgeth otherwise, yea quite contrary of it. When the protestation of Christ shall come into our memories, 
a joh. 18.36.  that his kingdom is not of this world: the exhortation of Christ, that 
b Mat. 10.25.  his Disciples should not be like to the kings of the nations, the example of Christ, who being himself Lord of Lords, King of Kings, during the time of his abasement, became 
c Mat. 17.16.  tributary to a Prince, a tyrant: The commandment of Christ, when he bid to pay unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is Gods. The 
d Act. 23.10.  practice of this commandment in the Apostles, who acknowledged themselves subjects to superior powers, subiecting to them every 
e Rom. 13.1. 1 Pet. 2.13.14.  soul by their e●hortations, when they protested that they 
f 2. Cor. 4.5. 2. Cor. 1 24. 2 Thes. 2.4.  were the servants of the faithful for Christ's sakee, that they had no power over their faith. These considerations make that which ravished fleshly eyes, misshapen, hideous, and terrible to a spiritual view; especially when it shall be considered that this boundless power, and transcendent dignity is a character of Antichrist, the true condition of his Antichristian kingdom, directly contrary to that of our Lord jesus Christ.  
Certainly be it as it will, that there have been, are and will be many 
g 1. joh. 2.18.  Antichrists, and false teachers, which oppose themselves against Christ, yet there is one of them to 
h lb. & 2. Thes 2.4.  whom this title is, by an unhappy excellency, principally due. Inasmuch as that beside the abominable impurity of his doctrine, which is common to him with the others, he invades the royal prerogative of Christ; hoising himself above 
i 2. Thes. 2.4.  the Magistrate and the Angels themselves, and so above all that is called God (for these are they to whom this name is allowed in Scripture), whilst arrogating to himself a power over consciences, he pretends a supremacy over all Christians: a supremacy of religion, and which is spiritual; and so fits in the temple of God, behaving him●elfe, as if he were God; taking upon him the power of binding & losing consciences; of making that sin which God hath not called sin; of giving dispensations where God gives none; of rating good works and setting a price upon them, enhancing, and moderating the market according to his occasions. 
k See Monsieur d● Nevers his discourse of his embassage to Rome.  When he hath terrified the consciences of the greatest Monarches, working this impression into them by his deputies, that how serious soever their repentance may be, yet they cannot enjoy peace either of soul, or body, unless his absolution come between. Whilst he makes unclean the use of creatures whom God hath sanctified by his word, not commending a fast, but enforcing an abstinence from certain creatures against the express word of God, which pronounceth this doctrine, a doctrine of Devils. Whilst he undertakes to make 
l Viz: that of the Clergy.  marriage unlawful, which the Scripture hath called honourable amongst all men, and the bed undefiled. When he dispenseth with the 
m Viz: Monastic vows●.  breaking of vows, when he allows for honest those 
n Witness the King of Polonia, who by a dispensation married his sister in law.  marriages, which the word of God hath declared to be incestuous. When he declares by his indulgentiall Bulls, that prayers had in a pl●ce by him assigned, are more precious, then if they had been without his assignation. Exercising this traffic, that with the sale of things spiritual, of souls and consciences, he may stuff his treasures, which he employeth, as the world knoweth, either in maintaining war against Christian Princes, or in promoting his kindred, or in making his proud, profane, Epicurean court swim in superfluities of dissolute luxury. What shall we say more? When he undertaketh to shut and open at his pleasure the gates of Paradise, to prolong, or abbreviate the torments of those that are departed. When arrogating to himself this power, he useth such a partiality in the execution of i●; partiality, say we? When he proceeds in such niggardliness, and avarice, yea such barbarous inhumanity, sauîng only whom it pleaseth him to save, being able (if you will believe himself) to save all. Is not this to arrogate a power proper, and peculiar to God alone? But this power which in God, the Lord and Master of all, is no whit tyrannical: in man, who is obliged to do for another all he can possible, to love his neighbour as himself, more than tyrannical. Finally, when 
o Clem 5 in bu●●a indulg.  out of his authority, he employeth the Angels, in the pretended execution of his commandments, usurps not he an authority more than humane, altogether divine? Yet notwithstanding, this so strangely usurped power, is the master sinew of that policy, by which this unwieldy body subsisteth, the Colossus and main pillar of the Roman Church, a nerve which taking its original from the head, straggles through the whole body, being distributed to every member proportionably to its use: even as in the kingdoms of the world, the monarchs reserving with themselves, as it were, the springhead, and sun of sovereignty, nevertheless communicate the streams of this spring, the beams of this sun in proportion to their officers, according to each of their functions.   

CHAP. XII That although it hath been foretold, that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God, yet that Church which acknowledgeth him, cannot be the true Church.  
But there remaineth yet this scruple, that how tyrannical and Antichristian soever this policy be, yet the Church where it is practised may not a whit the less be the true Church. Yea rather seeing that Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God, considering this power and dignity, we have just reason to presume that the Church of Rome, wherein it bears sway, may be truly the Temple of God.  
This scruple cannot stagger, or stay him who shall examine whether this power be to be exercised by the Church, or against her: to be approved, or de●ested by her; who will consider that the followers of Antichrist at any time, now if he be already come, as certainly he is: or for the future, if he be not yet come, as a great part of the world dreameth, may oppose the church by the same argument, alleging that they are the true church, because Antichrist is amongst them. One 
a August. civet. Dei lib. 10. c. 59  therefore, adventured to interpret these words, sitting in the Temple of God, in a sense which runs, sitting against the Temple of God, grounding upon the words in the 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  original, which may denote as well, an opposition against the church, as a residence in it. But let us take the words in the former sense, that Antichrist must sit in the church of God; yet it will never follow that that church which a●knowledgeth him for her head, obeyeth, and adoreth him hath any thing of the church but the bare name. Let him then be in the church, but as a canker is in the body, a tyrant in the commonwealth. It may seem that for this cause the Apostle used the word Temple, rather than Church, that he might express unto us this mystery of iniquity, by allusion to the Temple of jerusalem, called by an excellency, the Temple of God; signifying unto us, that as the Temple of God had been anciently the place which God had consecrated, to t●e outward exercise of his service, but that men afterwards transformed it into a den of thieves: retaining for all that the title of the Temple of God, in regard of its primitive, and sanctified use: even so the church of Rome is styled the Temple of God, as being primordially planted, and dressed by his hand: consecrated to God, and the Lord jesus Christ, (and is so still at this day outwardly) by baptism, and profession of the Christian faith, although they have degenerated from their original purity, and by their abominations profaned their consecration, & belied their profession. Like unto rebels, who notwithstanding their rebellion, retain the name still of king's subjects, as usually he that is the ringleader of a conspiracy, obeyed by his confederates, is said to usurp rule over the king's subjects. So the adulteress keeps the name of a wife still. After this fashion, that may be called the Temple of God, which is become a den of thieves, that wherein not Antiochus, but Antichrist hath set up the abomination of desolation. But granting them that the Temple of God, wherein Antichrist must sit, should be the true Church; it cannot thence be concluded that the Church of Rome should be the true Church; this will imply no more, then that the Temple of God are the faithful, both those which have been heretofore, and those which are still as it were impledged in the Church of Rome, as anciently the jews were in Babylon, and all Israel in Egypt. Over them the Pope long since sat, and at this day sits, and in this sense sits in the Temple of God in the rigour of its signification. They in the mean time never were, and now are not of the Roman church, as the grain is in the chaff, but not of it. As some upright justices may be in a Court of corrupt judges, but not of their confederacy, a few wholesome bodies may be with a multitude of infectious, but not of their company. Finally to cut them off from all evasion, we say that the Pope sitteth in the church of God, in regard of the unlimited authority he usurps over all christians, even those which are separated from his slaves, undertaking as their judge, to proceed against them with his tyrannous censures, and constraining Princes to persecute them.  
It is then a certain truth, that this policy of the Roman church, being of the same nature with that of the Antichristian church, it is a disgraceful and scandalous badge of her corruption, and apostasy.  
On the other side, let the government of the reformed churches be observed, in them there is no supreme jurisdiction, but an authority which always submitteth itself to the rule of God's word, and Canons of a discipline regulated by it. Every man being assubiected to the judgement, not of one alone, but of many, and those many not undertaking to bind any man by their authority, but only by the equity of their decrees, submitting themselves to the control of any man, yea and yielding to it, if it be accompanied with reason. The true church is of so ample a circumference that she cannot be governed by one alone, and of so Royal a descent, that in that which concerneth the conscience, she cannot be ruled by any but God himself. Any other whosoever he be, employed in any function concerning her, must behave himself as her servant, not as her Lord, not prescribing her any thing, but bearing witness to what hath been prescribed her, not advancing himself above kings, but bowing unto them, not thinking, that his spiritual liberty, exempts him from bodily loyalty, but giving to Caesar, that which is Caesar's, to God that which is Gods, honour to whom honour, tribute to whom tribute belongeth.  
This is the platform and ground of jurisdiction in the protestant churches, very different from the Popes, who establisheth a spiritual monarchy in the church, who taketh upon him to judge all, without being judged by any, who requireth a blind obedience, grounded not upon the reason and equity of his injunctions, but upon the uncontrollable eminency of his place, making as much of his ordinances, as if they were brought down immediately from God, as having in the 
c. Plat. in vita Paul. 2.  registry of his breast, the fullness of infallible knowledge.   

CHAP. XIII. Whether union and discord be marks, by which the true Church should be discerned from the false.  
ALL the advantage then that the Church of Rome gets by this clatter of external pomp, of ceremonies, jurisdiction and authority, by which it is endeavoured to make her greatness more venerable, stands her but in this sorry steed, to strengthen the suspicion of her falsehood into her conviction. On the contrary, the innocent baseness, simplicity, and humility notable in the true church, maketh her more lovely, affording us sound matter of a pressing conjecture, & a strong presumption that she is indeed, as well as in style, The Reformed Church. This perceived, maketh us presage that all the other exceptions which the Church of Rome darteth against us will be of the same making with this first: having more plausibility, than soundness, partiality, than justice, colour then strength, as we shall see, by God's assistance, in the progress of this examination. Let us consider then in the second place, what weight there is in the pretended unity of the Church of Rome, opposed to the discord surmised to be amongst us.  
Now we say that it is not generally true, that unity should always be a note of the true Church, or discord of the false. We s●y also that the unity of the Roman Church is in show only, not in deed: that it is rather a conspiracy, than a union; like unto that amongst those which were besieged in jerusalem, who 
a Joseph. de bell. Judaec. l. 6. c 4.  disagreeing between themselves, joined forces nevertheless against those which besieged them, being divided at home, and united abroad. And on the other side that our discord is only surmised, and t●at we are in truth united, not only against the common en●my, but also between ourselves.  
That it is true that union is not a mark of the true Church, nor disunion, a just presumption of the false, see we not that in the times of the Apostles, there were great discords in the Church? Some of them were of one opinion, some of another, one thought that the ceremonies of t●e law were to be retained, another that they were not. And this division had made such an alienation of hearts in t●e Church, that 
b. Gal. 2.11.  St Peter himself was compelled to be a timeserver, and diversely to apply himself, according to places, and persons, until he met with a rough censure from St Paul, who resisted him to his face, and sharply rebuked him, for not walking uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel. I understand (saith 
c. 1 Cor. 11.18.  the same Apostle, writing to the Corinthians) that there are dissensions among you, and I partly believe it, for there must be heresies amongst you also, that they which are approved may be made manifest.  
Behold in the mean while 
d Act. 23.  amongst the jews, the Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadduces united together under one head the high Priest. Could they then benefit themselves with this pretence, and upbraid the Christians with their discord? True it is, the Sadduces agreed not with the pharisees in all points of doctrine, but yet, all of them acknowledged one chief Priest, all of them joined together in the same form of diu●ne service, & which is more, the number of the Sadduces was so small, commpared with the other; that it could nor furnish the Christians with just matter of retortion; and if it could, what would this have been more than reproach, and counter-reproach, crimination, and recrimination; equally true on either side. Now seeing that one of the parties was the true Church, could it be inferred from its division, that it was the false? Neither division then, nor union can be essential characters either of the true or false Church. But suppose these marks should be infallible, what would the Church of Rome get by it? What should we judge of her during that long schism? What may afford her an apology? perhaps a distinction, that the division at that time, was in respect of charity, not of faith, and doctrine. But how will this distinction of schism in faith, and schism in charity, heal up the wound, if both of them be equally, pernicious, equally incompatible with the nature of the Church? The Donatists were not divided from the Catholic Church in faith, at the first, for all that, they were reputed of as members cut off from her. Their schism, indeed, at the length begat heresy; as an inflamed ulcer causeth a fever. And may we not avouch, that during the last schism in the Roman Church, the same case hath happened, when the anti Popes were by one another accounted the forerunners of Antichriste: the followers of both sides reciprocally called by one another the members of Antichrist. What may here be replied? perhaps, that in the Christian Church in the time of the Apostles, in the Roman Church since, heretics and schismatics were not of the true Church, but mingled with it: as darnel amongst wheat, which maketh no part of the wheat: as mutineers in an army which are not of the army. But what? make not they of the reformed religion the same reply when their discord is cast in their dish? confess they not that their is indeed darnel in their wheat, but yet not of it, that there are in their spiritual army turbulen-mutiners, but not of their army? Now if so soon after the publication of the Gospel by the Apostles, when that judaism, and Paganism were assaulted by such strong forces there sprang even then schisms, and heresies like fogs at the rising of the sun. If in a time so privileged, so flourishing with the frequency, and variety of gifts, and extraordinary graces, notwithstanding all this, Satan strived with might and main, to make the assault upon those, who gave it to his kingdom confounded with distractions, that he might weaken the assailants, by dividing them: who will think it strange that he hath made the like assay, with the same success in this last reformation? who will wonder, that he hath raised such an hurly burly of dissonant voices, that Christ's voice may not be heard distinctly? Just as anciently the jews making their children pass through the fire, in honour of their Idol Moloch, for fear that their rueful scrietches should call to their hearts for natural affection, and amaze them with the sound of their own cruelty, they took order, that voices so sensibly lamentable, should be lost in a rude variety of more clattering, and unpassionate noises Certes this device was effectual to the jews, but it succeedeth not so well with Satan. The cries of infants were feeble, and might easily be out-noised: but the voice of Christ, how soft and sweet soever it be, to those who are his, yet it is a piercing, and a mighty voice. True religion hath had its course, all heresies are either dead, or dye one after another not by the fu●y of faggots, and gibbets, but by the sword of the spirit, and by the power of the word of the living God.   

CHAP. XIIII. That their is no true unity in the Church of Rome, and that in the reformed Church, there is no discord of importance.  
But to consider this point nearer hand, there is no discord of moment amongst us; no sincere union amongst them: but a combination to ruin their common adversaries; as some Princes, which otherwise bore mutual grudges one against another, entertain nevertheless a league against a common enemy. So Herod and Pilate agreed, in putting to death the Lord jesus, the saviour of the world.  
Surely it cannot be denied, but that in former ages, the dissensions in the Romish Church were very great. Their mutual hatred was deadly, witness their schism, witness also the great variety of opinions amongst those doctors which themselves style Catholic. who so will see proof of this, let him only consult the writings of Cardinal Bellarmine, there he shall find diversities, and contrarities of opinions amongst the Catholic doctors almost about every point of religion.  
But the Pope being then busied about the establishment of his Papal omnipotence his spiritual authority over the temporalty, yea his temporal authority over the temporalty, and spiritualty together, tormented not himself with those disputes, not so much as to interpose his authority to appease them. For those schoolebroiles at that time did not a whit prejudice his designs, but rather helped them forward. So long as these doctors sharpened their subtleties against themselves, they let him alone in peace, they outvied one another in flattering of him, each side fearing lest he should incline to its opposite. This indifferency was both acceptable to the disagreeing parties, and beneficial to the Pope. There were as yet no strangers which might publish the shame of these doings, and advantage themselves by these domestic quarrels of their enemies: they spoke therefore at that time freely, and boldly vented their opinions between themselves. But since that, the world is well changed, their affairs are no longer at this point. Now it was to be feared, lest the discord of the servants, should ruin the authority of the Master. For this it is, that he hath desired to ●ull it asleep, that he may bend the entire forces of his supports, against the stranger, and common adversary. He was now to look to it, that they without took no advantage of this dissension, & to take away the scandal of it from those that are within. This is that he hath done, but after a sorry manner, as he could, tyrannically, and by means altogether shameful. Not by a resolution of their doubts, by stating of their questions, by a rational decision of their controversies; but by his absolute authority imposing silence upon the parties, by this trick●, smothering the evil, without meddling with the root.  
He that will be better informed concerning this, let him observe that even at this day (for example) the true followers of Thomas yield not to Bellarmine, that their Angelical Doctor concluded amiss, affirming that the image of Christ, and the true Cross are to be worshipped with the same adoration, that Christ himself. That the Sorbonists will not consent to the Jesuits, that the Pope should be above a Council, that he may as well depose as excommunicate Kings, that a Tyrant may lawfully be put to death even by a private man. In the mean while these points are of such consequence, that if any of them be true, they avoidable damn the contrary. 
Bellar. de imag. l. 2. c. 20.21.  If the opinion of Bellarmine be true, touching the adoration of images, that of Thomas is pure idolatry: if the tenet of the jesuits concerning the authority of the Pope be receivable, that of the Sorbonists is schismatical and heretical.  
What will be answered us here? Doubtless that these opinions are but problematical, and may on both sides indifferently be maintained, so long as the Church hath not given her determination of them. This hole indeed they usually start out at, when for the diversity of opinions which are amongst them, they are pressed not to tax that fault in others, which is so notorious in themselves, not to urge those laws upon others which they mean to shift off themselves. Nevertheless their by-corner reacheth not far, they cannot run far, if one briefly tell them, that the sentence of the Church is not effective, but declarative, that it makes not truth but directeth to it, it makes not heresy, but points it out. Even as the opinion of the Physician makes the disease neither better, nor worse than it is, less doth it make it what it is. The diseased party then of whom the Physician hath decreed nothing, ceaseth not to be sick and to dye, as well as those who by a true prognosticke were judged to be in danger of death. Whether the judgement then of the church be interposed or not, that which deserves to be condemned is condemnable of itself, and in the sequel, makes him that believeth it infallibly damnable.  
But let any man tell me, whether there may be imagined a more complete and formal schism, then that which we see in the protestation of the French church against the council of Trent: Yes, they say, but this was but in certain points. What matters that? Seeing that a Council is a body, and expects either to be wholly received, or wholly rejected: not submitting itself to judgement, 
Vid. Sledian. comment. l. 22.  that they to whom it speaketh by authority, should go about to choose, and pick out some of its determinations. But requiring of all an absolute and universal obedience by reason of its authority, and the pretended presidence and guidance of the holy Ghost.  
After all this, who will not be more astonished, to see that the Pope pronounceth not definitive sentence upon these differences▪ dispatcheth not these difficulties, determineth not these questions. Is it because he taketh delight, to foster and cherish discord amongst his adherents? No, this is no time for it. He is so nearly assaulted by those without, and so lustily encountered with, that he had need have good intercourse, & keep good correspondency with those that are within. Is it then because he favoureth all sides equally? neither, this is more unlikely than the other. He loveth his greatness to well, he is to jealous of his authority, too zealous for the advamcement of his Papal omnipotency to bear no more affection to those who employ their spirits to his bent, for his sovereignty, them to those who cross it, & skirmish with it. Is it not known, how these are esteemed of, in that they are termed Politikes, and have not the name of Catholics allowed them, but grudgingly. That which holdeth the Pope, from openly condemning some of them, is a fear by alienateing them to diminish his forces. He knoweth, that slippery things wrung to hard slide away the faster: that lines stretched too much snap in sunder. He remembreth the peremptory roughness of Leo the tenth, he hath seen how much it hath cost him (or to speak mo●e properly) the papal Monarchy, to have prosecuted the affairs of the See so eagerly, to have been so stiffly bend in the breaking of that, which (as he thinks) might have been mollified and bended with time.  
By this it is to be seen, that there is rather a conspiracy amongst them, the● a true union: as on the contrary, the difference amongst us is rather a diversity, than a division, in the circumstances, then in the thing; in the accessary, then in the principal; in the policy, then in the doctrine; amongst some persons, then in the Corporation, and generality of our Churches. Witness the harmony of our confessions, and Catechisms, a harmony grounded upon no other plot, or design, then that of coming to the kingdom of heaven, to the fruition of the heavenly inheritance, by that one and only way, the knowledge of one true God, and whom he hath sent I●sus Christ. 
john. 17.  If some turbulent spirits strive to trouble our peace, to divide our unity, we account them not ours, they are spots in our feasts, 
jud. v. 12,  and scabs in our body, which spiritual vigour hath chased out. Surely if any one communicate not with us, in doctrine and charity, he is none of ours, although he impugn the same adversary with us: no more, than he is of that side which impugneth us, under colour, that he opposeth us with them. They are not accounted members of the Roman Church, who oppose us with as much violence as she doth, no more ought the same men to be esteemed ours, under this covert, that they fight with us against the Church of Rom●; but indeed with much less valour and efficacy: and therefore they are much more supported by her, and she by them reciprocally, than they support us.   

CHAP. XV. That novelty is a reproach which is ordinarily cast upon truth, and how she hath been cleared of it from time to time.  
LEt us come now to the prejudice strongest of all the rest, that Antiquity they pretend, burdening on the contrary, the truth which we preach, as new, with hatred and envy. Antiquity, they say, is divine and venerable, novelty on the other side, damnable and devilish. The truth of this we willingly subscribed to, but we yield not, that this antiquity, which they so much crack of, appertaineth unto them: that the shame of novelty which they so much taunt us with, is due unto us. Here standeth the difference, if they can justify that they are ancienter than we, let them gain the cause: if we are convinced of novelty, let sentence be pronounced against us, the condemnation shall be just, we are all ready to give way to it, and to be the first that shall set their hands to it.  
But we earnestly request, that their pretences may not be taken upon their words, that our reasons may be pondered ere we be condemned of novelty upon a bare accusation: yea although there were some likelihood of truth in it. So long as the accuser speaketh, it is hard if the defendant be not injured. But the laws, but nature, but God willeth, that both parties, the plaintiff and defendant, be heard with equal attention and equity. Otherwise, where is the innocent that could shroud himself from the fraud and violence of calunny: always malicious, but then confident and peremptory, when she perceiveth herself handsomely trimmed, and to be favoured something like the truth.  
To begin this point, we say that it is no new matter that truth should be censured of novelty, nor that falsehood should be invested with the venerable and sacred mantle of antiquity. The jews cast this aspersion upon our Saviour the Prophet of Prophets, and doctor of doctors: contrarily they took to themselves this prerogative, that they were the 
a Marc 7.5. Math. 13.2.  old friends, and retainers of truth. 
b Sym. in relat.  The pagans made the primitive Christians odious to the world by the aspersion of novelty. Proud and lying bragger's, they made bravadoes and trophies, with the monuments of their antiquity. It is for us then to think ourselves happy, and to cheer up ourselves in that we are partakers of the same slanders with Christ: these are honourable scars, with which the primitive Christians were marked: And they who go about to shame us by these aspersions, who boast and brag of their antiquity, if they do it upon the same title which the jews and Pagans presumed on, are they not unhappy, and their proceeding is it not really as ridiculous, as in appearance it was commendable? Now that it is so, it appeareth by the nature of the answers we oppose to their exceptions, conformable to those of Christ to the jews, and of the Christians to the pagans, to discover the impiety, quell the earnestness, and abate the insolency of the like calumnies. Search the scriptures (saith our Saviour) for in them ye think to have eternal life, and they are th●y which testify of me, 
●oh. 5.39.  If y●u have believed in M●s●s ye believe also in me, 
〈◊〉 5. 4●.  for he wrote of me. This is our defence at this day. We are slandered as innovators, we answer, search the Scriptures, if you believe Moses, the Prophets and Apostles, you will bel●e●e also in Christ, preached in the midst of us, we publish nothing, but what hath bee●e written by them. It was oblected to our Saviour, 
Math 25.6.  that his disciples violated the traditions of the fathers, he replied v●to th●m, that by their traditions they had made void the word of God. We at t●is time are molested with the same censure, we in our Saviour's authority, retort the same reproach, using his words, in the face of them that brought it. We offer to make it manifest, we do indeed make it a plain case, that they nullify the word of God by their traditions, that our antiquity is the antiquity of the Scripture, yea of the truth contained in it, which was preached before ever it was written. So when the Pagans by this aspersion (though false) of novelty, made the cause of the Christians suspected, they were confuted by 
f. Tertul. Apol. c. 19  the antiquity of the scriptures, and by a proposal of these considerations, that we are not so much to care when, 
h Arnob. Contr. Gentes. lib. 2.  as upon what grounds we embrace religion, that as God almighty jehovah, the ancient of days is not of any new being, so his true worship cannot be new, the form of which worship who can better prescribe, 
i Ambros in r●spos. ad Sym. celat.  than God himself? who (said they) is more to be believed in a matter concerning God, than God himself? is man to be credited, who is ignorant of himself, unless God assist him, and reveal him to himself? It is not the antiquity of years, but of manners which is venerable. It's no disparagement to be converted even in the doting age of the world, no age is superannuated for repentance. It is rather a shame, not to be forward in a willing and industrious amendment in old age. So the Primitive Christians defended themselves; and so in these times, we frame our apologies. We rehearse the same things to justify us. We request, that the antiquity not of people, but of doctrine may be respected. This is that which we expect, that to which we have summoned, and do daily call our adversaries to. Hither our adversaries dare not come, that they may not come hither, they find excuses to run back. It is then, a base slander which is cast upon us; that we confess our religion is new, that we deny, which we stiffly affirm, that antiquity is always on truth's side. Christ in appearance, was but an upstart in respect of his adversaries; as being but newly come abroad; Christian religion, if one would have judged of it, while he cast his eyes upon the heathenish monuments, their temples and edifices, would have been thought a neotericke vanity. New in outward show, but really Christ and his doctrine, in antiquity surpassed the pharisees, and their leaven; Christianity was by many ages ancienter than Paganism. But is it not a kind of stupidity in man, more to look after towers and steeples, than truth? never remembering that there was a time when these devices were not; but truth was before them all·  
Is it not reasonable here that we should be heard? will it not be thought, that we speak with reason, when we affectionately both advice and entreat, that it may be considered, that it is a fault, almost common to all men, to call that new, which is not so but in respect of them, to bestow the honour of antiquity upon nothing but what is ancient in their opinion; measuring both antiquity and novelty, by the ell of their memories. It fares with religion and laws, which the corruption and ignorance of the times hath obscured, and as it were buried, as it doth with Countries called newfound lands, because lately discovered: yet who is there that hath not his senses stolen from him, which doubts but that they are of the same standing with the world? All reformation is new, what matter is it if the model, and pattern of it be ancient? Let our discovery be new, The land which we have discovered is ancient, h●th always been, though unknown to the multitude·   

CHAP. XVI. That the search of antiquity is not rightly ordered, and what the direction is which Saint Cyprian gives us for it,  
WE affirm then, that antiquity is always on the right hand of truth, we believe it, and preach it, honouring true antiquity, not that which seemeth so to our fancy ignorant of times past: but that which is true and real. Otherwise, we should be like those, which sometimes thought, that beyond the great Ocean, and Atlantic sea, there was no land, because there was never known any Pilot, that went so far, until Columbus ventured upon it in the time of our Grandfathers. We begin at our shore, with our time and so go backward; but why at least pierce we not this Ocean of time, and so get through to the other end? why loose we courage in the midst of our voyage, why turn we sail so suddenly? If we have had neither the skill nor courage to sail further, why affirm we so confidently, that their is nothing beyond our computation? why dream we that it is impossible for us, to find that which we never sufficiently looked after, fearing to find it, desirous not to find it. We may then justly suffer this taunt, that we fainted in our undertake; that we were tired in our journey. When they go about to calculate antiquity, now a days they begin not with that which is first, the first epoch is, where were you within these hundred years! so in steed of going forward, they stop at a short period and retire homeward. In the mean time this path were not to be neglected, nor this method to be refused, if they would not stop in their search, until they came to the age of the Apostles; for beateing this way so far, how many novelties would their be met with between this and that, of fresher date; and which might be questioned, where were you before? which are not then of that ancient original, nor graced with the privileges of true antiquity, which yet are antiquities in respect of us, and our times: but mere novelties in respect of the age of the Apostles.  
That which was in the age of the Apostles, is truly ancient, and nothing ancient but that: they are the fathers whose bounds we must not remove: we must inquire after the ways of these fathers, as for those degenerate ancestors which came afterwards, we have an express prohibition. Walk not according to the statutes of your fathers, 
Ezek. 2●. 18.  and regard not their-ordinances, I am jehovah your God, walk in my statutes, keep my commandments, and do them. Antiquity then is not to be accounted of, but as she is a witness of truth, according to Tertullian, that which was first taught (saith he) is of the Lord and true. 
Tertull. de praescent, 〈◊〉  That which is absolutely first than, is to be sought out, and from it the calculation is to begun.  
St. Cyprian giveth us a direction for this calculation, 
Cypri. ad Pomp. cont. epist. Seph Epis. epist. 74. ex edit Pamell.  (although he otherwise applieth it) which is as pertinent, as it is familiar, instructing us, that even as a conduit of water which formerly ran copiously, and continually coming to fail upon a sudden, we have recourse to the springhead, to know the cause of this defect: whether it be that the drying of the fountain, depriveth the running water, both of an original & nourishment: or whether the fountain being entire the water faileth in its course, the pipe being either broken or stopped, that it being mended the water may be restored to the use of the city, in the same plenty & purity it proceedeth from the fountain: so, saith he, the Priests of God ought to repair to the original, and the tradition of the Gospel and Apostles, in keeping his commandments, to the end, that the reason of our actions may be deduced, from the same beginning, whence that deriveth its authority. That we may not doubt, what is the tradition of which he speaketh: 
Cypr. ibid.  let us he●re what he saith a little before, to the same purpose. One alleged to him tradition; whence is this tradition, replieth he, is it from the Lord, from the authority of the Evangelists or Apostles? For that those things which are written, in the book of the law, are to be observed, God himself testifieth, telling josuah that the book of the Law, the scripture should not depart out of his mouth. If then it be either commanded in the Gospel or contained in the Apostolical writings, that they which come out of any heresy, be it what it will should not be baptised, let this holy and divine tradition be observed. St. Cyprian rejecteth not the baptism of heretics, but only because he believeth not that it was a holy and divine tradition, that it should be admitted; he is ready to receive it, if it be proved unto him to be such a one; giving us the rule to prove it, by the apostolical writings. He calls then a divine and holy tradition, all that which may be justified by them, as for other traditions, he putteth t●em aside with this slighting interrogatory▪ whence is this tradition? Now therefore such traditions as these, we are ready to accept, provided that the Papists, after the same method, manifest their origin all unto us. When w●e demand whence is this tradition? when began it? let them answer us, it is drawn from the writings, it hath been from the time of the Apostles.   

CHAP: XVII. That the only means to prove true antiquity, is to have recourse to the beginning by the scripture.  
NOw that we allege St. Cyprian, it is not to authorize the truth, by the authority of men, only we borrow their words, and fancies to express it. We wish that it may be considered, not who speaks, but what is spoken. But if better authority here be called for, we will allege supreme authority; that of the Lord prescribing us the rule It was not so from the beginning. Wisely then, and fitly, 
a Tertul. contr. Martion. l●b. 4 ca 5.  said Tertullian, th●t which is the first, is the truer, and that which is from the beginning is first, and that which is of the Apostles, is from the beginning. To which we add, only that which followeth of itself, that which is in the scripture, in the writings of the Apostles is of the Apostles.  
So then, in respect of this antiquity, do we not submit ourselves to reason, when we yield that our doctrine should be rejected, if it be not of the Apostles? Are not our proofs authentic to confirm ●he antiquity of our religion, when they are gathered out of their writings, the writings of the Prophet's & Euamgelists?  
The course which is taken, to prove the antiquity so much talked of in the Church of Rome, is a recourse to Fathers, and Counsels. The more ancient these Fathers and Counsels are, prove t●ey not this antiquity the more evidently? But what fathers, what Counsels a●e more ancient, than the scripture? what antiquity then, is ancienter than the scriptures? what title more ancient than that which is of the same date with the scriptures? certainly it is an excess of open blasphemy, to equalise either fathers or counsels to Scripture, and yet this is done. But though this be done, yet it will not be said, that the Scripture is of a fresher original than the fathers, and Counsels, Impudence hath not yet ventured so far. He then of whose side is the doctrine of the scripture, hath gaine● the prerogative of antiquity, and by consequent of truth. So then this question about antiquity is brought to this issue, what we are to examine which is the doctrine most consonant to Scripture, this being cleared, the controversy of antiquity need to trouble us no longer.  
It is impossible otherwise to decide it: for let them allege fathers, and Counsels, as long as they will, this scruple still remaineth, to know if the Apostles have so ordained. Universal consent cannot be called to witness in this case, for to show that, it would ●e requisite to ask all persons of all ages, until the Apostles. If the name of universal consent, be attributed to that which is believed by the greater part, to the most received opinion, yet how shall we know and judge of this kind of universal agreement? Must it be by Counsels? Provincial Counsels cannot give us sufficient assurance of it, and for general let them show us that after that at jerusalem which is registered in the Scripture, there was any one held before that of Nice, which was not celebrated until about the year 325. shall it be by the writings of the fathers which lived before this Council? The 
b Just. Mart. in dial. cont. T●y. Iren. cont. Her. lib. 5. c. 33. Euseb. Eccl hist. lib. 3 c. 36. Tertul de spe fidel prout cita●ur à Hier. in Com. sup 36 c. Ez●ch Vict ap. Hier. ib. & in Catal. script. Ec●les. in nom. Papius Lactan. lib. 7. c 25.  greatest part, yea & most ancient of them had this strange conceit, that we are to expect after the resurrection, an earthly happiness here below, for the space of 1000 years, during which the Lord also shall converse with us eating, and drinking. A doctrine which those Fathers propose as received of all the Church. The Fa●hers then are not sufficient witnesses, the consent of the Church is not a sufficient testimony of true antiquity. 
c Aug. lib. 1. de merit. peccat. c. 20 & 24 & lib ad Bonif. cont 2. Epist. Pelag. c. 22. & lib. ● c. 4. &. l. cont. julia ●. c 2. & passim a ibi.  But what shall we say of their consent in receiving little children to the Eucharist? Shall we therefore believe this opinion to be ancient? Ancient indeed in respect of us, but not of truth, which being truly ancient and Apostolical, hath condemned it of error, which doubtless will be confessed by the Church of Rome. They which came after these ancients, have corrected their errors, concerning the thousand years' habitation upon earth, the worldly delights after the resurrection, the admission of children to the Communion. Their coming afterward, hath not prejudiced the priority of truth, which they set up again in her ancient splendour and Majesty. The time which these fathers lived before them, advantaged not their opinions younger than truth.  
It is then a reasonable offer which we make, to verify the antiquity of our religion by the Scripture. It is an easy, necessary, and certain discovery. For how few are there to be found, which either are versed in antiquity, or can be? Seeing the tedious succession of so many ages, the multitude of volumes which must be read, and perused for this purpose. A multitude, if we have regard to the truth of the history we search, defective; if to the leisure of ability of the greater sort infinite. Let them which have been versed in these inquiries speak, if they find not through every age changes, and alterations? But the Scripture is exposed to the view of every one; it is but one book in which that which is necessary to salvation is easy to him, who is not preoccupated either with passion, or with a conceit of its obscurity. This we have elsewhere demonstrated, here we will only recite as appertaining to the matter we have in hand, that which the renowned father 
d Chrys. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inacta tom. 4. edit. Sauil●  chrysostom speaketh concerning this. The Pagan saith, I would make myself a Christian, but I know not which side to fasten on. There are many contentions among you, every one saith, I speak the truth. I know not unto what, or whom to refer myself: both sides pr●tend Scripture. But answer him, this maketh much for us: for if we should say that we believe reasons, there would be something to trouble one, but seeing that we stand to the Scriptures se●ing they are plain, and true, it is very easy to judge of the matter. If any one consent unto them he is a Christian: if he oppose them, he is far from their company.  
These are the very words of that father, which in his mouth will find a great deal more favour, and less envy than in ours. Words which advertise us, that the Scripture is the most especial instrument to ha●e recourse to, in t●e search either of antiquity, or truth. Words also, which avouch that the Pagan himself, ●ay judge who is he that believeth, who speaketh agreeably to Scripture: although he cannot judge of the truth contained in it. For they are very different things to judge of the truth of a writing, and of the conformity of some discourse to it. The Pagans could not judge of the truth of the Scripture, but according to Chrys●stome, they might discern, what tenet and opinion was most conformable to it. Now this sufficeth in the question of antiquity: for neither side doub●e●h, but that the Scripture is most ancient, that si●e then which shall be found most conformable to it, shall be the most ancient. The Pagans may judge of this conformity, saith chrysostom, how much rather than may the Christians. The shortest cut then to the composing of this difference, is to address ourselves to the Scripture.  
When one would know the antiquity of the privileges of a College, or a soceity, he repaireth no whither, but to the Charter of the foundation. The instrument of the foundation of the Church is the Scripture: if we offer to verify our antiquity, if we do verify it by the date of this instrument: we proceed ingeniously, and our conclusion is irresistible. Let them cease then to reproach us, that we have brought in a new doctrine, unknown in the times of the Apostles. Let them not for shame boast any longer of antiquity, seeing they refuse to be controlled by the Scripture, the most ancient monument of antiquity. Certainly they make but an untoward enquiry into antiquity, who measure it by a certain number of years: who dream that to have been always extant, whose beginning they are ignorant of.  
It is a safer course then, to prove antiquity by truth, than truth by antiquity. Custom without truth, as St Cyprian well observed, is but antiquity of error. 
Cypriari. Epist. 74.  The proportion, elaborate figure, the beauty of a medaile, statue, or an old piece of building is not known by the antiquity, but the antiquity of them is characterised by these conditions as by i●s infallible marks. So the glory and use of the Sun, are not discerned by his antiquity, but by his glory and use, he may be judged to be as old as heaven and earth. It is not with time in respect of truth, as it is in respect of nobility, the antiquity of which augmenteth its reverence, making it more illustrious. Time contributeth no growth, nor lustre to truth. She was as much herself, in her cradle, as she is many centuries of years after. We must believe that the thing is, and afterward examine since what time it began to be. Let us prove our religion to be true: and afterward let us consider its antiquity: yea by this means we shall have proved it; for virtue is ancienter than vice, truth then lies, superstition is after religion as sickness after health. So we are ready to verify both the antiquity of our religion, by its truth, and the truth of it by its antiquity: beginning at the wellhead, the times of the patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles; that the process may be abridged, and speedily ended.   

CHAP: XVIII. That upon the supposition, that the Church of Rome hath sometimes been a true Church, it cannot be concluded, that she is so at this day.  
SO on their side those counterfeit flashes of antiquity vanish, which now with a real brightness, shine more vigorously on our side. They who cracked so much of their antiquity, are found to be but upstarts; and we which were flouted at as new comers, are found to have the strongest title to antiquity. Yet here they will demand, whether we can deny but that the Church of Rome hath been a true Church: seeing there is extant an Epistle of St. Paul addressed unto her, in which her 
a. Rom. 1. ●.  faith is commended, as being renowned through the whole world? Certes we confess, that the Church of Rome hath sometimes been not the true church, but a true Church: that her faith hath been commended, by the Apostle. We say also, that if they can make her appear to us at this day, as she was then, we will willingly shake hands with her. That nevertheless, this cannot serve her for any prerogative; for if the Apostle directeth one letter to her, he wrote two to the Corinthians, if he extolled her faith, testifying of it that it was renowned through the whole world, he hath graced also the faith of the Thessalonians with the same eulogies. 
b. 1. Thes. 1. ●.  These prerogatives benefit not any of those Churches, at this day, with any privilege, why then doth the Church of Rome extract advantages out of them? The Churches of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria have sometimes been pu●e and flourishing Churches: b●t now who condemneth them not, as being fallen from the piety an● doctrine of their ancestors? But they add, that the Church of God cannot fail or decay: a strange pertinacy! The Church's which we have named of Corinth, Thessalonica, Alexandria, and Constantinople since that they are altered & changed: that they have failed, and fallen away, a●e not permitted to have recourse to the privilege, and to the favour which God had showed unto their predecessors, if they allege, that they have been sometimes true Churches, yet this consequence will not be admitted, that therefore they are so now. It will easily and clearly be manifested, that they are no longer true churches; and that nevertheless, the church of God hath not been conquered by t●e gates of hell, but hath continued immoveable upon the rock, upon which she was built by the supreme Architect, the Lord jesus. It will be answered these Churches, that their ancestors endear we●e of the true Church, but tha● also the gates of hell have not prevailed against them, that they have overcome temptations, that they have vanquished death, and shall vanquish the grave; that they which have succeeded them, have succeeded the● in the name and title of the Church: n●t in truth of doctrine, not in purity of life, and that therefore they are not of the true Church. That it is n●t therefore strange, that the promises made unto the Church, should be true, a●d yet not appertain unto them; seeing they are ne●ther the true Church, nor ●rue Churches, but barely successors of som● tha● have been.  
Let the Doctors of the Church of Rome here tell us in conscience, i● s●ch an answer be not pertinent, & beyond reply to the Eastern Churches, which are separated from the Roman, when they allege their Ancestors, when they s●y t●e fathers were of them. Why shoul● it not be permitted us then, to use the same answer to them: that the●r predecessors mad● a part of the tru● Church, that the gates of hell have not prevailed against them: but this honour and especial favour of God advantageth not their posterity, unless they make it evident, that they have not been Apostates from the doctrine of their fathers. Good parents may have bad Children: and yet God fails not of his promise to the Parents, although the child receive the stipend due unto his iniquity: the piety of his parents serves but to increase his condemnation. A good father cannot perish, a true Church cannot fall away. But as it is but too common, that wicked children succeed good parents, which perish in their sin, except they repent: so to a true Church an impure Church succeedeth, a●d perisheth in her impurity, unless she be repurified and reform. 
c. Math. 3.9.  Do ye works worthy of repentance, and presume not to say, that we are the Children of Abraham (said john Baptist to the jews) If 
d. john. 8.39.  ye were the Children of Abraham, ye would do th● works of Abraham, (said the Lord to them, than when they bragged, that they were of the race of Abraham) They 
e. Rom. 4.16. & 9.7.  then a●e the true Children of Abraham, which are his Child●●● in the faith, and they are truly the successors of the Primitive Churches, which have succeeded them in the doctrine of the faith.  
The ancestors of the twelve tribes which revolted, were of the true Church; for all this, could it be said, after their revolt, because sometimes they had been, that therefore they were so still, under pretence that the true Church cannot revolt? doubtless no, for when it was said that the ten tribes at other times had been of the true Church, that was always understood of their pious and religious ancestors: of them, merely in respect of the outward profession, and in regard of the opinion men might conceive of them, before their revolt. So their revolt caused not that the Church should revolt, but discovered their hypocrisy, 
f. jerem. 3.11.  Moreover it so fell out that judah, Be●iamin, and the half tribe of Manasseh revolted also with a worse apostasy than they of Israel: 
Ezech. 16.51 & 23 11. 2. King 16 21.  and consequently the revolt was general in all Israel; yet notwithstanding it could not be said, even then, 
g. Esa. 1.9.  that the Church of God was revolted, because that instead of the revolted multitude, God always preserved his own. A small number of the election of grace, 
h. Ezech. 9.4.  which groaned & sighed for all the abominations, which were committed in jerusalem.   

CHAP: XIX. That notwithstanding the revolt of the Romish Church, the true Church hath continued whole and entire.  
IN the Apostasy 
a 2. Thes. 2.3.  which was to be in th● Christian Church, and which at this day we see to be, the same is come to pass. If the jews in vain cried the 
b. jerem. 7.4.  Temple, the Temple, in vain cry they now adays, the Church, the Church. If there were nothing but the Temple, an empty name, a stately den of thieves. If it were sometimes answered them which boasted of it 
c. jerem. ib.  Trust not upon lying words, The temple of the Lord etc. May not we now make the same answer upon the like occasion. They bragged, that the law should not perish from the Priest, nor the council from the wise, nor the word from the Prophet, because these promises were made to the Church.  
At this day the Romanists say the same, make the same vaunts, but that which was sometimes answered those vainglorious hypocrites, 
d. Ezech 7.10.  the law shall perish from Priest, & counsel from the sage, is that which we tell our adversaries, it is that which we desire to be admitted to verify, that we may not be oppressed with these preiudices, wherewith the jews anciently endeavoured to confute the Prophets and the Lord, the Prince of Prophets himself, the supreme Prophet of his Church.  
At the time when the Lord came into the world: when God was manifested in the flesh, and many years before that time, what was the state, and outward face of the jewish Church? What was the high Priest? What were the successors of Moses which pretended antiquity, succession and the title of guides, and Pastors of Israel? Surely enemies of God under the honest title of being his servants: seducers of the People, under the demure show of being their teachers: Corrupters of the law, wearing the ornaments, and sitting in the chair of interpreters; commending themselves to the people, and by them commended under this magnificent title. Such was the jewish Church to look upon outwardly, as well in those which sat & ruled in their Synagogues, in their great & little counsels which they called the Sanhedrin; as in the rout & multitude which followed approved, & adhered to those disorders. So miserable was the face of the jewish Church at that time, which yet had not always been so. But nevertheless, in this so thick and black darkness God caused his light to shine, reserved his wheat amongst this chaff, in that infected multitude he preserved a small number from that spiritual pestilence: small indeed, but so useth to be the number of things of worth, excellencies are rarities. There is much stone, few diamonds: the●e are many dullards, few sages. It is the little flock to whom it hath pleased the father to give the Kingdom.  
So then the Church which hath succeeded, which hath occupied the ●oome of the true Church, may become an harlot by being erroneous and apostatical, and yet the true Church erreth not, is not abandoned of her Lord and husband. The reply also, which here is made unto us, is impertinent, not tolerable, That the estate of the Church, was of another nature under the old Testament, before the first coming of our Saviour, while the 
e. Gal: 41.23  heir was a child, and the Church enjoyed not a full liberty; while she 
f. Heb. 11.13.39.  saluted the promises of the actual exhibition of the Messiah, & of the abundance of Grace in him, a far off, without obtaining them as yet. All this is true, but would they hence infer that the heavenly father hath disinherited his children, under the old Testament, which he doth no longer under the new? That he hath prostituted his spouse, but now keepeth her in his Cabinet? No, our heavenly father hath never been without Children, our bridegroom without the Church his bride. It is true indeed that he maintained her more sparingly, under the old, then under the new Testament, ●s the scripture teacheth, and we believe. But we deny that he forsook her any more then, then now, for, he which 
g Zach 2.8.  toucheth you saith he, toucheth the apple of mine eye. The Church then which revolted under the o●d Testament, the Church which followed that revolt was not the Church, but in name and in respect of the revenues and dignities into which it succeeded, masked howsoever with the outward profession of the true religion. This was the Church which forsook God, this was the Church whom God forsook.  
If then any Church in these times after the like manner become apostatical, ought she to have any more privilege under the n●w, then under the old Testament? God detesteth hypocrisy equally in a●l ages, yea the greater it is, the more abominable it is unto him. If then it be doubled in these latter times, the indignation of God is proportionably incensed against it. The grace offered, excuseth not, but agravateth the neglect of it, so that there is no difference in th●t which concerneth the perseverance and revolt of the Church, under the law, or under grace.  
This is our belief and our doctrine in this point. Not that we would affirm, that the true Church erreth or falleth away finally in that which is fundamental; although in some of her 
b Gal 1. & 3.1.  members, sometimes she go away for a time. But we affirm, that they who by most voices bear away the title of the Church, either have erred, or may err, eu●n fundamentally and finally. So when we say that the jewish Church hath erred, we understand not the true jewish Church, but that which was so in appearance, which took up its room, and bore the outward cognisance of it, which had the external calling, & succession. After the same manner when we teach, that the Christian Church may err, that it hath erred, we understand not the number of the faithful, the number of their successors in the faith, we are cofident that they cannot err fundamentally, generally all together, and finally. We say indeed, that the Church which erreth, is that Church, which triumphing with the title of Christ's spouse, is indeed no better than a strumpet.   

CHAP: XX. That they of the Church of Rome use a perverse and ridiculous manner of Argumentation, while they conclude from the promises made to the Church, that they nei●her have erred, nor can err  
IT is a frivolous trick then, that they insist somuch upon the promises made to the Church, and to b●ing us news that f●ee 
a. Math. 16.18  is built vp●n a rock, t●at the gates of he●l shall not prevail against her. It is to no purpose, that they allege those privileges, that she is 
b 1. Tim. 3.15.  the pillar and prop of ●ruth, the spouse of Christ, 
c. Ephes. 1.32.  his 
d Cant. 2.16. & 6.3  only spouse, that he is, and will be always in the mi●dest of her, that his 
f. john 16.  spirit guideth her into all truth. 
e. Math. 28.20.  The pith of our controversy lies not in all this. Let him which denieth the truth of these promises, or envieth the church these eulogies be Anathema Maranatha; let him be as a jew, or a Turk. But as he is not truly a jew which is one outwardly, said the Apostle: so neither is she always the true church which is so in the account of men; but she which 
g Rom. 2.28.29.  is so inwardly, whose glory and praise is of God, and not of men, 
h Ib.  sealed by his spirit, 
i 1. Cor. 1.2. Ephes. 1.13.  known of him, & him only certainly and 
k 2. Tim. 2.19.  distinctly. All the question is, whether she be the true church, whom the world graceth with this title. If we should grant that the church of Rome is the true church, doubtless we should confess too, that she never erred fundamentally. Let it then be verified unto us that she is so, and we will give way to all the rest, we will ingeniously confess ourselves to have been schismatics, in separating ourselves from her communion.  
The principal question then between us and them is, whether they are the true church or no. This being so, is not their proceeding perverse and ridiculous, when they take that for granted, which is the main point of our controversy? For alleging that they are the Church, they thence infer, that they neither have erred, nor can err. This argument should run backward, they have not erred, therefore they are the true Church. If a woman accused of adultery, of being taken even in the vile act of her unchastity, instead of answering directly to her accusation, and of acquitting herself, by this means to recover her good name now tainted, for all her defence, should only make a bare protestation, that she were an honest, chaste woman, might it not be presumed, that she were either mad as well as dishonest, or else as impudent as unchaste? What should that Physician be thought of, which being examined about a fact of impoisonment objected against him, instead of justifying his prescriptions, and his application of them according to the rules of Physic, would only cry out that he was a Physician of much skill, experience, and fidelity? We accuse the church of Rome (she who will needs be called so) of being the whore, and the Babylon in the Revelation. We accuse her Doctors of impoisoning souls; she answereth us that she is chaste, and that she is the spouse of Christ: her Doctors tell us that they are the successors of the Apostles, and the servants of God; contenting themselves with this poor silly answer, without any other proof to justify themselves. Truly if we should accord that the Papacy is the spouse of Christ; and that its Doctors are the heirs of the Apostles, they would have gained the ca●s●: but what man is there so stripped of reason which seeth not, that when we accuse the Church of Rome for having erred, and played the Apostate, we accuse her of not being the true Church: That when we accuse the teachers of the church of Rome for being seducers, we deny them to be the successors of the Apostles. So then, when for their complete defence, they only oppose against us these glittering titles, they do no more then simply affirm that, which was principally called in question; a pretty defence for them who have none at all. True it is, that their proceeding would have some equity in it, if our accusation consisted in a naked assertion, and if we barely affirmed that, which we were not able to prove: for to a simple yea, it is enough to oppose as simple a nay, You say it, we deny it. Yet he that is innocent will not content himself with this easy come off, courageous as he is, he will do more than acquit himself. But here the question is not about a bare affirmation, but a rational proof, so strongly backed, that there is no shift in sophistry, no wrangling devise which they have not recourse to, that they may not be bound to answer directly. We offer to lay open the whoredoms of the Church of Rome, and the impoisonments of her teachers. We propound this accusation fortified with reasons and proofs. Is not this on our part to proceed as we should? and on theirs by this vaunting, as vain as it is bold, of the venerable title of the Church, the Pastors and Teachers of the Church, which they oppose us with, to make themselves rather more suspected, than any whit justified? Yet when they are prosecuted and driven even into the uttermost corner of their evasions, their last mine, as it were, by which they blow all up is, We are the Church of Catholic Doctors. As if we disputed not with them about the truth of this title, as if this were not the sum and substance of our accusation, that they are not such as they would make us believe they are. In doing which, they are like unto a company of unlearned Professors, who when they are puzzled & nonplussed by their auditors, for want of other reply, betake themselves to the authority of the chair, and prerogative of the square cap.   

CHAP: XXI. That it is an unjust proceeding, to deny the change happened in the Church, under pretence that the Authors, time, and place of it cannot be specified.  
FOr all this they imagine, that they come over us again very shrewdly by a demand which they urge us with, pressing us to tell, where, when, and by whom the change in the Church was begun. For presuming that we cannot answer them exactly concerning this, they promise to themselves in the sequel this advantage, that we shall be forced to yield unto them, that since the times of the apostles, matters have continued at that point which we see them to be at at this day; never considering that it is the unhappy condition of time, and the ordinary pace of the world to run on into wo●se, to lose and destroy with time that good which deserved to have been perpetuated by it. Not as if this corruption or contagion could at all endanger or hurt the true Church, the number of the faithful and the elect, whom God sustaineth in the midst of the greatest confusions, and enlighteneth in the most fearful eclipses, as we have formerly showed: but in as much as time shriveleth and wrinckleth, as it were, the face, and outward hue of all things.  
Under the old Testament, before the publication of the year of God's good pleasure, he always preserved his Church, viz. his own; yet no man denyeth, but the outward face of the Church was the subject of many and great alterations: all confess it, and he which should not, would deny the Scripture. Under the new Testament the same is happened, the Church of God never altered in that which is essential, much less hath she utterly failed: but if we consider her outwardly, in the multitude in which she lay hid as the grain amidst the chaff, here the change is notorious, we offer to manifest it to him who doubteth of it. But we say, it is a tyrannous law to compel us to particularise the persons, times, & places by whom, when, and where the change, and revolt was begun.  
When the concealer of stolen goods is attached for felony, the lawful owner challenging his goods, and, verefying his title, gaineth his cause, and overthroweth the concealer, although he cannot show where, when, and by whom the theft was committed. The Physician forbeareth not to judge of a disease, and to apply convenient remedies unto it, although he be ignorant of the time, place and occasion of it.  
Surely it is a weak conclusion in all matters, especially in religion, to infer that no alteration hath been, under colour, that the author, time, and place of it cannot be punctually specified. Such an accurate enquiry, acknowledge so exact in such circumstances dependeth of the histories of times past; what then, if those histories be not known? what if they be not to be found in the Records of Antiquity? What a multitude of alterations have all along happened, the first authors, times, and places of which, it is impossible to specify? But who is not acquainted with the ordinary dealings of Innovatours? who knoweth not that they use to mislay or abolish such copies, and evidences as might one day be produced against them? How many bastardly books have been fathered upon ancient, and famous authors which they would have rejected as monsters? This hath been practised in all faculties, in Physic, in Law, and also in Divinity. It is then a hard and unjust proceeding in Romanists, to bind those who accuse them for being Innovatours, to produce against them fragments foisted into the registry by their own confederates whereas they produce more authentic, & unquestionable evidences.  
He that should undertake to convince the jews of having adulterated, or rather abolished the purity of the ancient doctrine of their fathers: since the time of the Prophet Malachi, he would find himself hardly tasked, precisely to specify the authors, times, & places of this so strange, & enormous an alteration. Yet it is as clear as noon, that such a corruption, such a change hath been in the Religion of the jews. By what then is this so undoubted a truth made evident? doubtless by the Scriptures, by which we know what was the ancient Religion of the jews. The comparison of that sampler with the religion of the jews, as it was in our Saviour's time, discovereth what a great diversity there is, between their new superstition and old religion: and consequently marketh out the change, though not the circumstances of it.  
And indeed, when the Lord the son of God accused the Scribes, and Pharisees, the Doctors and interpreters of the law, and convinced them of having corrupted the ancient and original purity, he troubled not himself to quote unto them records and histories, and exquisitely to set down where, when and by whom the innovation was begun. He contented himself with the Scriptures, and went no farther than the comparison of doctrine. Yet who could better have preformed such an enterprise then himself? who could number to the smallest scruples of time, and was superlatively skilled both in Chronologie, and History. But he was willing in his own person, to teach us what method we are to follow in discovering, and reforming abuses, to wit, that we are not bound, scrupulously to specify all those circumstances, which are of no importance to the main point.   

CHAP: XXII. That there are changes which creep on by little and little, and that it is hard, yea impossible to specify always the times, places, and authors of a change.  
MOreover we must needs confess that which experience daily thrusteth into our senses, that there are alterations which cr●epe on and increase by little and little, so that one cannot so distinctly perceive them, that it should be possible for him precisely to quote the very instant of every degree, in this almost insensible progress. Who could ever observe when, where, by whom, by what degrees the French tongue hath been changed? Yet must he needs be accounted void of judgement, who from this difficulty, yea impossibility, would conclude that there hath been no change in it. What old man is there, able precisely to observe the minute, hour, day, month, yea year, in which he begins to be an old man, to change his complexion, to feel the decaying of his strength and faculties? yet for all that, he must needs be senseless, who in his old age should deny so sensible an alteration.  
Now to apply these considerations to the estate of the Christian Church. Who knoweth not that in the Primitive Church, the 
a Vid. sup. c. 17.  error of the Millenaries prevailed? Yet who is he that can specify by whom, where, when it began? Who can particularly tell when it ended, where, and by whom it was first condemned? Upon this who will infer, that this error hath been alwa●es, that it is yet in the Church, or that it is not an error, but an Apostolical doctrine? It was also (as no man doubteth) an error anciently received and approved by the Church, that the Sacrament of the 
b Vid. iter. c. 17  supper was to be administered to little children. Who will tell us who was the first father of it? Where, and when it was brought in. Who will produce the records of an opposition made against it? Nay more, let any man tell when, and in what Council such a doctrine was condemned? There is no man able to perform this, and shall we therefore say its a doctrine of the Apostles.  
It was an error of the Fathers of the Primitive Church, that 
c 
Iren. cont. haeres. lib. 5. ad finem. Tertull. de an. cap. 5.  
Ambros. de hon. Mort. c. 10. Aug. in Enchir. ad Laur. c. 109.   the souls of the Saints themselves entered not into the heavenly Paradise immediately after their departure out of their bodies. Tertullian excepted only the souls of Martyrs. But who is able to name the author, time, or place of the nativity of this strange opinion? Yet it is most certain, that this erroneous doctrine, had its birth, growth, and period. It was an erroneous practice in the ancient church, to pray to God in the behalf of the Patriarches, 
d Epiphas nhaer. 75 co●t. Arr. lib. 3. t●m. 1. Cypr. Epist 34. ex edit. Pamel.  Prophets and for the whole company of the just deceased, for the Martyrs themselves. Who is so versed in the knowledge of antiquity, that can distinctly set down the time, place, and first inventor of that so strange a devotion; or the council in which it was condemned, when, where it was first condemned? The difficulty, yea impossibility of rendering an exact account of such particularities, shall it be a sufficient ground to maintain, that it always was, and is still in the church.  
There was a time when immediately after Baptism, 
e Tertull. de coron. Mil. c. 4.  the baptised party was made to taste milk, & honey, when his whole body was to be 
f 
Dionys. Areop. de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 2.  
Clem const. Apost. lib. 7. c. 41. & 44.   anointed with oil when they were 
g Tertull. ib.  to abstain a whole week after from washing themselves. When they made upon a certain day in the year offerings for the nativity, that is, for the memory of the day of the Martyrs sufferings. When they thought it an impiety to fast between Easter and Whit●ontide, to worship kneeling. When 
h Basil. de spi● san. c. 27.  they prayed not but towards the East.  
When was it that these customs had their beginning? Or if they are Apostolical, as it was sometimes thought when they were practised, how have htey been since altered? When began their change, by whom, in what place? If we are not able to satisfy those, which should urge us with all these queries, must we needs therefore be obstinate without reason, and peevishly deny the change of those rites? And seeing the change of them was made with reason, must we not confess that they were not of Apostolical, that is, of divine institution?  
It was an Apostolical constitution, but which was to last no longer than the occasion of it, 
Act. 15.29.  that the faithful should abstain from victuals sacrificed to Idols, from blood, and that which was strangled. We see that this constitution hath expired, but if we cannot assign the time when it gave up the Ghost, or the Synod in which it was abrogated, shall we therefore affirm that it continueth until now? In the mean time, it is as absurd to deny the original of a thing, under pretence that t●e author, time, and place of it are unknown, as to deny the discontinuation and end of it, under colour, that it cannot be assigned by whom, where, and when it begun to be discontinued. As if one should deny that he had ever been the month, year, or perhaps age, of whose nativity is uncertain: or as if one should deny that he were dead, the year, or perhaps age, of whose decease is unknown unto him.  
It is then an absurd cavil, to press us to show that no change hath happened in the Church, by quoting the time, by assigning the place, by naming the Authors of it. But we argue rationally, when we prove by experience, that there hath been a change: when we compare the doctrine of the Apostles with that which prevailed in the church afterwards, and clearly manifest the strange diversity, & repugnancy there is between them. When we compare the state of the Romish Church, with that of the church in the first & purest ages, and make the diversity between them visible and palpable? Although, this kind of proof being not easy, but to those who have skill in the languages, we stand not chiefly upon it. And although it should fail us, which yet it doth not, yet therefore there should not be any prescription, or exception against Scripture. That which is come up since, is new in respect of it, though ancient in respect of us. But here the question is not about the Antiquity of persons. To which we add, that if there should be any thing found as ancient as the Scripture, being not conformable unto it, if its antiquity commend it, its falsity condemneth it so much the more, as it is the nature of evil to be the more pernicious, the more ancient it is.   

CHAP: XXIII. That it is not ingenuous dealing, to urge us to answer where our Church was, and what Pastors it had before the Reformation.  
NOw the authors of these wrangling, cavilling proceedings, might cease their captious quirks, and take time to blush a while. But as the contentious spirit of Sophistry is infinite in the invention of new tricks to perplex a cause, they give us here another knot to untie. God they say hath always had a church on earth, this we confess: and that church hath from time to time had her Pastors, here we agree with them too. But then, say they, Where was your Church before Luther? What Pastors, what Doctors had it? See here again, how from the ignorance of man, they conclude the not being of the thing. Presuming that we cannot satisfy these demands, and assuring themselves that we know not where our Church hath been, and by whom it was guided, they take it for a matter already out of question, that therefore our Church was not at all. In which inference there is discovered a notable piece of wrangling; for it being presupposed (which yet is false, as it will appear by and by) that we knew not where our church was, and who have been our Pastors, since the alteration, and defection happened in the church of Rome, might it in conscience hence be concluded, that it was not therefore at all? Would this consequence be admitted, Thou knowest not such a thing, therefore it is not, or hath not been. Yet this is the manner of their argumentation against us. You know not, say they, where your Church was, nor who were her Pastors, therefore she was not at all. Upon this it is, that they triumph and insult over us, as if we answering that we know not where our Church was, nor what Teachers it had, we should implicitly yield in the same answer, that she was not all, or if she were, that she was destitute of Pastors.  
The like argument once deceived the Prophet Elias when he knew not where the church of the ten Tribes was, nor who were its Guides. 
a 1 King. 19.10. Rom. 11.4.  They have forsaken thy covenant (saith he) they have broken down thy altars, they have slain thy Prophets, and I am left alone, and they go about to take away my life also. He thought himself to be alone, because his fellows were unknown unto him. But the Lord made him see the imperfection of his untoward Logic, advertising him that he had reserved seven thousand to himself, which had not bowed the knee to Baal. If then the Church of Israel might subsist so secretly, that Elias knew neither her abode, nor her Pastors, who will think it strange, that the same case should happen in the time of our Grandfathers: that then when the earth was overclouded with darkness, God had a Church, albeit we are not able to specify the place of her residence, or names of her Pastors. It may not here be replied, that at that time beside the hidden company, God had a flourishing Church in judah; in as much as it hath often fallen out, that the Church of judah equalled, yea exceeded 
b This hath been showed already. c. 18.  the church of Israel in corruption. So that then to behold the face of the church, as it was obvious to humane view, it could not be said, but all lay in desolation. But albeit that lamentable defection had not been universal in israel and judah, yet the argument drawn from the estate of the Israelitish church would still retain its force, seeing that if such a part of the Church might exist undiscernible, why may not the other parts also, and all other particular Churches subsist unknown?  
It's a necessary consequence, that that which hindereth the whole Church from lying hid, ought also to hinder any of her parts: and the same power which preserveth and sustaineth the parts of the Church, viz: particular Churches, amongst the most tumultuous confusions and disorders, shall conserve likewise the whole Church. If we are to think, that the Church is always visible, and may be pointed at with the finger, because the Lord prescribing the means to compose differences, 
c Math. 18: 17.  hath said, Tell it to the Church, seeing they are particular Churches to whom recourse in this case is to be had: this reason will prove as strongly, that particular Churches should always be visible. If it hinder not but these may be invisible, as it is agreed upon, neither will it hinder, that the Church totally in her universality may sometimes be invisible. If the Church be always 
d. Esa. 2.2.  set upon the tops of mountains, if in consequence, she be always visible, the particular Churches shall be so too, seeing she cannot be taken notice of, but in them and by them, and if she be not always glorious and conspicuous in her parts, no more shall she be in the whole. If lastly, it be thought that the Church ought always to be visible, always exposed to the eyes of men, because her Pastors are 
e. Math. 5. 15.1●.  the lights of the world, compared to candles which are not put under bushels, but upon Candlesticks, seeing this appertaineth to the Ministers of particular Churches, the Churches in which these Ministers are, by this argument shall continue always visible to the eyes of carnal men, which is manifestly false. But certainly. God hath not promised, that his Church should be always elevated upon mountains; he promised indeed, that she should be placed there, and so no man doubteth but that this promise from time to time hath had its accomplishment. But he never promised that she should be placed there always, no more hath it fallen out so. On the contrary, God hath promised, that 
f Apoc. 12.14.  there should be wings given to his Church, that she might fly unto her place, before the persecuting Dragon. And whereas, the Lord hath commanded us, to empty our grievances which we have against her brethren in to the bosom of the Church, when private reconciliation is impossible: this commandment is of the nature of those which always have this condition understood, when the thing is possible. The Lord had regard to the time wherein he lived, and hath prescribed a law which ought to be observed, but always the possibility of observance supposed, and an estate of the Church semblable to that in his time, when the Church discipline was not as as yet corrupted in this point. This Commandment than presupposeth not, that the Church should always be obvious to the eyes of men, but that in the case propounded recourse should be had unto her, when she was so.  
As for the Pastors of the Church, they are called the light of the world, not always in relation to the effect, but to the duty; as they are called also in this respect the 
g Mat. 5.13.  salt of the earth, because they were ordained for this purpose, and are bound to this duty. But then when they are in effect the light, it is a spiritual light, not discernible but to the eyes of the soul, & minds of those which are spiritual, of those which are in the house, as our Saviour expresseth it. So that none of these considerations can yield a sufficient argument, for the perpetual outward visibility of the Church, neither in the whole, nor in her parts.   

CHAP. XXIIII. That the Church of God was before the last Reformation, where she was, and who were her Pastors.  
But if they will needs press us further yet, & demand where our Church was extant immediately before our separation, we tell them that she was in Babylon, in captivity under the kingdom of Antichrist. ᵃ Come out of Babylon my people, it is written in the Revelation: the people of God were then in Babylon, albeit they served not the Gods of Babylon; and which is more, their Teachers were the Teachers of Babylon. If this seem strange to any man, let him call to mind the estate of the jewish church before our Saviour had begun his preaching. Might it not at that time have been demanded, where the Church of God had been before, and who were her Pastors? What could one answer to this query? Might it have been said, that the Scribes and pharisees, and their adherents, the greater part of the people were the Church? alas they were nothing less: they were enemies of Christ and ●his Church the true answer than had been to say, that the Church was a small number of righteous persons, which groaned under the burden of that spiritual tyranny, which lamented the desolation come upon them by the corruption of the ancient doctrine and discipline. That the Doctors of ●he Church were the pharisees, of whom the Lord testified, that they sat in Moses chair. Now we say the very same thing. That God before the reformation begun in the days of our forefathers had a Church in the midst of Babylon, in the midst of the Popish and Antichristian church: but that this church howsoever, was not the multitude of those who had received the 
b Apoc. 14 9  mark of the Beast, and worshipped it, but the small 
c Apoc. 20.4.  company of those which misliked the Roman tyranny and corruption, of whom, some from time to time being detected, have been banished, others cruelly put to death, and slandered to have been guilty of horrible and heinous crimes, to make their persons odious to the people, & their memories execrable to posterity: had not God by his providence, maugre the subtlety and fury of calumny, preserved the monuments of their faith and piety even unto this day. Such were the poor Waldenses constrained to wander to & fro, such also were the exiled Albigenses.  
Concerning that which is further demanded of us, who were the Teachers of the Church during that time so full of confusion then when Babel reigned: We answer that questionless the holy Ghost always instructed his Church 
d joh. 16.13.  inwardly, and that outwardly they were the very same which taught publicly, namely the Doctors of the Romish Church. But some man may here say, that by consequent they were true Teachers: to which we answer, that in some sort they were true: as the Scribes and pharisees were both true Teachers and seducers: true when they sitting in Moses chair, teaching his doctrine, the people received wholesome instruction by their Ministry: Seducers when they sitting in their own chair, teaching their own traditions, their own inventions, they 
e 1. Cor. 1.18. 2. Cor. 2.15.  who perished, the people whom 
f Rom. 11.17.  God had not chosen sucked in the poison which they tempered. Thus it was in the jewish church before the Lord had begun to manifest himself to the world, otherwise God had not had a Ch●rch. This being true and evident, it should not be necessary solicitously to insist upon a farther answer to the demand, How this could be? When there is an agreement about the thing, it is curiosity to inquire after the manner of it.  
Yet that we may leave no scruple behind, we will tell them after what manner God useth false Teachers to instruct his people. The Scribes and pharisees propounded the word of God, and read it amongst the jews before the coming of our Saviour, so much as was necessary to salvation: but they mingled their leaven with it, they thrust in their expositions, glosses, and traditions; the true Church sustained herself with the word, and rejected the leaven, the false glutted herself with the leaven, and let pass the word. What strange matter is there in all this? The sheep in their pasturage where there are some venomous herbs, and others convenient for this nature, know well how to choose that which is proper for them, & ●o let alone that which is hurtful: and shall the sheep of Christ be unfurnished of this discretion? They of whom it is said, 
g joh. 10. 4.5·  that they hear his voice, know it, follow it, and fly from the hand of a stranger.  
Who then will wonder any longer, that before the great Reformation which the Lord hath begun in these latter days, as it were in the decrepit age of the world, the Church having truth propounded unto her mixed with lies, hath embraced the truth and rejected the lies. Surely this truth hath sounded always in the Church, it hath been in the mouths of the Romish Doctors, as the benediction was in the mouth of Balaam. This truth, that there is one God, Creator, and preserver of all things, that the Father, Son, and Spirit, distinguished, but not divided, are this God: that the universe being created for man, and man after the image of God, he by his sin hath drawn upon himself anger and malediction. That the s●nne of God hath taken our nature upon him, and in it hath expiated our offences, that all th●se which believe in him, which repent in sincerity obtain mercy. That therefore we ought to love so merciful a God, to call upon him, to give him thanks. Thus far the Scribes and pharisees were in Moses chair, in the chair of the Prophets, of Christ and his Apostles: thus far they were to be hearkened to. Thus far the Church did hear them: But whilst they added to this truth their lies, to this spiritual bread their leaven: then they sat in their own chair, they were to be heard no farther; then the true church stopped her ears against them, the false she listened to them.  
Thus we answer to this importunate questixon, How may this be?  
By the same reason also, we are not perplexed for an answer, when they ask us, what is become of our forefathers? This interrogatory proposed by the Pagans to the first Christians, extorted from them an answer odious in the mouths of children speaking of their parents, that God was marvellous in his ways, but in all likelihood they were damned. Thanks be to God, we are not driven to such straits. In Paganism there was nothing which might save, no word of grace and mercy: in the doctrine published in the church of Rome, there was something to be● chosen, and they who picked it out carefully, and applied it to their use were saved. Why should we doubt but that many thousands of our fathers did it? God hath known how to preserve a church to himself in the midst of the most horrible Apostasies, confusions, and desolations, happening under the old Testament since Malachi. Should his arm be shortened under the new? No, but 
h Mal. 3.6.  Eternal as he is, he is always like himself.  
Now then let the importunate curiosity surcease those questions, framed only to distract the simple: Where was your Church? Where were your Pastors? Our church was in Babylon, and her Teachers for want of better, were the Teachers of Babylon. Concerning that which they trouble us farther with; why therefore we have not imitated our forefather's example, why we are come out of Babylon if they were saved in it? We will give reasons for it hereafter 
i In cap. 37.  in their proper place.   

CHAP. XXV. Of the true succession of the Church, what it is, that it dependeth not of succession, either natural, or Politic.  
NOw because they mainly oppress us, with the prejudice, which they make against us about Succession, which they say is of great moment and pretend moreover, that they have it, and that we have it not; that they have continued always, that we are lately come in by the by, crossing their line of succession, let us consider what strength this pretence for them, & exception against us may have.  
Now that the ambiguity of the word may not entangle us, we must know what kind of succession they mean. If it be a natural succession, from father to son, from generation to generation: we say that the succession of the Church dependeth not of such a succession. It was, and is still the prerogative of the obstinate jews, that they are the successors of the 
a Rom. 9 ●.  patriarchs and Prophets, in respect of carnal and natural generation, yet they are far enough from being the true Church. They have succeeded their religious Ancestors in being men, this succession is natural. They have not succeeded them in being faithful men, this succession is spiritual. If they understand a politic succession, in respect of the place and authority, one succeeding another in order, and without out interruption, we affirm, that the Church is not fastened to such a succession.  
How often do the Prophets complain, that the people of Israel, their kings, and Priests were all gone out of the way and quite disordered by idolatry? albeit their kings were successors of good kings, and their Priests of good Priests. The Scribes and pharisees enjoyed not they this kind of succession, which we call Politic? Were they for all that the true Church? yea were they not 
b Mat. 23.16.17.19.  seducers of the people, corruptors of the Law, sworn and deadly enemies of the Lord and his doctrine. Now against this truth so evident, it is impossible they should reply any thing, but it will be very frivolous. If it be said, that Malachi prophesieth, that 
c Mal. 2.7.  the Priests lips shall preserve knowledge, that the people shall seek the law at his mouth: we answer that in that place, there is not contained a prediction of an after event, but a declaration of a duty. For indeed presently after the Prophet accuseth the Priest, for having gone out of the way, for causing the people to stumble. A manifest proof that these words: the lips of the Priest shall preserve knewledge, have no other emphasis than to signify, that the lips of the Priest ought to preserve knowledge. There is nothing more frequent in Scripture, than to propose a duty in the future tense. Almost all the commandments of God run in this form. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. etc. He that should infer upon these forms of speech, that these Commandments shall never be broken, would hardly prove himself a reasonable creature.  
So the true succession of the Church, is not always joined to this politic succession which of itself without the succession of piety, is like to the succession of darkness to light, of sickness to health, of an infectious air to a wholesome, of barrenness to fruitfulness, of a Tyrant to a good Prince. That aught to be accounted the true succession, which is the succession of truth. To have the same mind and opinion, is to have succession of the same seat; not to have the same opinion, is to be contrary in respect of the seat. The succession of the seat hath but the name of succession, the succession of opinion hath the truth of it, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianzen orat. 21. in laud. Athan.  said Nazianzane, and in saying so, hath taught us in what sense, the Lord would have the 
e Mat. 23.2.  Scribes and pharisees to be heard as sitting in Moses chair, to wit, when they taught like Moses, so far as they are the successors of Moses in doctrine. But that hindereth not but that he hath commanded also, 
f Mat. 16.6.  
k Psal. 107. v. 33.34.35.  to take heed of the leaven of the pharisees, when they sit not in his Chair, but upon a stool of their own making.  
But what hath the Church of God than no certain succession on earth? Yea the Lord hath said, 
g Esa. 6.13.  that as the substance of the oak and Teyletree is in that which they cast, so the holy seed shall be her substance. But this succession is not tied either to the natural, or to the politic succession, but it dependeth only of the free disposition of him, who turneth rivers into a wilderness: and the water springs into dry ground A fruitful land into barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein who turneth the wilderness into a standing water: and dry ground into water springs.   

CHAP: XXVI. That the Pope's authority, is not originally derived from the Apostles.  
But to come nearer to this matter, the Romish Church hath no kind of lawful succession; not that of government and policy, not that of rites and ceremonies, no not the succession of persons, lest of all that of doctrine.  
She hath not that of the policy of the ancient Church, for in the ancient Church there were no Popes, no Cardinals, no patriarchs, no not Archbishop's and Bishops after the Romish fashion. All the Apostles in respect of the power of the keys, and authority of the Apostleship were equal. If there were any difference between them, it was not in respect of their function. For it they were all 
a joh. 20.21.  joint tenants immediately to the supreme Apostle, the Prince of Apostles the Lord jesus. From him they all immediately received the same commission, to teach all nations, the 
b joh. 20.23.  same power to forgive sins. Their names were equally written upon the twelve foundations of the high jerusalem: 
c Apoc. 21.14.  
d Mat. 19.28. Luc. 22.30.  they are placed upon twelve thrones, not subalternate, but coordinate, in the same pitch & eminency, 
e Gelas. Cyzicen A●t. Syn. Nic. lib. 2. c. ●.  of the same dignity, even as the twelve tribes. They are (said Constantine the great in the Council of Nice) twelve pillars, not then underpropped by one another, but which being joined together bare up the edifice of the Church. Be it, that the Lord hath promised the keys of the kingdom of heaven to St. Peter, he 
f joh. 20.23.  hath bestowed the same power upon the other Apostles: be it, 
g Luc. 22.32.  that he hath prayed that his faith might not fail, he hath 
h joh. 17.20.  prayed also for all the faithful: be it, that he hath exhorted him thrice, 
i joh. 21.15.16.17.  to feed his sheep, this was because he had denied him thrice, 
k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Isid. Pelus. l●b. 1. ep. 103. Timoth. Anag.  A triple denial wanted a threefold reestablishment: he which had stumbled thrice, was to be lifted up thrice. Shall any extraordinary privilege be allowed him because of this reestablishment? Must those servants which are most frequently and earnestly put in mind of their duties, for this be supposed to be in greater authority? shall they be placed in a degree above the other? Nay they themselves interpret it on the contrary, and take it for an angry dislike their superiors have of them: they are vexed for it with St. Peter, and if their Masters could see in to their hearts, as his could, they would say with him, 
l joh. 21.15.  Thou knowst that I love thee, thou knowst that I desire to serve thee, Finally be it, that the Lord hath said unto him, 
m Mat. 16.18.  Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church: 
n 
Greg. Nyl. in Test. & vet. Test. de T●in. cont▪ Jud.  
Cyril. de. Trin. lib. 4.  
Chrys. in Mat. hom. 55. Hil. de Trin. l. 2. & 6. Aug. retract. l. 1. c. 21. in joan. tract. 124. & ali●i. saepe.  
Hieron. in Abdiam c. 1.   The most ancient and most renowned amongst the fathers teach, that Christ understood not the the person, but the confession of St. Peter; not Peter viz: the rock which confessed, but the rock by him confessed, viz: jesus Christ our Lord. Howbeit, we willingly confess, that the Church hath been built upon St. Peter, but not upon him only. He is one of the foundations of the Church, but not the only foundation of it, one of the twelve pillars, one of the twelve judges of the twelve tribes Israel, but not the foundation of these foundations, the pillar of these pillars, the judge of these judges, but a collateral foundation, a collateral pillar, a collateral judge with the other Apostles his companions. Furthermore St. Peter undertook not, to depose Kings, or to usurp any such authority, contrarily he hath joined these two duties together: 
o 1. Pet. 2.17.  Fear God, honour the king, how heathenish a tyrant soever, and Persecutor of the Church, the Emperor at that time was. 
p 1. Pet. 5.12.  He had no dominion likewise over the other guides of the Church, whom he calleth his companions in office.  
Now albeit St. Peter should have had that authothority, which is attributed to the Pope at this day, yet they are still to prove, that it died not with him. And if his authority of Apostle-ship survived him not, how much less that of being the Prince of the Apostles? If the other Apostles in regard of their Apostle-ship, have not left themselves successors, how should he leave his jurisdiction over them behind him? He had the gift of doing miracles, to whom hath he particularly bequeathed this faculty? Can the Pope do any miracles? He was the Apostle of the circumcision: is the Pope the Apostle of the jews? These offices of the Apostles were extraordinary, like that of Moses, which was extinguished in his person, and did not outlive him. As then the Bishop of Ephesus should idly have challenged to himself the authority of john the Evangelist, & the Bishop of Alexandria that of St. Mark, albeit that tradition report, that these two Apostles had bishops for their successors, St. john at Ephesus, St. Mark, at Alexandria: Even so the Popes unreasonably usurp the authority of St. Peter, under pretence that tradition maketh them his successors. So that, in this respect, the Papal Monarchy hath no Apostolical succession, seeing that not only, it hath not had its original in the times of the Apostles, but also this kind of sovereignty was a long time after unknown in the Church 
q Cypr ep. 52. ad Anton edit. Pamel. & alibi passim.  St. Cyprian calls Cornelius Bishop of Rome, his colleague and Co-Bishop, and the other Bishop's coepiscopos, or the fellow Bishops of Cornelius; 
t 
Epist 55. ad Cornel.  
S. Augusti. in Concil. Africa. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. edit. Ehi●g●ri.   he blameth him for having received those, which the other Bishops (whom he calleth the fellow Bishops of Cornelius) had excommunicated; he sets before him the statute of the discipline of those times, enjoining that the cause should be judged, where the crime was committed; a statute, which he groundeth upon justice and equity, upon the commission given to all Pastors, and the power which every one of them hath by virtue of his Commissiion, over that portion of the flock which is assigned him, of which he is to give account unto the Lord. Likewise he sharply reprehendeth Stephen also Bishop of Rome, teaching that as there is but one Church through out the whole world divided into many members viz: particular Churches: so there is but one Bishopric divided into many particular Bishoprics. He attributeth the same authority to the other Apostles with St. Peter, 
s Jdem de unita. Eccles.  although to denote unity it was said to St. Peter, I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. It is not then to the person of St Peter, but to Peter as representing the unity of all the Apostles. Of which mind also are 
t Hieron. cont. jovin. lib. 1 c. 14 August tracked. in johan. 119 & ●24.  St. Hierome, and St. Austen: 
u Gelas Cyzi. act. Concil. Nic. p. 2. c. 28.  The synod of Alexandria addresseth their synodal epistle, not to the Bishop of Rome in particular, but to him conjointly with the other, without the interposition of any distinction between them. Athanasius never calleth him otherwise, than his Co-bishop, and Comminister, his fellow Bishop, and fellow Minister. Hosius subscribed first to the Canons of the Nicene Council, not as representing the Bishop of Rome, but generally the Western Churches: after the same manner as the Bishop of Alexandria those of Egypt, Lybia, Pentapolis, etc. Hosius was not there then, to represent the universal Bishop of the Church, but to represent the Churches of the West, as every of the other Bishops, Churches of a particular circuit or jurisdiction, as it may more amply be seen by their subscriptions. Lastly, that which happened unto the Pope in the sixth Council of Carthage puts all out of doubt, 
Tom. ●. Concil. Concil. Carthag. 6. an 420. Vi●. Cont. M●g●●. Cont. 5. cap. 9  and admitteth of no reply. A certain lewd companion named Appiarius deposed from his Ministerial function and preferment by the Bishops of Africa, repaired to Zosimus then Bishop of Rome, who having reinstituted him, and deeming this a fit occasion to enlarge the bounds of his dominion, graspeth it fast, and posteth this Appiarius reconfirmed with his Ambassadors to the Council of Carthage, giving them moreover in commission, to demand that the universal authority of the Pope should be acknowledged by the Council, alleging to that purpose a Canon of the Nycene Synod. Upon these passages Zosimus dying, Eulalius is chosen in his place, by the greater part of the Clergy and people: but he gave place to the violence of Boniface, who out of his ambition prosecuted that which Zosimus had demanded, touching the acknowledgement of his primacy. The Council flatly denied, that there was any thing in the records of the Nicene Synod, which might favour his pretended primacy, and in the mean time sent Commissaries to the Patriarches of Constantinople and Alexandria, to have a sight of the authentic copies of the acts of the Council which were kept by them. Upon this Pope Boniface died. Celestine succeeded him, who also with the like heat, claimed the approbation of his feigned authority. But the Council having already discovered by the report of their Commissaries, that the authentic copies of the Nicene Synod contained no such matter as the proud Bishops of Rome required, blamed their fraud, checked their insolency, and adjured them to receive no more appeals, adding this notable reason that the grace of the holy spirit would not be wanting to any Province, 
In epist. Concil. As●. ad Celest. Nisi forte quisquam est. &c,  unless some man imagined that God could inspire justice to one only, and that he would withhold it from an infinite number of Bishops.  
Now, this history maketh it appear unto us, that until that time, the Churches of Africa had not acknowledged the Pope. So that if at this day, there were any in those parts of the world, which did acknowledge him, they should not be their successors in this. If the Pope hath been from the beginning universal Bishop, how happened it that at that time he was not universally obeyed by the Church? But it is no less remarkable, that the Popes which required this acknowledgement from the Council, sent not men to expostulate with that assembly by authority, much less to excommunicate them upon their refusal as schismatics: as also, that they alleged no Scripture for the primacy, but only the Canon of a Council. Yet they used a strange boldness, in daring to falsify the Canons of the Nicene Synod: A fraud yet of which their successors seem to have been ashamed. For in the decrees of the Nicene council, as we have received them from them, there is nothing extant which maketh for the primacy: but in them, the other patriarchs are rather equalised to the Bishop of Rome. Lastly, the harsh censure, with which this council entertained the Pope, which nevertheless was but provincial, witnesseth it not, that at that time his authority was new? This being so, seeing that succession must draw its line from the first, and that the first Roman Bishop had not that authority which he hath that now reigneth: it followeth, that there is no succession in the Pope-ship, and by consequent not in the whole state of the Papacy.   

CHAP. XXVII. That the Cardinals, Patriarches, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Monks, and Nuns of the Romish Church, are not of Apostolical institution.  
AFter we have examined the succession of the supreme degree of authority in the church of Rome, come we now to the inferior orders, and first to the Cardinals. Who is so ignorant at this day, as to think, or so impudent as to affirm, that their institution was in the times of the Apostles: or that their office, such as it is at this day, was in the church a good while after the age of the Apostles. The church increasing, there were created by the principal churches 
a Polyd. Virg. lib. 4. the inven. c. 19  Presbyteri Cardinals, that is to say, principal, or chief Elders. Diaconi Cardinals, principal or chief Deacons. Their office was limited within the jurisdiction of the church where they were created; if at Rome, within the jurisdiction of the church of Rome: if at Carthage, within the jurisdiction of the church of Carthage. Their charge was a superintendency over the common Elders, and common Deacons. The Cardinals at this day, have nothing of it but the name, their charge is quite of another nature, their institution is altogether different. They are now the electors of the Pope, which they were not anciently, except those of the city of Rome as making a part of the Clergy. Now they take care of the affairs of all those churches, which are obedient to the Pope: anciently their charge was bounded within the circuit of one church alone. Howsoever it's true indeed, that by hypocrisy, they bear now adays certain titles, which seem to assign and to bind them to certain parishes in Rome; to the end that they may retain, if not the truth, yet the name of what they were anciently. Anciently their authority allowed them not any degree above Bishops: now they are, as it were, Princes of the blood in the church, next to the triple crown. So then the Cardinals have no succession derived from the Apostles, and by consequence neither the church of Rome, in respect of this part of her policy.  
As for the Patriarches, there were none of them also in the times of the Apostles, nor a long time after. Only we read in the decrees of the Nicene council, 
b Can. 6.  that their jurisdiction is called an ancient custom, a term very different from an Apostolical tradition. Moreover the Patriarches were supreme, and equal to the Bishop of Rome in jurisdiction: he was but their companion, albeit he were first in order. All the other Patriarches have long since renounced the communion of the Roman church: the Pope also will no longer be accounted a Patriarch. The Patriarches which are at this day in the Romish church, are elected by the Pope, who hath no power to choose them, seeing that at their first institution (which howsoever was not Apostolical) they were his fellows in authority. So the Patriarches of the Romish church have no lawful succession, their beginning being not not from the true beginning, the times of the Apostles, yea not from the primitive institution of patriarchs.  
The Romish Archbishops and Bishops at this day are nothing like those ancient, primitive ones, I say not only in respect of their manners, but also in respect of their authority. Their authority at this day dependeth barely of the Pope: anciently, it was not subjected but to the Company of Bishops; They might not be deposed, but by the common consent. They were not bound, to run to Rome for their election; But they gave their mutual advice, one to another, both in the election and deposition of a Bishop. Anciently they had no such authority over the magistrate, as they at this day usurp. It's worth the observation, to see how matters are changed. Their authority in respect of the Pope, is become slavish: in respect of the magistrate, tyrannical This is their comfort, that they have gotten on the one side, that which they have lost on the other; so they would have it, choosing rather to be subject to one who is far from them, and whose greatness dependeth of theirs, then to many which are near them, and whose lustre might obscure theirs. In regard of this order therefore, there is no succession in the Church of Rome.  
In the ancient Church there were Elders termed Presbyteri, from whence came the name of Prebsters, Priests, But the Priests of the Romish Church retain nothing of them, but the name. Their Principal office was to 
c. 1. Tim. 1.89.  teach and instruct, where as the Romish Priests for the most part, are unlearned idiots, and by consequence are no otherwise successors of those Primitive ones, than darkness, poverty, sickness, succeed light, wealth, health. Now this default, cannot be excused, by alleging that it is the fault of the persons; for so it is in Ecclesiastical functions, that were the incapacity of the person is, the function cannot be. I call here the incapacity, not simply the fault of the person, but the impossibility of discharging the function. The woman which hath no milk, cannot be a nurse, and if she take the office of one who hath upon her, this cannot be in the quality of a nurse, she cannot be a nurse beyond the name. So he which hath not in some sort the abilities requisite for reaching, he cannot possibly be a teacher; if he succeed one that could and did teach, he succeedeth him not as teacher, but only in his name. Moreover, the Principal part of the priests office consisteth now a days in mumbling of mass, and in being sacrificers, of which there is no mention in the Primitive ordination of Priests.  
In the ancient Church there were 
d. Act. 6.2.3.  Deacons; now there are Deacons, Archdeacon's, subdeacons. But what have these people of the ancient Deacons, beside the name? Take they any care of the poor? yea they suck their blood by a cruel and importunate exaction of their revenues. Do they serve tables? yea themselves are sumptuously attended at their own. In a word, seeing they do not the office of the ancient Deacons, how shall they be their successiours?  
Concerning Monks and Nuns, there will no● be found a syllable in scripture, to signify that there were any in the age of the Apostles. 
e. Hieron. in vit. Paul. Erem  St. Hierome who hath much extolled this profession, fetcheth its original from Paul the Hermit; a fair time after the Apostles. If else where, he referreth its beginning to a time more ancient, he contradicteth both himself and the truth, 
f in Catal. scrip Eccles. nom. Phil.  being carried away by the excessive affection he bore to this profession. Howsoever the Monks of these times, cannot justly be accounted the successors of these Monks which St. Hierome so much commendeth: What maketh a monk 
g. ad Paul. de instit. Mon.  said he, within cities? These not only abide in cities, but even in them build cities. 
h. 
St. Austen hath left a full treatise of this point, entitled.  
De opere monachi. extat. 3. tem. Basil.   In St. Austin's time it was theft for a Monk to beg: now it is an especial point of their sanctify. 
i. Cypr. ep. 62. edit. Pamel.  In St. Cyprians time it was not unlawful for him who had vowed continency to marry afterwards: now it's a matter monstrously heretical; except when the Pope dispenceth with it, who like a God upon earth can do whatsoever it pleaseth him, and more also than God in heaven, for he can make vice virtue, and virtue vice by his dispensations.   

CHAP: XXVIII. That the Ceremonies of the Romish, Church are not of Apostolical institution.  
IF we consider the Ceremonies of the Romish Church, we shall quickly see, that the ancient simplicity and Apostolical purity is not to be found in her: that those decent customs of true antiquity, are either quite changed by her, or so extremely abused, that they are made unprofitable. In the flourishing time of the Apostles, there was nothing used in baptism but water: afterwards there was added Chrism and since that, salt & spittle. What succession have these additions, these new superfluities, seeing they had not their original, at the first institution of that sacrament? The channel & pipe as it were of succession here grew faulty, and received in this stinking water running athwart. The disguisement which they have put upon the holy supper, is yet more prodigious, they have miserably and unhappily mangled it: they have cleft the seal of the King of heaven in the middle, and cast away the one half of it. What is it that superstition dareth not to venture upon? We have the institution & canon of this holy sacrament recited by three Evangelists and by St. Paul. Can there be any thing more pure, more simple, less stuffed with superfluous & superstitious ceremonies? less accompanied with pomp & compliments? Now compare with that purity, simplicity, that nakedness (as I may say) of ceremonies, the histrionical pomp, the apish gestures, and antic tricks of the Mass: can there be any thing imagined more unlike unto it, and disproportionable? What succession then may be conceived, or acknowledged, where the dissimilitude is so great, but a succession of evil to good, or corruption to purity?  
Moreover what shall we say of their superstitious consecration of chapels, altars, pixes, fonts, Chalices, plates, vestments, holy oil, holy bread, holy water, of their Beads, Agnus Dei, Images, of their christening of Bells, of the hallowing of ensigns and swords. From whence will they fetch the institution of these trumperies? Had they a heart of lead, a face of iron, & a forehead of brass, yet they would not dare to affirm that any of these fopperies were in use in the age of the Apostles? What succession then of them can they pretend? Lastly their processions, their stately pomp at funerals, so Proud and magnificent that now they fond live and die altogether: Came it from the Apostles? Yea is it not a relic of the Pagan superstition?   

CHAP. XXIX. That there is no succession, in respect of doctrine, in the Romish Church.  
But the worst of all is, that they destitute of the succession of the truth, which is the soul and life of the Church.  
True antiquity believed, 
a Apoc. 14.18.  that they which die in the Lord, rest from their labours: they believe, that at their departure out of this life, they go to Purgatory, there to fry in as scorching a fire as that in hell.  
True antiquity believed, that 
b Luc. 17.10.  when we shall have done all that which is commanded us, we are but unprofitable servants, because we shall have done no more than was our duty to do.  
They teach that man already culpable before God, may merit eternal life, ex condigno, by exact proportion of the work of the wages.  
True antiquity believed 
c Rom. 8.18.  that the sufferings of this present life, are not sufficient to counterpoise the glory which is eternal.  
They believe, that they do counterpoise them in merits.  
Antiquity believed, that we are saved freely. They believe, that we are saved by the merit of our works.  
Antiquity believed that we are saved 
d Ephes. 2.8.  by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, to the end that no man might boast.  
They believe, that we are saved, partly by grace through faith, partly by merits and works, that faith is partly the gift of God, and partly an effect of our freewill.  
Antiquity believed, that we are not 
e 'tis 3 5.  saved by works of righteousness, which we have done.  
They believe, that we are saved, ex congruo, by the works which we do before our regeneration, and ex condigno, by those which follow it.  
Antiquity prayed the Lord, 
f Ps●l. 143.2.  not to enter into judgement with his servants, because that before him no flesh shall be justified.  
They believe, that the Lord shall enter into judgement with them, for they believe to be justified by the merit of their works.  
Primitive, and Apostolical antiquity believed, that 
g ●●m. 11.6.  God's election was every way free: that election is of grace, that if it be of grace it is no more of works, otherwise grace were no more grace, but if it be of works, it is no more of grace, otherwise works were no more works.  
They believe, that it is of grace, and of works too.  
Antiquity believed, 
h Phil. 2.13.  that it is God which effectually produceth in us to will, and to do, according to his good pleasure.  
They attribute both the one, and the other, in part, to their own free will.  
Antiquity believed, 
i 2. Cor. 3.5.  that we are not able to think any thing of ourselves, but that our sufficiency is from God.  
They attribute our sufficiency in part to our own selves.  
Antiquity believed, 
k joh. 15 5.  that we can do nothing without Christ.  
They believe, that we can without Christ, while we are not yet engrafted into him, do works which merit eternal life ex congruo, as before our regeneration, and that without the grace of God, a man may for a time be without sinning.  
Antiquity believed, that 
l Ephes. 2.3.  of our own nature we are the children of wrath: they believe, that by the strength of our own nature, we are able to prepare, and to dispose ourselves for grace.  
Antiquity believed, 
m Ephes. 2.1.  that before Christ hath quickened us, we are dead in sins: They believe that we have freewill to good.  
Antiquity believed, that 
n Gal. 5.17.  the spirit fighteth against the flesh, and the flesh against the spirit, & that they are contrary things in us.  
They believe, that we are able to fulfil the law of God perfectly, that is to say, without sin.  
Antiquity believed, that 
o Rom. 8 7.  the lusting of the flesh is enmity against God, and cannot be subject to the law of God.  
They acknowledge even in the flesh a freewill to good.  
Antiquity believed, that Christ 
p joh. 17.9.  prayed not for the world, but for those whom the Father hath given him out of the world.  
They believe, that it is no certain number for which the Lord hath prayed, but that he prayed indifferently for all.  
The Ancients believed, that all they who have 
q joh. 6.44.  heard of the father, and have learned of him, come unto Christ, and that no man cometh unto him, unless the father draw him.  
They believe, that they who come not to Christ, have heard of the father as well as the other: and that there is no grace, nor particular election in the calling and conversion of a Christian.  
Antiquity believed, that it is Christ which 
r joh. 15.5.  chooseth us, and not we that choose him.  
They on the contrary believe, that we choose Christ, for they make that grace by which he calleth us to him universal, and suppose it indifferently proposed to all, so that in respect of Christ, there is no election, seeing he promiscuously calleth all, but that we choose of ourselves to go unto him. Whence that is always in their mouths, Fac ut praedestineris, si non es praedestinatus, Make thyself predestinated, if thou art not.  
Antiquity believed, that God 
s Rom. 9. 15·  hath mercy upon whom he will have mercy, and compassion of whom he pleaseth to have compassion, that he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.  
They bereave God of this liberty, and accuse them of blasphemy who attribute it unto him.  
Antiquity believed, that they who fall away, who go 
t 1. joh. 2. 1●.  out from among the faithful, were never of the number of the faithful, for if they had been of us (saith S. john) they would have tarried with us.  
They believe, that they who are truly faithful to day, may fall away to morrow, and that no man can be assured of his perseverance.  
Antiquity believed, that we have 
u Rom. 8. 1●.  not received the spirit of bondage to be again in fear, but the spirit of adoption which cryeth in our hearts, Abba Father.  
They believe that the spirit of the faithful is a spirit of fear, that they must always live in doubt, that to have a settled assurance is presumption.  
Antiquity believed, that whosoever believeth in 
* joh. 3 38.  Christ hath everlasting life.  
They say, that he who believeth in Christ cannot be certain of life, albeit the Lord hath said it, which is in effect, to believe that we must not believe in Christ: for how shall he believe in Christ, who doubteth whether Christ loveth him or not? Whether Christ will love him continually as they teach him to doubt?  
Antiquity believed, that there is no 
x 1. joh. 4.28.  fear in love and that perfect love casteth out fear.  
They commend fear in those which ought to burn with love, not that fear of offending God that filial fear, but a fear of being damned, a servile fear.  
Antiquity believed, that there is but one natural body of Chri●t, a●d that composed of the substance of the blessed Virgin.  
They would seem indeed to believe so too, but by the infinite multitude of their hosties, or sacrifices, each of which they s●y is Christ's body, attributing unto him also body's ma●e of bread, they betray their dissimulation, and show themselves to believe the quite contrary.  
Antiquity believed, that the 
y Cor. 10▪ 16  Sacrament of the alt●r was broken bread: they believe that it is the body of Christ which is not broken.  
Antiquity believed, that the heavens must contain Christ until his second coming. 
Act 3. ●1.  They believe that the body of Christ is every where, where their hostie● a●e.  
Antiquity believed, that those were not to be believed which should say, 
a Mat. 24 26.  Here is Christ, there is Christ, he is in the secret chambers.  
They think, and say the contrary every day, when they have him about the streets, when they carry him to the sick, when they shut him up in the Pixes.  
Antiquity believed, that 
b H●b. 10. ●●.  jesus Christ is offered but once: they believe that he is offered a numberless number of times.  
Antiquity believed, that it was 
c H●Heb. 9 25.  impossible Christ should be offered often, unless he suffered often. They believe, that he is offered every day without suffering.  
Antiquity bele●ued, that we have but 
d 1. Tim. 2. 5·  one Mediator towards God. They believe, that we have many.  
Antiquity believed, that 
e Rom. 10.14.  we ought to call upon none but him in whom we believe. They believe, that we must call upon many in whom it is not lawful to believe, namely the Saints and Saintesses of Paradise.  
Antiquity believed, 
f Heb. 4.16.  that we may with a sound heart in a full persuasion of faith, yea with boldness go to the throne of grace that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.  
They teach, that it is presumption, & that we must use the mediation of the Saints to God, as we do the intercession of Court favourites to the King.  
Antiquity believed, 
g 2. Chro. 6.30  that only God knoweth the heart. They believe, that the Saints know all our secrets.  
Antiquity alloweth not prayer for the dead (we say true Antiquity which is the Scripture) for it teacheth that 
h Heb. 9.27.  after death cometh judgement, which must be understood immediately after, for otherwise one might say as well, that after our birth cometh judgement.  
On the contrary, they believe that judgement cometh not immediately after death, and upon this opinion they ground their prayers for the dead.  
Antiquity believed, that that which entereth in at the mouth of a man, defileth not the man.  
They believe, that eating of flesh in Lent defileth the man.  
Antiquity believed, that to 
i 1. Tim. 4.1, ●.  command abstinence from marriage, and certain meats is a doctrine of Devils.  
The Romanists command, and practice both.  
Antiquity believed, that 
k Exod. 20.  images were not to be worshipped.  
The Romish Church is full of such idolatry.  
Antiquity believed that God is to be worshipped in spirit and truth. 
l joh. 4.24.   
The Romish Church thinks there can be no religion, where there is not a multitude of ceremonies.  
Antiquity believed, that he which 
m 1. Thes. 3.10  laboureth not should not eat.  
The greatest Saints amongst them abstain from labour and are most idle.  
Antiquity believed, that it was 
n Act. 20.35.  a more blessed thing to give then to receive.  
They believe far otherwise, for the most holy amongst them place their felicity in poverty.  
Antiquity believed, that it was expedient to 
o Prov. ●0. 8.  pray to God against poverty.  
They believe that its best to vow it.   

CHAP. XXX. That there is not so much as the succession of persons in the Church of Rome.  
BUT how will this matter go, if it appear that they are destitute, not only of the succession of Ecclesiastical policy, of the succession of ceremonies, of the succession of doctrine, but also of the succession of persons? If it hath failed in the Popes themselves, shall it not by the same reason, have failed in the whole body depending of them? Now he that would deny, that this succession hath not been interrupted amongst the Popes he must, impudently venture to deny also the outrageous schisms made by the Antipopes, whilst there were two, sometimes three, who claimed this succession. It cannot be said, that only one of them had it, for what's then become of the Churches that depended on the other Popes? Shall they be excused by the pretence of their well-meaning, because every one of them believed, that they depended on the true Pope. This good intention than shall excuse the Donatists, 
a Aug. ep. 15.  for they thought they adhered to the succession of the Apostles: and why should not the same excuse the Protestants also, seeing they believe verily, that their Ministers are the successors of those Pastors, which the Apostles planted in the Primitive Churches.  
It is to no purpose to produce here the example of Barbarius Philippus, who being a slave, his determinations which he gave during the time of his judicature were currant nevertheless, even after he was discovered to be a slave. For there is not the same reason in the Ecclesiastical functions. Civil functions depend of the approbation of men, these of God. The Pope's the being not true Popes, but usurpers before God, could have no authority, whatsoever men esteemed of them. It is as idle to allege the example of judas, because that although he were a wicked man, yet he was a lawful Apostle, not an intruder, but one lawfully called to the Apostleship, which cannot be verified of those Popes, which were thrust out, because thrust into the ch●ire. 
b Gen●b. Chron. & 4. sect. 10.  Genebrard goes farther than all this, when he pronounceth all those Pope's unlawful, in whose election the Emperor of Germany bore the sway, although there were many of them succeeding one another, without ever being deposed.  
The succession then having failed in the Popeship, (as I may so speak) seeing the Pope is the head of the whole body of the Roman Church, it would be labour in vain to show, that it hath been personally interrupted in his members, who have no other succession then what is derived from his.   

CHAP. XXXI. That its mere wrangling to demand by what authority one requires an holy Reformation.  
But be it (say they) that we have in so many kinds degenerated from the purity of our ancestors, who gave you authority to reform us? Who hath appointed you judges over us? See them again at their preiudices. So the pharisees anciently outbraved the lord In what authority dost thou th●se things? But what have we done, that they should press us so much, to show our authority? We have espied the wolf in the fold, & we have cried ou● the enemy, not at the gates, but in ●he citadel, and we have sounded alarm. We have observed the Traitors, and fingered them out. To proceed thus far, there needeth no other authority, than the zeal of the honour of our Sovereign Lord, of the peace of his jerusalem, and prosperity of his house. If the Wolf hath made no spoil, if that man of sin hath not taken possession of the temple of God, if the watchmen of Israel are not become gluttonous, and drowsy dogs, than our zeal hath been without knowledge, yea not zeal, but madness. We entreat them to give us leave to make it appear, that we cried not out, but upon a just and necessary occasion, if we cannot verify this, let us be condemned. But let us not be thrust back upon the simple prejudice of want of authority in our persons; to give warning, and advise, it is instead of all authority, to know how to give it seasonably. He that can show, that he hath given an opportune, and necessary advertisement, sufficiently purgeth himself from the crime of rashness. Here then is the pith of the matter, to examine whether we have so proceeded or no: This being cleared, the question touching authority will be found to be but a wrangling quirk, craftily invented to make us lose the principal: for who doubteth, but if that the desolation of the outward face of the Church, hath been so lamentable as we pretend, that every one ought rather to strive to succour it, with some timely remedy, proportionably to the measure of his skill, then to make it worse by dissembling it? In the common wealth, if any one arise against the ordinary officers of the King, this is called sedition, rebellion, treason, but if this insurrection be occasioned by a treason attempted by those officers against the King, and state, if this be verified, it is no longer a crime, but an heroic exploit, and an example of loyalty, so much the more famous, by how much less note, and authority he was of, who undertook, and achieved it.  
It is as truly, as commonly held, that the divine power is evidently manifested, where the strength of man, by reason of the meanness of the person, could not come between. If a person not authorised by degree, and licence, should undertake to control the advice of Lawyers, and Physicians in their own professions, he is not accounted rash, if he doth it with reason, especially if he do it according to the Canons, and rules of art: but he is esteemed, and respected so much the more, as he hath less commendation elsewhere, then from his own deserts. How much more yet is he reverenced, if he do it in time of need, in matter of great moment, when it standeth upon life, and death? should not such an one be advanced, and for his skill, and fidelity worthily be promoted into their rooms, who are unworthy of them, both for their ignorance, and unfaithfulness? If this be practised, and that profitably in the affairs of the world, for the supreme law, is the service of the King, and safety of the people; shall not the same be practised in the Church, in divine affairs, which concern the glory of the King of Kings, the eternal safety of our souls, the importance of the gain, or loss being infinite. It is a● ordinary law of nature, that heavy bodies descend as it were to their centre, the place of their rest, & conservation; and yet this law is subject to another more general law of nature, which commandeth, that there be no vacuity against the ordinary law of nature; so that rather than there should be any emptiness light bodies will sink down, and heavy bodies will mount up. Just so it is in Ecclesiastical, and civil affairs. In the church it is an ordinary law, that every man in it follow his calling, hold his rank, keep the law prescribed him, to avoid confusion, which must needs arise from each one's intermeddling with another's function. But this law is subject to another more universal law, of more importance and necessity, which commandeth every one to forget his ordinary condition, and to abandon his private rank, that he may go against some extreme evil, and keep back some irreparable loss, when it cannot otherwise be avoided, then by this seeming breach of his rank. I say seeming, for indeed, he which upon a reasonable, and urgent occasion quitteth his place, quitteth it not, but keepeth it: he should abandon it, in not abandoning in this case: even as heavy bodies should either move, or rest against nature, if they forsook not their ordinary centres, to ascend aloft, when by their ascent they should hinder a vacuity: So the soldier, who being ascertained, that his captianes hath traitorously delivered the gate to the enemy, should superstitiously keep his rank, and not set upon his captain, he would not in effect in this case keep his rank, but whilst he would do the duty of a soldier, he would be found to have committed the act of a traitor.   

CHAP: XXXII. That they whom God employed in the reformation had an outward calling, and that albeit they had not had it, if they were otherwise furnished with the gifts requisite for such a business, this defect ought not to be objected against them.  
IF we justify ourselves upon these terms, why should we be accused of sedition in the Church? If being but private persons (as they make of us) we have ventured upon the common officers, if being but common soldiers (as they term us) we have performed the office of Captains, so far, as to deny them our obedience, and to make war with them, as with the enemies of our King, and disturbers of the peace of his spiritual Commonwealth, and finally, as against traitors. Although in truth, the first repairers of the ruins of the Church, in the time of our forefathers, were not jacks out of office, or common soldiers, but men employed in the principal functions of the Church. In England all the Bishops, in Germany the most ren●wned Doctors of the Church, as also in Switzerland, of whom others are descended: Here it is replied, that if these men, had a true calling, then there is a true calling in their Church, and consequently, they shall be the true Church. To this we answer, that if there may be a true baptism without the true Church, why may there not be also a true vocation? Is the vocation less compatible with the false Church than Baptism, doubtless, where is baptism, there is a power to administer it, and where this power is there is a calling. None can seal, unless he be a Keeper of the seals, no man is so, unless he be called to it. The seals of the Church are the sacraments, no man can seal in the Church, but he who hath commission for it. They acknowledge that our baptism is effectual, and reiterate it not, what heretics soever they account us: we pay them the like, when we make that calling sufficient, which our predecessors received from them, the right of which they have bequeathed to posterity. To allow then our baptism, what is it, but to confess that we may baptise? and what is this but to confess that we have an ordination, a calling to baptise?  
But their reply furnisheth us with a stronger argument against themselves, when we press them either to confess, that they are not the true Church, or to yield that the calling received amongst them was lawful. It cannot be concluded, that there where there is a true calling, there is also the true Church. Witness the ten tribes revolted, & the Church of judah, in the time of the Idolatrous Kings, in the time of our Saviour Christ, in which the Levites always had their calling, albeit they executed it amiss. But it will be good logic to argue that where there is no calling, there is no true Church; witness the multitude of Pagans and infidels, amongst whom ●here being true calling, there can be no true Church. Here they are fain to take sanctuary in another shift, that the calling of the first reformers was nullified by the corruption, and alteration of that doctrine, for the preaching of which it was conferred upon them. But see they not, that this reply giveth us as much as we desire? namely, that setting aside the question, touching ordination, they accuse us for having altered, and corrupted the doctrine, of which accusation if we purge ourselves, why perplex they us about outward ordination; seeing they yield by their reply, that we have that, provided, that we have not lost it, by corruption of doctrine: As also on our side, if we justify not our doctrine, we will yield to them that we have no lawful calling amongst us, & that our predecessors lost it, as soon as they brought a change into the Church. If they reply here, that the question is not whether our pastors at the beginning of the reformation, altered the doctrine of the Gospel, but, whether they altered that of the Romish Church, for the preaching of which they were sent. To this we answer, that the teachers in the Roman Church, are called indeed to publish the doctrine of the same Church, but under the title of the Gospel of our Lord jesus Christ. This doctrine then being not commended unto them, but as supposed for evangelical, if they come to discover that it is not so, they are no longer bound to teach it, but to teach that doctrine which is correspondent to that title, under which the other was falsely commended unto them.  
Surely if our doctrine be true, albeit we had not the ward calling, yet we were to be heard: if it be false though we had this external mission, (as we have it) yet we were not to be harkened to, but abhorred. Why then come they not directly to this point? why begin they not with our doctrine? can there be a better argument against a Physician, then to prove that he is unskilful, or that he is an impoysoner? or against a Lawyer, then that he is ignorant and corrupt? or a better means to procure credit, to a Physician, or authority to a Lawyer, than the proof of their ability and fidelity? what do degrees and licences, profit a a Physician or Lawyer, if they be both witless and dishonest? what do their not taking of degrees in case of necessity disadvantage them, if otherwise they are skilful and honest? So it is with the teachers in the Church, if they are of sufficiency, they are to be received, though they have no testimonial of their external ordination, and if they have not this sufficiency be it, that they make it appear, that they were outwardly sent, yet this would be but a humane mission, an authority bestowed by ignorant man, which the Lord disalloweth, who sendeth no man whom he hath not endowed with gifts, necessary for the execution of the charge in which he employeth him. He is not like those hucksters of degrees, worthy to be banished out of commonwealths, who for the most part licence those, not whom desert, but whom bribes and by respects commend. So then where this divine mission hath place, there is also suffciency: where sufciency is not found, we may conclude that there is no divine mission. Now if this sufficiency be found in our Teachers, if it be not found in the greater part of the Romish pastors; we shall have on our side an argument and testimony of divine ordination, they only of an humane; an uncertain institution, because he that conferreth it, may be either so deceived by his ignorance, blinded by his affection, or perverted by his malice and wickedness in such a manner, that he may call him whom God calleth not, and put by him whom God calleth.   

CHAP: XXXIII. That the example of the first Reformers openeth no gap to confusion, seeing they had the outward calling, and that albeit they should not have had it, the misery of those times excuseth, yea justifieth that defect.  
Nevertheless, here divers difficulties throw themselves in our way. 1 That it must necessarily breed confusion, to permit every man to exercise that charge of which he is capable, without being orderly called unto to it. 2 That the example of the Priests in the ancient law is contrary to it, who being fallen from God, yet no man was permitted to substitute himself into their rooms. 3 That the example of commonwealth is against it, in which no man is suffered, to take upon him any office, of what worth soever he be, unless he be legally deputed to it. 4 That there will be no danger in joining with a schismatical Church, if to be true ministers of the Church, it sufficeth to have the truth, and purity of doctrine. From these objections, they conclude that outward mission and vocation are absolutely necessary, unless they are supplied by some other circumstances, as the gift of miracles, or prophesying.  
But we easily wind ourselves out of these difficulties, by showing, that our first reformers had the calling which was at that time ordinary: & that therefore they gave no example of selfe-intrusion into the Priest's office, seeing themselves were priests; nor of undertaking the execution of a charge without a patent, seeing they were privileged, and licenced to that function which they undertook, having been called to be ministers; That no man may take occasion by their example, to be schismatical, because schism is a separation made without a lawful cause, and the separation made by them was most just, 1 for the Apostasy, 2 heresy, 3 idolatry, 4 cruelty of the Romish Church. To the verifying of which, we beg that we may be admitted, because the manifestation of this, is the only proof of our innocency. If the Church of Rome be not Apostatical, heretical, idolatrous, cruel, if we make not this accusation good, let us be condemned for schismatics in separating from her; for heretics, seeing that our separation, hath been grounded upon the contrariety between our doctrine and theirs.  
But because in the former Chapter, we have principally reckoned upon sufficiency, and occasion to exercise this sufficiency, so far as to think these two circumstances, the notes of divine calling and sending, Let us suppose (that which was not) that the first which God employed in the work of reformation, had not an humane, and outward ordination; let us consider if that therefore, they indiscreetly undertook a business of such consequence, and whether the reasons alleged to that purpose be of any weight. It is a frequent saying in their mouths, How shall they preach unless they be s●nt? But this hindereth not, but that he who is sent by God, may ofttimes be thrust back by men. Our Lord was not only rejected, but even persecuted to death, by the Scribes and pharisees; the Apostles, were entertained with the like contempt, the like cruelty; and which of the prophets is it (said the Lord to the jews) which your fathers have not killed? In the mean time it is certain, that no man may thrust himself into a charge in the Church without mission. But the controversy is about the nature of this mission, whether it be humane, having its approbation from men, or divine, having its approbation from God? In a tolerable estate of the Church, God hath established an order which he would have to be kept; even as Kings and princes in their dominions, who though they might by their authority install their officers immediately, yet they will have them pass through certain formalities, which they have ordained for orders sa●e, and for preventing hasty, and crafty surprisals. But when their state is disturbed, when their officers are combined against them, when all order is perverted, and these formalities have no longer place, the Prince immediately settleth his officers in their places, it sufficeth them for all patents, to be authorised by his commandment. So it is in the Church, God will have every thing done in order, so far as it may be observed, but when confusion hath turned all upside down, he forbiddeth not, to look to the main chance, though it be without a method, but commandeth, to solicit the principal business, the more zealously, because there is less possibility of compassing it the ordinary way. Method is commendable in all things, but when exigences are so violent, that they make it impossible, nature, laws, customs, instruct us to betake ourselves unto that which is most necessary.  
This then is not to give example to tumultuous persons, or to open a gap to confusion: for he is truly tumultuous who contemneth order, not he who cannot find it: he who neglecteth it without any good motive, not he who is constrained to pass over it. It supposeth then, not introduceth a confusion, to permit the exercise of a function to one who is capable of it, destitute of a humane calling, then when the calling is impossible, the exercise of the function necessary. But whilst the ordinary formalities may be observed, and the case is not so urgent, as to exact an extraordinary proceeding, it would be truly to open a gate to disorder. So it maketh no way for sedition in a city, or mutiny in a camp, to permit that in case of treason, the citizen should rise against the subordinate Magistrate, the Soldier against his Captain, without any other commission, than his own private motion, if he cannot have time for a more formal course. Confusion is only when without this case this licence is permitted. So the first objection drawn from the inconvenience, which the liberty of not observing order and forms of law when it is possible, draweth after it, cannot disadvantage our predecessors, although they were not furnished with an outward calling, seeing they were driven to such plunges, as gave them not leave, safely, to follow the method of law.  
For the affairs of the Church, being at that pass that heresy, and idolatry bore the sway, that they which had the outward calling, not only exercised it abusively, but which is worse, having the authority to confer it, they bestowed it not upon those who would and could exercise it aright: keeping back (as some times the pharisees did) the key of knowledge, shutting up heaven gates, neither entering in themselves, nor suffering any other to get in: It was necessary then, albeit, they had no outward calling, in an extraordinary case, to venture upon an extraordinary project. St Paul had foretold, that there should come a falling away, so notable that by a kind of singularity he calleth it 
2. Thess. 2.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Apostasy. Not then one heresy, one sect, a part by itself, for there had been already in his time such fall away, but a revolt which should overspread the face of the Church, so that she might hardly be espied through the thickness of so horrid a cloud. Now who are those which were to oppose themselues against this revolt? Doubtless not the Apostates themselves, not they who persevered in this revolt: but they who separated themselves from it, who protested against it, be it that they either had authority amongst the fallen away, as the Levits amongst the ten revolted Tribes, or be it that they had it not. But they will say, perhaps we ourselves have made this revolt? Let this then be our question, the prejudice laid aside, and then we must come to the examination of doctrine, which is all that we desire.   

CHAPTER. XXXIV. That the example of the Priests under the law, cannot be drawn into argument to prove that a man may not sometimes exercise a function in the Church without an outward calling.  
THE second objection which they make against us, is that, as it was not lawful, to occupy the rooms of the Priests in the ancient law even during their revolt: so it is not lawful for any man, in the revolt of the Doctors of the Christian Church, to take the place of a Doctor.  
But there is not the same reason between the Pastors of the Christian Church, and the Priests of the jewish Church. Their function was typical, & carnal, and therefore fastened to certain typical, and carnal circumstances of times, places and persons: they were not to sacrifice but at a certain time, it was not permitted but to a certain race, to exercise the Priest's office, and that in the Land of juda only.  
The administration of the Gospel is real, spiritual, free from all circumstances. Preaching may be in all times, at all places, by all men of ability, who both may and aught to preach, when it's requisite. Salvation depended not upon the carnal and typical administration, the ceremonial sacrificing in the law, the omission of which, the circumstances of times, places, persons requisite for the business ceasing, as in the time of captivity, of itself endangered not men's souls, as doth that of the preaching of the word, which the Lord even under the old Testament set free, chaining it not to these conditions, to such a time, such a place, such a person, because it is simply and absolutely necessary to salvation. Whence it was that there were teachers out of all the Tribes of Israel, who although they supplied not the defect of Priests, for so much as was typical and ceremonial in their charge, as in offering of sacrifice; this part of their charge, being especially, appropriated to their persons: nevertheless, in that which concerned teaching and instruction, they were substituted for aid, and relief, and were to make good those stations which the others had forsaken. Witness the Prophets and the Sons of the Prophets, being indifferently of any Tribe, witness the pharisees whose calling our Saviour alloweth, censuring only the abuse of it, who were not only of the Tribe of Levi, but of all Tribes, of which St Paul furnisheth us with an example in his own person, being of the stock of Benjamin, and yet a Pharisee, borne of a Pharisee. And indeed, if here were fit place to allege the ancient law against this truth, as it was not lawful but for one Tribe to execute the Priesthood of the old Testament, and but at a certain time only, and in a certain place: we should by the same reason, circumscribe the calling of Ministers under the Gospel with the same limits, and gird in their liberty with the same fetters; making it requisite that they should be of a certain family, and exercise their calling at a definite time and place. Whence it is manifest, that the priesthood of the old Testament cannot be brought for an example, when the controversy is about preaching under the new, that being tied to certain circumstances, from which this by the property of its nature is freed.   

CHAP: XXXV. That the example of judges in a Commonwealth is impertinent, to prove, that outward ordination is always necessary in the Church.  
IT is to as little purpose, to produce the example of a judge in a Commonwealth, where no man what necessity soever there be, what ability soever he hath, may presume to thrust himself into that office, without being called to it.  
For besides that we have formerly showed, that in the time of confusion, the King installeth judges himself, not binding them to pass through the usual forms, there is moreover this difference to be considered. The exercising of the office of a judge, deriveth its force and efficacy, from his authority, whence it is that the determinations of judges, are not executed because they are just, but because they are sentences, and determinations, be it that they are given justly, by the wisdom and equity of the judge, or unjustly by his ignorance, or corruptness But the virtue, and power of the Ministerial function dependeth not of the authority of him that practiseth it; For if he be ignorant, or heretical, one who willingly slighteth his charge, and vilifieth his own function, an hucster of God's word (as the Apostle speaketh) his authority will not make, that when he hath proclaimed peace, peace, there shall be peace by & by, as well as the sentences of judges how unjust or silly soever they are, fail not for all that to be put in execution. On the other side, if he who exerciseth the function be both of ability and fidelity, though he want the formality of an outward mission, it being impossible for him to obtain it, and that which he doth without it being necessary, he faileth not effectually, to instruct, exhort, and comfort.  
It fareth with him as with a Physician whose authority giveth not his doses and recipes virtue to work▪ and in working to heal, but it is his skill & honesty which direct him in choice of such prescriptions as are proper for the cure, which is the fruit of his labour, and the end he proposeth unto himself. Otherwise, every graduated Physician would without any more ado cure the sick, if it were the authority of the Doctor and not the virtue of his physic, which did the cure, the choice and application of which dependeth of his knowledge, and fidelity. Whence it cometh to pass also, that if the Physician be skilful, and careful, the want of authority, in his person, hindereth not, the operation of his doses. From whence by comparison it may be observed, why in a judge outward authority seemeth to be absolutely, and simply necessary, and why in a Pastor notwithstanding, that authority which dependeth of humane authority is not simply necessary: namely because whatsoever a judge doth, he doth by that authority, which is lent him from a superior, his abilities but enabling him to do that aright, which his derived authority, maketh him do effectually: but in a Pastor, if he be sound in knowledge and conscience, the administration of his charge doth always its work, as effectually and completely, as if it were backed and graced by humane authority. It is the good physic which healeth; the good milk which nourisheth, whether the Physician hath taken his degrees or not, whether the nurse were approved of by a Physician or no; these circumstances as they bring nothing to the point, so they take nothing from it. Now the Gospel is a medicine (saith the prophet,) milk (saith the Apostle,) the authority then of him who applieth this medicine, who giveth this milk to suck, or drink, I say the authority, the commendation of men, can neither augment nor diminish their vertues·s  
But some will say, that although that authority which dependeth of outward mission, be not always requisite in pastors, yet at least, this defect ought to be supplied by miracles; & here they call upon us for our miracles. But we ask them again, where are the miracles of john the Baptist, 
b john. 10.41.  of whom it is written that he never did any miracles. As for that, after his conception, he leapt in his mother's womb at the presence of the blessed virgin Mary bearing in her womb the Lord of the world, this was not done to authorize & confirm his office in to the execution of which he entered a long time after. When Miracles are done to make some enterprise authentic, they are done either immediately before it, or else they accompany it while itself is in hand: they are done also publicly, exposed to the view of all, that they may be the less suspected for impostures. But to answer precisely, we say that when the Gospel was first to be planted, Miracles were very necessary, but that being finished, their necessity ceased. The Miracles wrought to authorise the Gospel anciently, retain still, at least amongst Christians, their virtue for that effect. If then we prove that we propose the same Gospel, those ancient miracles are ours. Let them admit us then to this proof, in which if we fail we will confess then, that they have good reason to call upon us for miracles, yea & more than this, that we were not to be believed, though we should do very strange ones. For we read, that the coming of Antechrist shall be with signs and wonders, but we read not that they who oppose him shall work miracles: so that if we should make a trade of doing miracles, or as it were stage-shewes of them, this would make us not more justified, but suspected.   

CHAP: XXXVI. That the example of the first reformers favoureth not schismatics.  
THere remaineth yet the fourth objection, that it seemeth that this doctrine touching the true marks of divine calling, to wit, sufficiency, & a necessity to employ this sufficiency, favour & encourage schism. But we tell them, that this cannot be. For seeing that he who maketh a schism hath no necessity to make it, this note agreeth not to a schismatical teacher who in a tolerable estate of the Church, erecteth a Church apart, seeing that than he emploieth his gifts, without necessity; for the beaten way lying open, what need hath he to betake himself to new cross-pathes? but this way being stopped up to our predecessors, it followeth that they were driven to a necessity, which presseth not schismatics. Certainly there is no schism where their is a just occasion of separation, & an impossibility of proceeding otherwise, now we say, that such was the misery of the times of our predecessors, that they had just reason to separate themselves, & that albeit they had been unprovided of that outward Vocation which they had, yet it had been impossible for them to proceed otherwise then they did. If they offer to deny this truth, we offer to make it good, hither we desire to be admitted, setting aside the prejudice: if we fail in our proof, we refuse not to be accounted schismatics.   

CHAP: XXXVII. In what sense we yield that the Church of Rome hath the substance of true religion, and how she ceaseth not for all that to be a false Church.  
YEa; but at least we yield to them, that they have Baptism, that they have the substance of Christian religion; from whence they conclude, that they cannot perish, & that we who have separated ourselves from them, have gone schismatically to work. This argument they frame, from that confession which they think they have extorted from us, let us see then what truth & strength it may have. First concerning Baptism, they confess that we have it, & that it may be amongst heretics: Antiquity believed it, & we believe it with antiquity. They reiterate not the Baptism administered by us, we reiterate not the Baptism administered by them: this privilege advantageth not us against them, why should it advantage them against us? The true Circumcision was in the Church of the ten tribes, it was not for all that the true Church: an heretical Church, shall have Baptism, & yet for all that not cease to be a false Church; not in respect of the Baptism, but of her heresy: not in regard of that which is pure in her & of the Lords institution, but in regard of her rebellion against the Lord, & her own impurity. That they have Baptism than we grant, but so we say have all heretics, so the ten tribes after their apostasy received circumcision▪ this exception than is frivolous, when they pretend, that we confess, that they have the Baptism, & craftily dissemble that which we add, that they have adulterated, & depraved it as much as in them lies. Concerning the substance of Christian religion, we confess that it is also amongst them, but not pure, nor separated, not only from chaff and straw, that is, from tolerable abuses, but neither from the venom and poison of false doctrine. Now it is no schism to forsake a Church wherein is the substance of religion, if it be accompanied with superstition, impiety and sacrilege, as gold and silver in false coin are mingled with copper and tin. It is true that the Church of Rome teacheth, that there is one God, Father, Son, and holy Ghost, that for the redemption of mankind, the s●nne hath taken to himself the nature of Man, and in it hath expiated our sins by his death, that he was buried, raised from the dead, taken up into heaven, sitting at the right hand of God Almighty: That the holy Ghost sanctifieth us, th●t there is a Church, a communion of Saints, a remission of sins, a resurrection of the flesh, and a life everlasting. That by faith we must rely upon the mercy of God, that by hope we must expect the accomplishment of his promises, by charity love him. This is indeed the substance of Christian religion which continueth so far as the doctrine, and outward Profession of it in the Church of Rome, in this respect we have not forsaken her, but these considerations make us leave her the title of a Church, to which so far we will always be joined. But what is it that hath not been added to corrupt this truth? what strange doctrines have been invented to obscure it? What heresies? what Idolatry? what gross sacrilege vent they under the protection of this Truth which they profess. These are the causes of our separation from them, if amongst them we could have enjoyed the substance of true religion, without defiling us with their superstition, we had tarried with them still. But in these later times, after the Lord had lifted up the Standart of his Gospel, and sounded with his Trumpet, Come out of Babylon my people, since the Angels have flown in the midst of heaven, carrying the everlasting Gospel, and crying with a loud voice, Blessed are they henceforth who die in the Lord for they rest from their labours, and their works follow them: not to run to this standard, not to obey this summons, not to go whither we hear this inviting voice call us, in brief not to come out of Babylon, to go up to jerusalem, is a rebellion against the living God, and a manifest contempt of his grace· Before this, the faithful whom God had reserved to himself in the Captivity of Babylon as a residue of the election of grace, though they were not separated from the superstitious, yet they were from their superstition, their groans, and sighs serving in steed of protestations against it, because that the Lord had not yet opened them away by which to come out, nor as yet prepared them a place into which they might withdraw themselves. In a word the time preordained by God, to put an end to that miserable captivity was not yet come. As than it was not a sin to tarry in Egypt before the Lord had sent Moses, or in Babylon before the seventy years were expired; But God having sent Moses, having given liberty to his people to come out of Egypt, to come out of Babylon, to tarry there still had been manifestly to testify a consent to the superstition of Egypt, and idolatry of Babylon: so before the Lord had sounded us a loud summons with his trumpet, Come out of Babylon my people, he sustained and supported his people in the midst of Babylon; it was not at that time a sin, but a Captivity to abide in it. But for any to abide, or linger in it, after the publishing of this summons, it is a sure testimony, that they live not in it unwillingly, but with delight, and that, at least outwardly, they partake of her sins, and so may justly partake of her plagues. Now to demand, why God caused not this trumpet to be sounded sooner, is to dispute against him; it were to bring back those ancient questions propounded to the primitive Christians, why the Lord jesus had not brought the light of the Gospel sooner into the Church, to which St. Paul clearly answereth, when he teacheth, that the fullness of time was not yet come. Why the Lord called not the Gentiles sooner unto his knowledge? to which the same Apostle answereth no more, then that God having winked at the time of Ignorance, now warneth every man to repent. 
Act. 17. 3●.  He hath the times and seasons in his own disposing.  
It often falleth out, that they who cannot go out of an infectious city tarry in it, and are safe, but for all that, they that have opportunity to go out of it, will not take example from them to tarry in it. The shepherd will lead his sheep into pastures where are noxious herbs, rather than he will suffer them to be famished: but if he have the opportunity of leading them elsewhere, where no danger is to be feared, the good luck that God gave him, of preserving them in an unwholesome pasture, shall not dissuade him from taking of them out of that, to put them into a better. That which the shepherd doth to his sheep, we are to do to ourselves: so long as there was presented unto us no other place of pasturage, than the Roman Church, for want of a better, we were compelled to make use of that. But the Lord having graciously provided us a better, miserable are we if we leave not that, and betake ourselves to this. In the time of a famine men live pinchingly and wretchedly, but the dearth being past, and plenty restored, he that will not take the benefit of it, deserveth to be starved to death. Let this consideration then serve for the solution of the difficulty above proposed.   

CHAP. XXXVIII. That there is nothing which deserveth to be admired in the life of the Monks of the Romish Church.  
NOw it remaineth, that we examine their last prejudice. They have amongst them a swarm of religious creatures of both sexes, who prefer poverty before wealth, severity of discipline before the tender delicacy of pleasures, humility and contempt of the world, before the greatness and pomp of it: who being sequestered from the turmoils, and tumults of secular affairs live here on earth, like Angels in heaven. Who deny nature that which she exacteth of them, macerate their flesh and tame it in such an austere manner, that it serveth the soul no longer but for a sheath, or case, Snatched up already to heaven in affection and contemplation, and not tarrying here below, but after the fashion of Angels during their soiournement on earth. Or if their be any thing else which may set it forth more admirably, it's all (say they) to be found in the angelical, and heavenly life of Monks and Nuns.  
So Mountebanks extol the virtue of their drugs, affirming them to be nothing, but Elixirs, balms, & antidotes even against death itself. Now the confident boldness, the smooth behaviour, and eloquent prattling of the Mountebanque, hath this faculty to make the praises of his drugs pausible and receivable to the simple, and dim sighted Vulgar. But experience confuteth them, discovering at last the impudent knavery of these cozening quacksalvers. So the Turks vaunt of their religious folk, of the sanctity, austerity and extraordinary devotion which seemingly shineth in their whole conversation. Let us hear not a Turk, but 
a. Septem castrem de morib. & relic. Turc. c. 14.  a Christian, a Monk by profession, who had familiarly resorted to them, and observed their fashions, who hath described their superstition, a witness, not to be suspected in this point. Some of them (saith he) show an exceeding great patience, wear no habit, go naked, not covering any thing but their privities: of so great perfection that they are impassable, testifying their patience by brand marks made by burning, by scars made by lancing; some of them eat, and drink very seldom, others altogether forbear both; some are so poor, that it's said, they think not at all on earthly matters: others never speak, and purposely avoid the company of men, lest they should be urged to speak, one of which sort I saw, not without admiration. Others have the gifts of vision, others of revelation: some have raptures and supernatural ecstasies, or trances. And by this means, there is no man amongst them which acquireth not some spiritual skill and experience, and according to the diversity of this skill which they profess they are distinguished by their habits, and manner of being. If there be seen any amongst them wearing feathers on their heads, this noteth that they are given to meditations and revelations. If any of them wear a patched habit, this is a sign of their poverty. They which were rings in their ears show by this that they are submissive in spirit for the frequency of their raptures. If they wear chains about their necks and arms, this testifieth the violence and vehemence of their raptures: some of them live sequestered, others associated: some live solitary inforrests and deserts, others in cities using hospitality. Where may these be paralleled? who can produce any thing outwardly at least, & in show, so holy and austere amongst the Christian Monks.  
What could they answer here, if the Turks should go to outbrave them after this fashion, using the same pretence against them, which they use agianst us? will they say, that this sanctity is but hypocrisy, that this austerity is but savage barbarousness? (as indeed it is no better.) But this is our defence against them, when they go about to oppress us with the prejudice drawn from the consideration of their Monkish holiness and austerity. What great matter have you (say we) in this respect, which those barbarous miscreants the Turks have not? nay, which is more what have yea wherein you are not by them exceeded? will they answer us here, that they have the Christian faith and Religion? But so we shall have unmasked them of this prejudice, so we shall force them to come to the trial of doctrine. The monkish life shall not justify the religion of the Romish Church, but they must go quite backward, and justify the Monkish life by that religion from whence it borroweth its worth and dignity. So we shall have fetched back the disputation to its true point, to the examination of the truth; thrusting aside that by-consideration, which advantageth the cause of the Turks, as mu●h as it disaduantageth ours.  
But let us draw a little nearer, to this seeming sanctity and austerity: let us look steadfastly upon it, and see whether it were not painting which deluded our view, whilst we stood farther off? whether it be not a cunningly contrived outside, adorning an ugly and prodigious inside. First of all, what kind of poverty may we imagine this to be, where no man is in trouble or anxiety to procure himself, wherewith to clothe himself against the cold, cover himself against the heat, replenish himself against hunger, to refresh himself against thirst, to physic himself against sickness? may this be termed poverty without mocking both God and man? If this be poverty, what is abundance? Nay (say they) but these goods are possessed without appropriation: no man hath any thing to himself; be it so, do they therefore enjoy them any whit the less. Enjoy we not all the sun the glorious lamp of the world? enjoy we not light in ●ommon, and without division? What? are we therefore poor, destitute of light, or rich, abounding with it? what shall we say of the air, and water? are we in penury of these elements, because we have not them enclosed unto ourselves, because we enjoy them in common? Monkish poverty than is nominal poverty, but real abundance.  
But their discipline is rigid and severe! here we call the world to witness, yea we appeal unto themselues in this point. We will not rub up the ancient reproaches of their gluttony, drunkenness, whoredom, adultery, sodomy. But let the world judge, let them speak themselves, whether they observe this austere discipline? whether those ruddy cheeks, those white fleshy hands, those lively sparkling eyes, that spriteful vigour of the whole body, testify a rigorous maceration & taming of the flesh, or whether that jolly plight be not rather an effect of ease, mirth, good cheer, and a complete entertainment of nature? Yet (forsooth) we must believe, that they (poor hearts) fast extremely, that they lash themselves unmercifully, that they lie upon the bare, cold, hard ground, that they grate their skins with sackcloth. And questionless some few of them do that, which they all profess to do: But what a great piece of work is it, if custom at first alleys, at length quite steals away the sense of these miseries. There is an excellent discourse to this purpose, & well worth the observation in the work which chrysostom hath left de sacerdotio, 
Chrys. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. edit savill.  that is (in the language of our times) of the office of a Bishop. Where he making a comparison between the real vexations in that office, and these seeming tortures in the monkish life (which we deny not to have been in respect, in his time, but many ways differing from this in our time) he telleth us, that it is to be seen by experience that there are many who without any pain or discontent, make a shift with very poor fare and very hard lodging; Principally such as being of a kind of rough course nature have always been brought up so: but not only such, in as much as a good able constitution of body, and custom, soften and sweeten the roughness and harshness of these extremities, even to those who formerly have been more daintily brought up.  
Surely, so it is. Those who are of a more tender and crazy constitution, faint under these austerities, and either lose their lives amongst them, or else retire out of them by a dispensation: those of a stronger, and and more solid, tough complexion, not only go through stitch with them, and make them tolerable, but in the end find them not only easy, but which is more delightsome. It's a matter to be wondered at, that no man bestows an admiration upon the patience of the galley slaves, which is so great that they sing in the midst of their grievous toil, so voluntary that they oftimes refuse their liberty, and choose to tarry in the galleys: whereas to see a lazy fellow well covered, to show his naked feet upon condition of warming them when he listeth, all are amazed, as if this were some extraordinary exploit quiet surpassing humane strength. We daily see poor, drudging laborours' toil, and sweat, and with painful sighs keep time as it were to their work: we see them with a greedy, glad appetite devour course bread, nourishing themselues with such victuals as we would hardly vouch safe to touch: in a word, we see them in appearance even to kill themselves with irksome labour; yet no man wonders at it, no man pities them, because we all know, that custom hath dulled and blunted in them the sen●e & apprehension of wearisomeness and pain. What then do we wonder at? What extraordinary matter is there to be observed, in the patience of the Monks, that they must needs be so much admired? Is it because from their labour, their ariseth no profit or commodity to their neighbour? Whereas by the pains of drudging laborours', and toiling mariners, the life of man is comforted, the society of men is upheld and maintained? What then? shall we admire a labour in vain▪ an unprofitable, fruitless toil, and disesteem that, which is not only profitable but also necessary. But by their austerity, they testify their patience, very likely; why do they not till the earth then? why row they not in the galleys? is not there an ample subject enough for them to show their patience, and to do some service to the world beside into the bargain, were it but in putting themselves into the place of many poor slaves whose natural infirmities make their servitude insupportable? Or if that be too much, have they not a fit opportunity to tame the flesh, in the Vineyards of the next neighbours to their Covents, in the fields at harvest time, at the press in time of vintage, by this means both to ease the poor day-laborers, and to make some recompense for those alms which they get so easily by begging? This would be both to subdue the flesh, and profit the world both together. That other discipline so much talked of, may be justly suspected, because it hath no regard to the profit of another. He who may with the same pains, tame his flesh, and serve his country is ungrateful, and uncharitable, if being able to undertake this course, he neglecteth it. But the truth is, that they refuse not this kind of exercise, but only because it is less pleasant than their own.   

CHAP. XXXIX. A resolution of certain doubts, which may be framed concerning some things in the precedent Chapter.  
But it will be said, that the labour of secular men is not voluntary. Why so? Why is it less voluntary than that of the Monks? Is it because they cannot exempt themselves from it when they list? Why this (I trow) is the Monks case to. Or is it because they are forced to follow that hard kind of life, whereas the Monks bound themselves to it with vows voluntarily made. Surely there is no difference between them yet, in this respect. Despairing discontents, melancholic dumps, the fear of parents, the hard dealing of kindred, the simplicity of youth, the desire of avoiding some disgrace, or trouble which is like to come upon us if we tarry abroad in the world, are usually the first motives, and which give the first impressions to them who aspire to the Monkish life. When these considerations have once staggered us, and set us a wavering, it is an easy matter afterwards to persuade ourselves, that that course of life to which we are now addicted (be it what it will) is the most compendious path to perfection, and the ready way to Paradise. But after that men are once entered into it, and have engaged themselves in it, than some come to discover the unhappiness of their choice, they befool themselves at leisure, perceiving those places to be but uncouth prisons within, which while they beheld them without, seemed princely palaces. But now it is too late; they are fast enough in the stocks, and fetters, bolts, bars, double gates, the Gaoler and Keepers take away all hope of getting out. So the fishes which toss & tumble within the nets, seem to play and sport to the others which behold them without. But the desire of being partakes of that sport, having once alured them in, they quickly perceive what is become of them.  
But some man will say, if it be so, how cometh it to pass, that we hear none of them complain, that we perceive not any of these votaries, by sighs and moans, to discover their repentance and dislike of their profession. Surely it is, because no man proclaimeth his own folly, but every one is most careful to hide it, especially when it is remediless. He who hath been unfortunately married, will not discover the inconveniences which he findeth in his marriage, if he can possibly cover them, because it cannot be done without some shame and disgrace. Discontents of this kind, do not evaporate by exposing them to the wind. To this sort of unfortunate weights, there remains no comfort, but only to procure their miseries a reputation of not being. So merchants willingly dissemble their losses, especially those which come from their own rashness and indiscretion. So the Devils who are comforted, if they draw many to hell use not to tell how hot it is there.   

CHAP. XL. That the profession of Monks is not a note of true humility, and that their life hath nothing Angelical in it.  
WE see then, what kind of poverty the poverty of Monks is: what kind of austerity their austerity is, having nothing admirable in them, nothing which may prejudice their opposites in a matter of so great importance as is religion, seeing there is nothing extraordinary in them, nothing which is not common in the ordinary course of life, nothing which may not be both paralleled, and transcended in the most horrible superstitions.  
But peradventure they are humble, contemning the world? But whence should that be conjectured? Is it from their poverty, or from the meanness of their apparel, or from their savage kind of life quite estranged from humane civility? This conjecture indeed might have some colour and probability, if their poverty (such as it is,) their habit & their strange course of life made them contemptible and despicable to the world. But poverty, baseness of apparel, and stoical incivility which make any other person contemptible, adorn a Monk, and make him honourable. Abundance of wealth, bravery in apparel, fashionable carriage are not honourable in the world, but only because they make him to be honoured who hath them. But if baseness procure respect and applause, it's pride to seem contemptible, and ambition to affect baseness. He spoke not like a fool, who told the Cynic Philosopher, that he saw his pride through the holes of his cloak, because he was so poorly clad, that he might be the more respected. There was not anciently any sort of men so proud as that ●ect of Philosophers, with their long beards, course cloaks, beggarly scrips, bare feet, like to our Capuchins now a days. The Gentry, and common people of those times with a kind of emulation, outvyed one another in a superstitious respect to that Idol of gravity, that deceitful outside of humility, which enwrapped a prouder heart than the royal robe of Alexander. True humilit●e is seated in the heart, and in the inmost closet of the soul: she is not commended by any thing which may be counterfeited: she is discerned as well under the robes of David, as under the rags of Lazarus. But some will say, that the Monks would be more respected than they are, if they were not Monks. Let us see how true this is; what should we think of those heavy, blockish spirits thrust into a Monastery by their kindred, because of their unfitness for any thing else, that they might not serve for a reproach to the family of which they are descended: is it likely these creatures would be more respected not being Monks? What should we think of those poor fellows, which if they were out of the Covent, would hardly find wherewith to sustain nature, unless they got it by their finger's ends at some base occupation? Would these be more respected? Lastly, what should we think of those more sublimated wits, and soaring spirits amongst them, to whom the Monastery is instead of a gallery through which they may walk to a Bishopric, thence climb to a Cardinalship, and thence ofttimes jump into the Papal throne? Would these have fared better out of the Monastery? Suppose all them hit not this mark, could they have aimed better at it out of the Covent? It was a Pope who before he came to this dignity, used out of his austerity a net instead of a bed, and now seeing the world to wonder at the change which he had made of his net bed into a feather bed, answered, that he had caught his fish. The Monkish profession serves now adays to heighten & adorn the lustre of learning, eloquence, and the like good parts, as shadows in a picture grace the other colours. Mantuan amongst the Poets, was but the more esteemed because he was a Monk. Hath Onuphrius been any whit the less admired by his own, or less esteemed of by the learned? Aquinas, and Scotus, have they not been so much the more renowned because they were Monks?  
The glory, and applause which Monsieur du Bouchage hath gotten by his Monastic profession, have they not equalled all the honour which he could expect from Martial feats? Those actions cannot be true notes of humility wherein one sows a small honour, for an assured harvest of a greater: but those wherein a man debaseth and dejecteth himself, expecting no advancement or preferment but in heaven. The praise also of this humility is not of men, but from God, who seeth it in secret and rewardeth it openly. Let it be proved unto us then, that the Monks contemn honour, and we will believe that they contemn the world. It is not to tread the world under foot, not to plead at bar, not to sit in the chair of state, not to bear arms, not to serve one's King and country, to live in idleness according to the precepts of Epicurus: but not solicitously to aim at, not to affe●t that honour which is wont to accompany all these professions. The Monkish profession cannot bring a testimonial of such a contempt of the world; yea on the contrary, it betrays a great love of it, seeing it is the most certain and easy way to that honour which other men purchase with so much sweat and anxiety. Finally they tell us, that the Monkish life is Angelical, but I would willingly know wherefore: Do the Angels use to be idle during their abode upon earth? Yea are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation. Are they not busy for the preservation of men? But these Angel-Monkes, what do they? It will be said, they spend much time in prayer; yea, they devour widow's houses, under the pretence of their long prayers, as anciently did the Scribes & pharisees. To pray to God, and to serve the world, are these matters which cannot stand together? The Patriarches, Prophets, & Apostles did not they pray? And yet did they not labour day and night for the setting forward of the salvation of men? Questionless, their charity is cold and hypocritical who being able to do more, spend it only in prayers; justly deserving, that their prayers should redescend upon their own heads turned into curses.   

CHAP. XLI. That the profession of Monks is contrary to true piety.  
BEhold now what that so much admired poverty of Monks is come to, their humility, their so highly esteemed imitation of Angels. But if we will but take the pains to acquaint ourselves a little better with the mysteries of this profession, we shall perceive it to be quite contrary to true piety, that it dishonoureth & turneth it upside down: and lastly, that the issue of it is to make a man a thief, a whoremonger, a proud Pharisee.  
First of all, theft is manifest and notorious in it. For the profession of Monks bindeth them not to give any thing to another, it hindereth the son from succouring the father, the daughter from relieving the necessities of the mother, the rich from possessing that with which they might comfort the poor, the wiseman from taking care of the weal-public; the valiant man from defending his country, the laws, and religion by his valour, yea it hindereth the Divine from preaching: for if some amongst them do preach, it is not as they are Monks; That licence was anciently granted them in the form of a dispensation. In St Hieromes time the office of Monks was not to preach, but to weep. To employ one's self in preaching is to bid the Monkish life farewell, & to renounce it in this respect. And if every Monk should employ his gift and talon, as do the small number of those amongst them which preach, the Monasteries would remain empty, and these Monks would be no longer Monks, but secular men conversing in the world and busying themselves for the common good of it, every one according to his ability, every man in his rank & station, one in pleading the cause of the Orphan: another in applying convenient remedies for the prevention, or expulsion of diseases: another in distributing alms out of his abundance: one in the exercise of one calling, another in another. But the Monks by their vows quite disenable themselves for the performance of these offices. Some ancient laws punished certain cowards, which that they might not be pressed for the war, got their thumbs cut off, not only for having used an inhuman cruelty towards themselves, but also for having cozened the Commonwealth of its due. They then make themselves culpable after the same manner, who wittingly deprive themselues of those means, by which they might give a helping hand for the relief of the common necessities of man's life. We are not placed in this life, neither abide we in this world for ourselves only, but for others also, every man for his neighbour. It is the law of nature, it's the law of God, it's the precept of the Gospel, that we should do good to all, and especially to those of the household of faith. He then who purposely maketh himself unprofitable, willingly violateth this law, showing himself unnatural, rebellious against God, full of self-love, seeking that which is his own, and not the Lord jesus, any farther than the lips and outward profession.  
But which is yet more intolerable, they make themselves not only unprofitable, but also burdensome; they live upon other men's labours, they deprive those who are poor indeed of their relief, intercepting that which might and ought to be given them. They think it a more blessed thing to receive, then to give quite contrary to the judgement of our Saviour. They labour not, and yet they think themselves worthy to live and be maintained, notwithstanding the speech of the Apostle, he which worketh not, let him not eat.  
They say that their prayers are their tasks, & their orisons their business. But St Austin in his book de opere Monach: where he hath taken upon him to prove that every Monk which lives upon alms and gifts is guilty of theft, hath amply refuted these flim-flamms: showing that the spiritual service of God, doth not hinder us from, but encourage us to labour. The Grecians account him not a true Monk, who is chargeable to others. The Abyssin Monks follow the same law. And indeed though the Monkish profession be ancient enough in the Church, yet the idleness of Monks, and their begging is but new. In St Austin's time some began in favour of them to allege the example of the birds of the fields, of whom the Lord saith that they neither sow nor reap. 
Aug. de oper. Monach. c. 26.  But that good father answereth them as they deserved, telling them that he was of opinion that they might go as the birds do, to feed themselves in the fields, without bringing any thing home with them, and that it would be good if they had wings, that they might be affrighted away like stairs [birds] & not be apprehended as thieves.  
Concerning the second point, the Monkish life doth not quench, but nourish, doth not cast water but oil upon the fire of concupiscence. An honest liberty of marrying, when one will, if a man be not altogether graceless, easily spends and exhales this passion, and suffereth it not to break out into flames; whereas the constraint by vow, taketh away all hopes of vent, and shutteth it up within us. There is no man less troubled with hunger, than he who hopes that he may eat when he pleaseth, he who despaireth of it, betaketh himself to his own flesh, and as the Prophet speaketh, eateth even his own arm. Now this is not spoken with a purpose to discover the secrets of the Covent, but only to give a secret glance at that which all the world knoweth of it.  
But what? Can their fastings, and scourge afford them no remedy? Yes if they would in due proportion fast continually, if they would fast simply and absolutely; otherwise for him which hath not the gift of continence to fast by starts, and lash himself by fits, this is but to stir his disease instead of removing it, and to anger his sore, instead of healing it? There are diseases which are nourished by gentle, lenitive remedies. The anodins (such medicines as cast the sick into a sleep) take away the pain for a time: but they either kill the person out right, or else the pain returneth with the greater violence, as if it had gone backward for a time, that it might come forward with a doubled fury. Witness St Hierome himself, 
Hieron. ad Eust. de custod. Virg. tom. 2.  my countenance (saith he) was wan by reason of my fasting, and my flesh, was dead before myself, and yet my spirit boiled within me with the heat of my desires. Did so holy and devout a man out of I know not what humility publicly divulge so base and scandalous a lie of himself? No, no. He spoke the truth, and thereby (how highly soever he hath extolled virginity) unwittingly confesseth, that for concupiscence which is not moderated by the gift and particular grace of continence, there remaineth only that remedy set down by the Apostle, that for avoiding fornication, every man should have his own wife, and every woman her own husband.  
True virginity is radically in the soul, if it be not ●●ere principally, it cannot be in the body, and if it be there, it will transfuse itself thence into the body, whether it be in wedlock, or in a single life. Imagine we that St Peter married (as the most ancient testify of him) was less acceptable to God, 
●gnat. in epist. ad Philadelph. ●id exerc. 3. V●del. cap. 12.  than St Paul unmarried? God measureth not men but by piety, where he findeth that equal, he is equally pleased with it, be it in married, or unmarried persons.  
What then? shall the single life have no prerogative? Yes questionless, if it conduce more to piety, than marriage; but if it fail in this point it's much inferior to marriage. Now it always faileth of that in them who have not the gift of it. There are some (saith our Saviour) which make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven; but all men cannot receive this saying, 

Mar. 19.10.11.12.  
●. Cor. 7.7.   save they to whom it is given. Which is clearly expounded unto us by St Paul, telling us that he could wish indeed, that all had the gift of continence as well as he, but that every man hath his proper gift, one in one kind, another in another· To him then, who hath received this gift after the same manner as St Paul had received it, his single life doubtless will be far more advantageous than marriage, because that to him who is thus qualified, virginity is a help for piety, marriage would be but an encumbrance. But to him who hath not received that gift in that manner, his single life would be but a snare and a trap: for by reason of his single life he would burn, & the Apostle tells us that it is better to marry, then to burn. As than marriage serves but for an hindrance and disturbance to him, who hath the gift that St. Paul had, to wit, the gift of continence: so the single life serveth but for an encumbrance and temptation, the danger of which is unavoidable, and deadly, to him who hath not received the gift of containing himself. We worthily esteem of the single life of those whom God calleth to it, but we say that no man is called unto it, who is forced to burn in it.  
Wherefore then (say they) see we not this single life more common amongst you? here we could tell them, that they should dispute against our doctrine, not against our manners; that faults in manners ought not to be thrust upon the doctrine, if the doctrine condemneth them; that our doctrine approveth not their do, who being able to contain themselves are married, unless they are driven unto it by some other urgent necessity. But we will answer directly, that the gift continence being rare we are not to wonder if the single life which presupposeth this gift be less frequent, but rather to admire the wisdom of the Apostle, who having set before us the conveniences of a single life and the inconveniences of marriage, professeth that it is not to ensnare us. Now if we are not fitly qualified for a single life, it is undoubtedly to ensnare ourselves, if we choose rather to burn in a single life, then to quench the fire by marriage. The thousands, and we dare say millions of Martyrs both in the Primitive Church, and in our own times, give a sufficient testimony that we entertain and embrace not marriage, but so far as it fitteth us for our calling. In how base and espiteful a mann●● soever men calumniate it, which of our Martyrs was ever held back by the consideration of the sweetness of his marriage, by the natural affection towards hi● children, by the cares of the world, from sealing the Gospel with his blood? They might all have lived, and many of them might have lived in all outward content, either for honours or pleasures, yet notwithstanding all this, they preferred death before life, torments before pleasures, the ignominy & shame, before the honour and applause of the world. Let our enemies be our judges, is not such a kind of death more admirable than the single life of Monks? is it not a sure token of a more magnanimous spirit, of a more fervent zeal, of a more fixed hope, of a more vehement love, of a more lively faith, than the single life of these Votaries; unchaste for the most part, and chaste only by constraint. But let us return to our purpose. As the Monkish life tends to make him who addicteth himself to it, a thief and a whoremonger, unless he hath received the gift requisite for a single life: so in the third place, it is a thing which puffeth a man up with a wonderful presumption of himself. I know the Monks make great profession of humility, but how can he be humble who thinketh himself able, who undertaketh to merit, and believeth that he doth merit? True humility is for a man to think himselve unworthy, to somuch as look up unto heaven: these Votaries presume to merit it.  
Moreover true humility is for us to think that when we have done all, we are but unprofitable servants; these Monkish Saints, believe that they do works of supererogation, and that they merit for others also. What pride is this, or what blasphemy? God himself commandeth us to love him with all our heart, with all our mind, with all our strength: They make profession of doing a great deal more than he commandeth us.  
In what mood soever God speaketh, it is imperative, after what fashion soever he speaketh, he cannot but command: see in the mean time the monstrous pride of these Monks: There are (say they) some counsels which God giveth, to obey which man is not bound unless himself please, his own vow alone bindeth him to obedience. Who can in conscience think thus of the Counsels of God without a proud exaltation of himself against him? was this the aim of the Lord? is this the fruit of his familiar mildness? when he commands in counselling, and counsels in commanding, deals he so courteously with us to the end that man should mistake him for his companion? that he should misconstrue his commandments, and allow them only the faint emphasis of counsels which a friend gives to a friend without any strongertie of observing them. The entreaties of our superiors are commands, if we either speak, or think of them otherwise, we cease in effect to acknowledge them for our Superiors, we proudly exalt ourselves against them. And what may we then think of these professors of humility, who allow not God that in matter of religion, which they owe to men in matter of civility. Questionless this proveth them not only proud, but also both sacrilegious and blasphemous persons.  
These things being so, how cometh it to pass, that such gross impiety should serve for a pretence to justify that religion, of the which it maketh profession? Yea seeing that it is so far from being what it seemed to be at the first view, that it is indeed the quite contrary, as we suppose we have proved, let it serve rather to accuse, yea to condemn that religion, of which it's said to be the excellency and perfection.   

The Conclusion.  
WE have at length examined in order, all ●hose preiudices and pretences which they of the Romish Church have invented, to hinder our cause from being throughly & exactly examined. It was the only scope of this treatise to show that all those allegations 1 of the Magnificence 2 Unity, 3 Antiquity, 4 Stability, 5 Continuation 6 Succession, 7 the substance of truth, 8 the holiness pretended to be in the Church of Rome, are but frivolous pretences, devised to hinder an exquisite and solid enquiry of the truth. If we have attained to this scope, it's all we could desire: the indifferent Reader shall judge of it. For my own part, it sufficeth me that my conscience beareth me witness, that I have proceeded in it without vainglory, without stomach, in all sincerity, as speaking rather before God, then before men. This maketh me hope for his blessing upon my pains so much the more, as he is jealous of his truth, at the clearing of which I have wholly aimed. Wherefore I humbly entreat him, by his spirit, to supply all my defects, and notwithstanding my infirmities, not to fail to accomplish his power by weak means, whether it be in confirming those, whom he hath already called to the communion of his grace, or whether it be in awaking others out of their security, to the end that they may seek his truth, and in seeking it may find it, and in it everlasting life through jesus Christ our Lord, to whom with the Father, & the Holy Spirit be honour and glory eternally, Amen.  
FINIS   

Faults escaped in some copies.  
PAg. 5. lin. 18. for brave, read, some brave. Pag. 8. line 21. for superstition, superstition flourished. P· 11. lin. 29. for accompany, for the most part accompany. 28.17. for won, wondered. 31.27. for liberally, literally. 132.1. for being true, being no true Pag. 108. refer the citation out of Cyzicenus to that which followeth about Hosius. and at u read Athanas. 2. Apol. divers other petty faults there are, such as cannot wrong a● intelligent Reader.