BELLS TRIAL EXAMINED THAT IS A refutation of his late Treatise, entitled. THE TRIAL OF THE NEW RELIGION. By B. C. Student in divinity. Wherein his many & gross untruths, with divers contradictions are discovered: Together with an examination of the principal parts of that vain Pamphlet: and the antiquity & verity of sundry. Catholic articles, which he calleth rotten rags of the new religion, are defended against the new Ragmaster of RASCAL. In the Preface likewise, a short view of one THOMAS ROGER'S untruths is set down, taken out of his book called. THE FAITH DOCTRINE AND RELIGION, PROFESSED AND PROTECTED IN THE REALM OF ENGLAND, etc. with a short memorandum for T. V otherwise called Th. Vdal.  jerem 7. v. 8. 
Behold you trust to yourselves in the words of lying, which shall not profit you.  
Printed at Roan. 1608.   

THE PREFACE TO THE good CHRISTIAN READER.  
IN my last book (good Reader) which I published against the challenging minister entitled. The doleful knell of Thomas Bell: I very well remember, that I freed myself from writing aught against him, until I had set forth his Black Burial, containing an answer to the main of all his blasphemous books and pestilent pamphlets, is just reasons there specified hindered not my designment: notwithstanding meeting not long since with a new toy of his, tricked and trimmed up, with divers patches and rusty rags, drawn from the dunghille of his former monuments, and called by him, The Trial of the new religion: I resolved to examine his depositions, and to try the truth of his new treatise: and that both because it falleth out very fitly and in order, that having rung Bells doleful knell, this examination of his Trial, as his winding sheet should follow, before the solemnity of his foul Funerals and interring of his carcase be kept: and also for that I fear by the disastrous conjunction of the planets, that a could frost of poverty, will yet keep back the springe of the promised work, and therefore I thought it not amiss to publish this Treatise being not of any such bulk, but that a few crowns may dispatch the impression. And lastly, to give Bell sure and certain intelligence, that it was contempt of him, and his books, that made them pass so long without answer, and not any rare learning, or stinging stuff, as in the light of his dark dreaming conceit, proceeding from much vanity and little humility, small grace & great pride, he framed to himself.  
His eyes I hope by this time be opened to see, that albeit he were an importune challenger, yet he lay not so close, but that his sides have been sound bombasted, and his quarters kindly curried over. That disdainful style of his which before trampled upon our silence: those mounting words which in former times menaced nothing but death and destruction: that insulting vain which did so contemptibly caper upon our quiet carcases, is now become bankrupt and fled the country. Those overlooking terms and fiery phrases, those terrible taunts, which with restless pen he rung in our ears, and never ceased to jangle both in town and country are vanished, and blown away like the locusts of Egypt. The world is altered, To●nam is turned French: his hot courage is cooled, the gospelling Goliath lieth sweeting upon the earth fetching his last gasp, and the false pleasing lustre of his books faded and coin to nothing. In former times this and such like were his usual songs. No no they do in effect confess 
Funeral. lib. 1. cap. 2. pag. 6.  so much, whiles they neither dare answer any one book at all, nor any one chapter wholly, but here and there an odd piece or sentence, I protest unto the gentle Reader I partly blush on their behalf. But never as I think shall I live so long to hear any more such music. No no that tune is out of date, the blood hath left his cheeks; and run in post to comfort his fainting heart.  
It was also no question a brave pang of his vaunting spirit, when he came over us in this insulting manner. They 
Funeral. lib. 2. cap. 1. pag. 4.  are so nettled, so pricked and gored with my books, and their religion so battered with their own best learned doctors, and most skillefull Proctors, that gladly they would satisfy their jesuited Popelings, & wipe away that discredit, which hangeth at their beards, for which end they use many coosenlnge tricks, jugglings, and lieger-demains, so to stay the outcries of the people until I be dead, and then by your favour, they will come upon me with good speed. Canis mortuus non mordet: but before that day, my life I gage in that behalf, they dare not for their guts publish any direct & full answer etc. because to snatch here a piece & there a piece, is no answer at all, but a mere toy for young children to play withal. But pardon him this, & he will never do so any more whiles he liveth, it was the heat of his zeal and the long gaping after an overseeing benefice, that made so many mad and lofty words to run forth, whiles the door was open. balam's eyes be now illuminated, and he seethe very well, and the world knoweth, that his books be not only answerable, but also some of them answered. His Downfall of Popery which in the high pitch of his soaring pride he affirmed to be such tickling stuff that every article 
Funeral. lib. 2. cap. 4 pag. 10.  conclusion, & proposition therein contained, might truly be called, Noli me tangere, because they dare not (quoth he) for ten thousand million of gold touch the same fully & directly: when as for all that, every article hath been examined, every conclusion confuted & every proposition perused, answered, & beaten in pieces, so that the Minister may truly be called Noli mihi credere, and deserveth for this and hundreds more of like quality, ten thousand millions of whetstones for the reward of his works, the trophies of his labours, and the perpetual ensign of his false, foolish, and fantastical monuments.  
But to prosecute further in particular this present Pamphlet, the due examination whereof I have undertaken, two special things remain yet to be spoken of. The first concerning myself: the second touching the Minister. As for myself, thou shalt understand (good Reader) that I was once determined, to have answered the treatise fully and wholly, as thou mayst perceive by the first and second chapters: but afterward infirmity of body hindering the course of my studies, and desire of mind to have it dispatched with all speed, caused an other resolution which may perhaps revive Bells dead spirits, and inflame his cooled blood, and make him come out once again with his old complaint, that I have answered him by pieces and patches, and for my lugges and guts durst not deal with 
Such are Bells phrases.  the whole, and that I have after much labour and study, much siftinge and searching, out of the whole tome of his Trial, consisting almost of five and twenty leaves in quarto, gathered only eight and fifty untruths, and not past some five or six contradictions. If the wind be got again into that corner, no remedy but I must bear of his storm with the cloak of patience, hoping that the good reader will consider, how as I was not bound to meddle with his Pamphlet at all, so it was also at my choice to leave what I listed and take what I pleased, especially making open profession of this my course taken therein, and have not any way abused the good Reader, as Bell hath, who in his Funeral doth make the world believe, that he hath wholly answered my Forerunner, consisting only of four sheets of paper, and yet omitteth many notable and principal points, as I noted in the doleful knell as for 
Pag. 61.  example, where his congregation is challenged by me to have been unknown for many hundred years together, (as they are enforced to confess) our Church all that while bearing sail in the sight of the world: and also charged to maintain the heresies of Aerius, Vigilantius, and to take part with julian the Apostata, and Turkish Mahometans: to all which troublsom objections, he maketh silence to give the solution.  
The irreconcilable dissensions likewise of the Protestants in Germaeny, and the endless brawls of our Mininsters at home, not in trivial toys, but in matters of main moment and importance, being upon just occasion set before him, he feigneth himself blind, and will not see any more than pleaseth himself: and the better to cloak this his dealing, he hath perverted the whole order, chopping and changing all things, as best serveth for the concealing of his treachery, as in the foresaid 
In the Preface a little before the end.  book is handled. But as for me, albeit I have not taken upon me any entire reply, yet shall the good Reader find every chapter examined in order, no one omitted, and not much worth the speaking of, to be let pass: so that in very truth it may serve for a just confutation. another thing also Bell is to understand, viz, that he hath entered into an obligation of all loss of credit for ever, if he can be convinced guilty of one only untruth. Be not these his own words, breathing out nothing else but an argument of a timorous conscience, and upright dealing, to the commendation of his doctrine, and winning popular applause and liking. And my proceed 
Motives pag. 17.  (quoth he) throughout this whole treatise, shall be such and so sincere, as if I can be convinced by the adversary, either to allege any writer corruptly, or to quote any place guilefully, or to charge any author falsely, I will never require credit at the Readers hand, neither in this work, nor in any other, that I shall publish at any time hereafter: of which promise he maketh also mention in his Downfall. This being so, can Bell justly complain if his 
In the Preface.  books be not wholly answered, when as one only certain corruption or untrue charge of any author proved against him doth cassiere his credit, and give him his death's wound or with what face can he justly complain, when as in this Treatise not one or two, but almost therscore of his untruths be displayed, or how can he deny all his reputation to be lost, and his credit cracked for ever. Will he say that he is not truly charged, and plead still for his innocency and sincerity in proceeding? So he may I grant, but whether truly or no, that I remit to the sequel: desiring the good Reader in: he mean time, only to peruse over the xx. xxv. xxuj. and xxvij. untruths, and if he findeth not that he hath alleged writers corruptly, quoted josephus Angles guilefully, and charged authors falsely, than a God's name, let him be still liked and loved, still culled and embraced for the stout champion, and sure pillar of the congregation. But if trial shall teach him that he hath forfeited his obligation. no reason or conscience, but the condition should be performed Thus much touching myself.  
Concerning Bell and his Pamphlett, two things occur worthy of consideration. The first is, that as his Pamphlets called. The hunting of the romish Fox, his woeful cry, etc. be either wholly, or principally borrowed from his other books, though a new title, and an other manner of order and method, may cause the Reader to think it otherwise, and thereby to have him in admiration, for his abundant matter and flowing invention: so this his Trial of the new religion, will be found upon trial, to be nothing else, but old patches and pieces of his former works, especially of his Survey and only stitched together, and botched up after a new fashion. For I assure the good Reader, except it be the first chapter, entreating Of the Pope's name, not only all the rest, (and that in many places almost verbatim) is drawn from his Survey (and his other books) but also the very Epistle dedicatory itself, such a rare jewel hath he presented to his patrons. Whether this be so or no, let us briefly run over the particulars.  
His Epistle dedicatory, is taken from his Survey pag. 341. 342. except a very flew lines, and the recapitulation (which he hath annexed to the end) of the chapters following after. Of the first chapter I have already spoken. The second chapter Of the Pope's superroiall power is borrowed from his Survey pag. 189. where his eight arguments against the supreme spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope be contained. His third chapter, Of the marriage of Priests, etc. consisting of five paragraffes, is conveyed from the same book of his Survey. The first paragraph, is found pag. 216. The second, pag. 224. pag. 233. and 234. and 228. The third pag. 267. and 269. The fourth pag. 268. and 269. and that which he sayeth of Aeneas Silvius, or Pius the second is in his woeful cry pag. 25. and lastly that which he bringeth of S. Gregory, etc. cometh from his Survey pag. 222. His fift paragraph, is nothing else but a recital, or recapitulation of the whole chapter: which fashion he observeth also in his other chapters to make perhaps the bulk the bigger for the greater commendation of his labours.  
The fourth chapter Of Pardons, is fetched partly from his Survey, pag. 278. 279. and wholly from his woeful cry pag. 17. and 18. The fist chapter Of Purgatory, taketh his first Original from his Motives pag. 3. 4. and 5. (where the authority of Roffensis is spun out at length) and also from his Survey, pag. 297. His sixth chapter, Of Auricular confession, is derived from the same Survey, pag. 501. and 502. And partly from the same sink, partly from the puddles of his Downfall, stew the principal contents of his seventh chapter, which is Of venial sins. See his Survey pag. 381. 382. and Downfall pag. 383.  
His eight chapter, Of the Pope's faith, as touching the former part, he took from his Anatomy, as himself noteth in the margin, and that which in the later part he saith of So to and Alphonsus is fetched from his Balance, fol. 9 a, and fol. 13. b. His ninth chapter, Of the merit of works excepting that which he disputeth against S. R. is transported from his Survey pag. 396. 397: and from his Downfall, pag. 61. 75. and 69.  
His tenth chapter Of Transubstantiation, is but a few rags, gathered from his Survey, pag. 436. 437. and his Downfall pag. 34. The eleventh chapter Of Popish invocation of saints, is shreds of his Survey pag. 331. and 340. where the same tales of S. Thomas and Polanchus were broached before. His twelfth chapter, Of the communion under one kind, proceedeth from his Survey pag. 402. and 409. The thirteenth chapter, Of private Mass, springeth from the same root of his Survey pag. 414. and 415. The sourtenth chapter, Of Pope Martin's dispensation, is drawn from his Downfall, pag. 40. and his Funeral, lib. 2. cap. 7. The fifteenth chapter, Of worshipping of images, is a woeful slip, of his woeful cry pag. 62. and 63. The sixteenth chapter, Of Church service in the vulgar tongue, descendeth from his Survey pag. 476. 477. etc. The seaventeth chapter Of the antiquity of Popish Mass, and the parts thereof, acknowledgeth the same Survey for sire, pag. 480. and 481. The eighteenth chapter, Of the profound mystery of Popish Mass issueth from the same book, pag. 484. The ninetenth chapter, Of kissing the Pope's feet, hath his first head and origen, in the same Survey pag. 487.  
The twentieth chapter, Of praying upon beads. The one and twentieth, Of changing the Pope's name. The two and twentieth, Of the Paschall torch. The three and twentieth, Of the Popish Pax, be four brethren, begotten by his Survey, pag. 487. 486. 488. and 482. The four and twentieth chapter. Of the Pope's Bulls. The five and twentieth, Of the Popish Agnus Dei. The six and twentieth, Of Candlemas day, be three sisters, descending from the very same father, pag. 492. and 491. The seven and twentieth chapter, Of the doubtful oath, etc. receiveth his generation from his Motives pag. 60. and his Downfall pag. 124, etc. The eight and twentieth chapter, Of fasting, hath his creation, from his Survey, pag. 68 etc. The nine and twentieth chapter, Of the annulling of Popish wedlock was first handled in his Motives pag. 63. and 64. and afterward rehandled in his Downfall, pag. 36. The thirtieth and last chapter received his first life from his Motives pag. 56. and 57  
This is the Anatomy, and lively description of his Trial, which discovereth the rare dexterity he hath in writing, and from whatfountayne his great show of abundance floweth. His choice of new books is not unlike the variety of Esopes suppers, or the skilof some poor fiddler, that with two or three course dances scraped upon a sluttish crowd, serveth the whole country, and maketh his good masters merry. This is the first thing which I had to say concerning Bell, and his books.  
The second point which I meant to entreat of, and would have the Reader to note is, that whereas Bells former books did continually ring out brags and bravinge, dare and redaring, challenges and Larums, and the world was filled with his daily outcriestin this last l'amphlet of his Trial, as also in his Antepast, (sor so much as I have read) I meet with no such swelling words, nor find any smoke of that ●aunting humour. Those winds are allayed, that terrible tempest is overblown, and the surging seas, and mounting waves of such extravagant insolency calnied and at quiet. Besore we could hear no other music but the battle and such quarter brawls as these. In regard hereof most gracious 
In the Epistle dedicatory of his Funeral.  and dread Sovereign, I now prostrate (quoth Bell) upon my knees, do most humbly beseech your most excellent Majesty, that it will please your Highness, of your most princely favour, to grant your royal licence and safe conduct, for any English lesuit or lesuited Bapist in the whole world, that shall have courage to appear, for the true performance of the challenge, in such manner as is in this reply expressed; Oh most gracious Sovereign I am joyful when I remember this future combat, I wish in my heart that it may be effected with all expedition, for I confidently persuade myself in our Lord jesus, that his name shall thereby be glorified, your Majesty highly honoured, the Papists stricken dead, and all true hearted English subjects receive unspeakable endless comfort. If it shall fall out otherwise, and that I shall not be found even in your majesties judgement to have the victory and upper hand, I will be content to lose my life for my just reward, as one that dishonoured your Majesty and the cause: where also the Echo of the margin returneth back again, the like triumphant tune. O noble king (quoth he) for Christ's sake grant my request, the victory is already gotten, none of them dare undertake the quarrel. Let me be hanged, bowelled, and quartered, yea and my corpse cast to the fowls of the air, if the victory fall not on my side.  
Again in an other place. I dare and redare all English 
Funeral. lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 5.  jesuits and jesuited Papists, whosoever and wheresoever, to let me have their speedy answer, and the acceptance of this challenge, etc. No no they dare never do such an act, dum spiritus hos artus: what they dare do when I am dead I know not. And again he not only reneweth his challenge, but also enlargeth it with many big and terrible words, protesting his burning desire, and great readiness in this marginal note. A new 
Fun●val. lib. 2. cap. 5. pag. 12. Annexed to the and of his Funeral.  challenge which I desire with all my heart to be performed as knoweth our mereifull God. And yet once again he is upon our bones with A fresh Alarm, or new challenge, to all English jesuits and jesuited Papists in the universal world tag and rag, none at all excepted, whosoever shall appear in the shape of man. This was the brave vain and exalted spirit of the magnanimous Minister, never at quiet but still urging and pricking us forward, goading ad goaringe us to the combat with his continual scoffs, taunts, girds, glicks, with incessant and insupportable scorns, and in most contemptible and disdainful manner, a sample whereof I have here in the former sentences presented before the (good Reader) a more large view may be had in the doleful knel, and that taken only out of the one book of his Funeral.  
But he that before, like a princely Eagle soared a lost in the skies, creepeth now like a poor frozen snake in the low vaults and valleys. Esop's rumbling mountain that terrified all the borders, with the fear of some misshapen and formidable monster, is at last delivered of a ridiculous mouse. Bell that thus assaulted us with his challenges, and gave us no rest from his dare and Larums, hath now given over that stately style and manner of writing, That which the merciful God knew before he desired with his whole heart, knoweth now that he longeth for no such thing, the eadge of his zeal is abated, the overboiling heat of his courage is coaled: In this his Trial, not one sentence, word, or syllable of any challenge, offer of disputation, or acceptance of Conference is mentioned, and as little (for that little which I have read) do I find in his Antepast. Quantum mutatus ab illo. From whence cometh this sudden change or what hath wrought this unexpected and strange alteration. Nothing else good Reader but that Bell as at the first surprised with the desire of vain glory and the worlds applause made his first challenge yet with a clause to prevent afterclaps, viz if it might stand with the liking of higher powers: so was he afterward deceived in his accoutes, erred in his conceits, & made a wrong reckoning: For he verily persuaded himself because he had remained so many years unansweared, that the same world would still have continued: and that the terror of his challenges, had so benumbed our fingers, that no pen could or would have been stirred against him. None of them (quoth he to his Majesty as before was noted) dare undertake the quarrel: and in his Latum. But on the other side if either no Papist dare appear, to perform and answer the challenge: and to speak plain English, I think it will fall out so etc. Whereupon he followed the chase so eagerly, that no rest or peace could be had from his dare, challenges, and Larums: but finding now that he was in a wrong box, and that it was rather contempt, than any fear which caused so long silence, our terrible kilcowe hath pulled in his horns, and he that before like a proud palfry pricked up with provender kept a snorting and flinging, is now become so poor, so lame and lean, that the kites and crows assure themselves shortly to be the executors of his last will and testament.  
He hath met with S. R. his answer to his insolent and challenging Downfall: or rather that hath met 
In the Epistle to his Majesty.  with him, which hath givene him this deadly greeting. Wherefore seeing that of late Thomas Bell, a fugitive once from Protestants religion, as he is now from Catholics, hath not only accused but also slandered the universal Catholic cause, in a book which he hath dedicated to your Majesty, and termed it, The Downfall of Popery, and withal challengeth, dareth, yea adjureth, (in which case our blessed Saviour though with danger of his life made answer) all English jesuits, Seminary Priests, and as he speaketh jesuited Papists to answer him: I have presumed upon your gracious favour to accept his challenge, and am ready to perform it hand to hand, if your Majesty grant licence, and in the mean time to dedicate to your name this my Confutation of his arguments and slanders. After this dismoll news, no small cooling card to the gallant gamester, and so much the more grievous, by how much he never expected any such thing: behold, out cometh an other book of mine against him, called. The doleful knell, in 
In the Epistle a little from the beginning, and also not far from the end.  which I have made most humble suit unto the right honorrable Lord Chancellor of England, (to whom the book is dedicated) for the favour of an indifferent conference as passed in France, and that in such serious and effectual manner, as Bell can not but perceive that we be in earnest. In that book also, after I had set down many of his proud and presumptuous speeches, of his vain vaunting, and craking challenges, I did as it were prophecy, that the world should shortly know how he would slip his neck out of 
In the Preface: about some seven pages from the end. 〈…〉 Chap. 3.  the collar, and not withstanding all his daring and redaringe, all his brave boasting and solemn protestation, find out some one cavilling shift or other, never to appear in public conference, lest he shamed himself and the congregation for ever. There likewise shall the good Reader find, that I have answered him so home, & so roundly joined issue with him touching his challenges, in a chapter entreating of that special point, that I suppose he can not desire more, and make no doubt but that Bell never desired so much.  
Finally in my Scholastical defiance to his Fresh alarm in the end of the doleful Knell, I have said so abundantly in answer to the particulars thereof (setting down the same wholly and entirely) that it is no question with me, but that Bell may say more truly thereof, than he doth when he acknowledgeth his sins before the receiving of their Communion, viz that the burden thereof is to him intolerable. And here to the perpetual disgrace of challenging Sr. Thomas, and perfect satisfaction of the Reader, that he may fully understand, how we are more willing to take up his gauntlet, than ever he was in the height of his greatest vanity to throw it to us, I will adjoin what for the last parting I say to his Alarm, my words be these. To conclude this point, whereof I have said before so sufficiently both in the Epistle dedicatory, and in answer to his third chapter, that I make no doubt the Reader remaineth with full satisfaction: here not to follow the wandering Minister in his vain of vaunting, to leave words, and to come unto deeds.  
Non cauponantes bellum sed belligerantes.  
I the meanest of millions, do accept of his challenge here made, and do undertake to defend, not only those two points of josephus doctrine and Pope Martin's dispensation, which he hath singled out as matters important: but also all the rest; so it may be, (which is but reason) with that equity and favour, which was granted to the Protestants in France: and upon the same conditions do provoke him with a counter-challenge, to the defence of his books, according to his insolent and manifold daring offers: and for trial of both these twain, in manner a foresaid, do conjure him, for the credit of the congregation, and adjure him by the majesty of the Ministry, and exorcize him by all those Larums and challenges, by all those brave and braggings which be found in his books, by all that reputation which he hath gotten with his silly dependents, and that mighty expectation, which he hath moved in the minds of many, that he would procure this safeconducte, of which he much speaketh, but we can not yet get any sight: and the more to urge and press him: the more to prick and spur him, to the effecting of so notable and memorable a piece of service: the more to stir, provoke, and inflame his ministerial mounting spirit, impatient of disgrace, and to fire the zeal of his fury forward, I send him this scholastical denance, with as many challenges, as will stand between Charing Cross and Chester, and as many dares, as will reach from Derby to Darington.  
These, these doleful news, have cast him into such dumps, that he hath small list to hear either of disputation, or any indifferent Conference and therefore though he writeth still, and useth that as a poor prop to uphold his falling reputation, lest the infamy of cowardice and dastardly fear, with no small desgrace to their cause, should suddenly seize upon him yet the tickling string and mounting Minekin of bravinge and challenging is not once touched, that kind of desc●nie is now out of date. He is no true friend of his that will so much as mention any such matter. If this be not the cause what is the reason that he which was so furious before like a little lion, is now become so gentle like a tame cosset? Be it that his haughty and insolent manner of craking, upon better adi●ise of friends disliked him, yet should he in temperate and modest sort, still have prosecuted his former quarrel, for the credit of their gospel, and reputation of his learning, which in the opinion of his dependents is very great, and in his own incomparable, and accepted of the offer of S. R. and utterly confounded him in disputation: for he nothing doubteth or at least in former times hath not, if his words did truly deliver his meaning, but that such an act would tend to the glory of God, to the service of his Sovereign; the honour of his country, the edification of his auditors, and the comfort of his own soul, as in his Motives he speaketh: or if disputation 
Pag. 36.  liketh him not, why hath he not procured a Safeconduct for such an indifferent Conference, for the due trial, and examination of the authorities alleged in his books, as passed in France betwixt the reverend Bishop of Eureux and now Cardinal, and the Lord of Plessi Marlie: for if that sincerity be used which he often protesteth, what readier way could he have wished, either for the procuring to himself eternal renown, and unspeakable credit to his cause, or everlasting shame to me, and thereby some disgrace to Catholic religion. Seeing then he is now so mute, that before was so tonguy: now so dead, that before was so lively: can any other true cause thereof be assigned, then that his own conscience, not ignorant of his bad quarrel, and privy to so many corrupt citations as be found in his books, maketh him willing, after so great expectation moved in men's minds, to shift his hands from any such business, & slily to steal away, as though England's joy were again in actinge. Or if the humour of self love doth so dazele his eyes, that he can not yet see, into what dangerous straigtes by his many & manifest untruths, he hath brought the reputation of the congregation: and so would for his own part still venture forward: What can be thought otherwise, of any that penetrate into the matter as they ought, but that superior authority hath commanded the clapper to silence, for his foolish and dangerous jangling. But he that hath hitherto behaved himself in such insolent and dominiringe manner, odious to God and the world must not thus pass away: wherefore I give him once again to understand, that we expect the Safeconduct, which he hath so often spoken of: this we require, urge, and exact at his hands: wherein if he fail, well may his followers say: Farewell fidelity, the glory of the Gospel is eclipsed, shame hath shaken hands with the congregation, and no remedy but it must be proclaimed by us in town and country, that Bell, even the Minister Bell, that daring Doctor, that craking challenger, that courageous champion, that Alarm ringer is desperately fled the field, not daring to endure the encounter of his aversaries, and hath left all the fraternity egregiously cousined, abused and gulled: or else: which turneth as much to his perpetual infamy, and disgrace: that his mouth is musseled by authority, for having spoken more, then be can with his own honesty, or reputation to the common cause, defend and maintain, Wherhfore what remaineth, but that having rung his doleful knell, and left him speacheles, and ready to give up his last gasp: and having also provided here a winding sheet, for the shrew dinge of his carcase, but that I should with what convenient speed I can, make ready his Black Burial, that he may according to his deserts be interred, to the perpetual ignominy of his name, and everlasting confusion of the congregation.  
Before I end, I can not (gentle Reader) but say something, concerning a book that came lately to my hands, of one Thomas Rogers: which as it is a commentary upon nine and thirty articles, containing the faith and religion professed in England, and concordably agreed upon (as he saith) by the reverend Bishops and clergy, at two several Convocations: so is it graced with this Emblem. Perused, and by the lawful authority of the Church of England allowed to be public. In this book, proceeding from so grave a man, as he insinuateth himself to be: from the chaplain, to the principal of their clergy: entreating of so weighty, and important a subject, as the Synodical decrees of their church: and commended to the world, in such singular and special manner, what can of reason be expected, but that the truth should sincerely be set forth, without all suspicion of cunning conveyance: all fear of sinister relation, or any scruple, or doubt of hateful corruption: seeing the stain of such crimes, should not only touch Mr. Rogers, but redound also as it were, to the infamy of the whole body of their clergy, and religion. For any, yea of mean insight, may soon make this discourse: that if the religion of England were sound, and ours false and abominable, no indirect proceeding needed or would be practised, either to the advancinge of their own, or depressing of ours: and contrariwise, if corrupt courses, be made the buckler to defend themselves, and the weapon to offend us: what can be thought, but that there is a flaw in that faith, which is by that means maintained: and impregnable verity in our religion, which is by such godless shifts assaulted: now whether this be so or no, and in that gross manner, as not only those which be of capacity and learning, but even of the meanest and ignorant sort, shall (especially in some of them) think us to be notoriously abused & injuried, remaineth to be hadled. Wherhfore to run over briefly, some few untruths, and a little to touch the corrupt dealing of Mr. Rogers as my short time shall give leave, & the strait confines of a Preface will permit.  
Pag. 14. He setteth upon us in the manner. One Mother 
A. short list of Mr. Roger's untruths.  jane (quoth he) is the Saviour of women: a most execrable assertion, of Postellus the jesuit. Nay rather it is a most execrable untruth of Mr. Roger's the Preacher. Can a man of his profession, charge us with so strange, paradoxical, and blasphemous an assertion, and so injurious to the sacred blood of the Redeemer of the whole world, and that both of men and women, without recoiling of Conscience: we deny what he saith, how doth he prove what so boldly he affirmeth. Postellus the jesuit (quoth he) teacheth this execrable dnctrine: which he proveth out of the jesuits catechism. That Postellus was one of that order, is more than I do know, or more than I list yet to believe, until I see better proofs: but if he were, he was no other, than such a religious man as Luther was, that ran out of his cloister to lay the foundation of the Gospel. I find him in the Indice of the Council of Trent, commonly annexed thereunto, enrolled for an heretic and so discharged from us: albeit I can hardly believe, that ever he could be so mad, as to broach any such ridiculous, senseless, and blasphemous doctrine. To justify this of Postellus, Mr. Rogers voucheth the jesuits Catechism, that is a most scandalous and slanderous libel, made by one Pasquiere a French heretic, in disgrace of that renowned order, as he knoweth full well, when he citeth out of the same Catechism two infamous verses, tending deeply to the 
Pag. 187.  touch of their lives, which none so simple to think, that they would publish of themselves. They are so far from being the authors of that filthy and heretical book, that one Richeome a learned man of that Society, hath set forth a confutation thereof. Should a Catholic compose a like treatise, bearing title. The Church of England's Catechism, fraught with abominable and most odious opinions, and such in truth as they utterly detest: and should I produce out of it most loathsome stuff, against them in disgracè of their religion, would he not condemn both the author, for a monster of the world, and me for an extreme malicious slanderer, to press them with any such damnable testimony? I leave the application to himself.  
Pag. 17. He condemneth it in us as an error and dream, that Christ descended down into hell, to deliver the Souls of our forefathers: and that most injuriously, for (to omit what may be brought out of sacred scripture) we can not be condemned herein but the ancient fathers, must bear us company, and that by the testimony of our adversaries. The fable (quoth Casuin) of a place under the 
2. Instit. cap. 16. §. 9  ground, called Limbus, albeit it hath great authors, yet it is nothing else then a fable. Sutcliffe confesseth, that S. Hierom and other fathers believed, that 
Lib. 1. de Purgato. cap. 4.  there was a simbus patrum before the coming of Christ. But he addeth, that they affirmed it rather scholasticaliy then dogmatically, which yet he neither doth nor can prove: we take what he granteth of their believing, the other we deny. Willet also can not gainsay the same. We confess 
In his synopsis of the edition 1600. pag. 353.  (quoth he) that the fathers for the most part of them, to have been in this error. To conclude this doctrine is taught by the church of England, when as in the Geneva Psalms, allowed and authorized by received custom amongst them: this article of the Crede: He descended into hell. is turned thus into meeter.  

His soul did after this descend,  
into the lower parts.  
To them that long in darkness were,  
the true light of their hearts.   
By what warrant therefore Mr. Rogers expoundeth them here to the contrary I know not, himself can best tell.  
Pag. 23. many Papists (quoth he) and namely the Franciscans, blush not to say that S. Francis is the Holy Ghost. Mr. Rogers blusheth not notoriously to injury us with the imputation of so blasphemous an assertion. He quoteth in the margin for proof, the Koran of the Franciscans, a most shameless and scurrilous book, set out by modern heretics against that worthy and religious order. It seemeth he bestoweth much of his time in such spiritual books as these, and willingly entertaineth such witness against us, as the Scribes and Phariseis did against Christ: until he dischargeth himself better, this injurious and blasphemous untruth must lie upon himself.  
Pag. 29. Speaking of our behaviour to the scriptures, he 
Antidote. evang in Luc. 16. p. 528.  saith. To the same purpose but more blasphemously Stapleton saith, as the jews were to believe Christ so are we simply and in every thing to believe the Church of Rome, whether it teacheth truth or errors. He fathereth a gross untruth upon Stapleton; his words be these. Certum est, etc. It is certain that the jews ought to have obeyed Christ, so far forth, as he gave testimony to the truth, but whether he did that or no, belonged not to the jews to make any doubt of, but simply to believe. Wherefore as the jews ought to have believed Christ, so ought we simply to believe the Church: not verily whether 
Note these words against Mr. Rogers.  it teacheth true things or not; but whether that be certain to us or not. We ought not to doubt but as the father sending Christ; & commanding him to be heard: so Christ sending his church and commanding that to be heard, hath by his wisdom disposed, that without all danger of error, as well the Church should be heard of us, as Christ of the jews. True therefore it is not, that Stapleton saith we are simply and in every thing to believe the Church, whether it teacheth truth or errors, for he affirmeth the contrary, and his words contain not any impious or absurd doctrine, though Mr. Rogers, by overlashing, and not reciting his words truly, would make him to speak both impiously and falsely.  
Pag. 49. He taxeth us, for teaching free will: and these words he citeth as out of the Council of Trent. Man 
Ses. 6. cap. 1.  hath free will, to perform even spiritual and heavenly things. What error can this be; when strait after Mr. Rogers setteth down this proposition. Man may perform and do good works, when he is prevented by the grace of Christ, and renewed by the Holy Ghost. But he will say, that the Council of Trent teacheth, that good works may be done without the grace of Christ, and therefore he citeth this doctrine of ours as erroneous, and contrary to a former proposition of his, which is this. Man can not do any good work that good is and godly, being not yet regenerate. But herein he doth slander the Council of Trent. In the very place by him quoted it rather hath the contrary: and in the first Canon of that Session most plainly; which is this. Yfany shall say, that a man is justified before 
Ses. 6. can. 1.  God by his works, which are done either by the force of human nature, or the doctrine of the law, without divine grace by jesus Christ, be he accursed. judge now (gentle Reader) whether Mr. Rogers, hath dealt truly with us, and the Council of Trent or no, when he would persuade the world, that we believe, that man hath free will, to perform even spiritual & heavenly things, without the grace of God.  
In the same page, and very next line, he entreateth the Rhemists in like manner, where he citeth these words of theirs. Men believe not but of there own free will. True it is they say so, but they exclude not in those words Gods grace, as most injuriously he chargeth them, alleging their words for that purpose, for else where they acknowledge that God's grace and free will must both concur. 
2. Cor. 3. in ver. 5. pag. 447.  Beside, the better to infame them, he hath corrupted the sentence, chopping of the last words, which be these. August. lib. 1. ad Simplicianum q. 2. so that the charge of heresy or error toucheth S. Augustin, from whom those words be drawn Mr. Rogers without all scruple, cutteth those away, to make his slander the more colourable against the Rhemists, not having any list to quarrel with S. Augustin.  
Pag. 65. S. Francis (quoth he) attained unto the perfection of holiness and could not sin at all. A most injurious slander. In the margin, he may seem to quote something to the ignorant,  justification of his bold assertion, but there is nothing save a latin sentece, which in English is this. Wilt thou come to the top or perfection, attend to the life and manners of Blessed Francis: but these words prove not, that he could not sin, and who is the author of them, none is here named at all. Is not this great sincerity of Mr. Rogers, to vent out such an egregious untruth and then to cousin his ignorant Reader, with a quotation of his own, which yet proveth not that, for which it is alleged.  
Pag. 97. Speaking of the Popes, he enroleth, divers of them for heretics. Some (quoth he) have been heretics. For Siricius, Calixtus, Leo 9 & Paschalis, condemned the marriage of Priests. A notorious untruth, proceeding from a soul infected with heresy. Let Mr. Roger's name is he can, any old approved father or later writer, not tainted with his levin, that ever condemned S. Siricius for an heretic. For if it be heresy to condemn the marriage of Priests, than was the ancient and holy Council of Carthage heretics: nay then were their forefathers, yea and the Apostles themselves heretics, if 
Concil. Carth. 2. can. 2.  we may believe them. It doth please us all (saith that Council) that Bishops, Priests, and deacons, and such as handle the Sacraments, being keepers of chastity, should abstain themselves from wives, that what the Apostles taught, and antiquity itself hath kept, we also should observe. And if it please him to read Bells 12. & 13. untruths in this treatise, he shall find other authentical authorities for the single life of the clergy, yea even by the testimony of his own dear brethren the Lutherans of Magdeburge: which being so, I make no doubt but that the discreet Reader, will rather condemn this modern Minister, of a notable untruth, than so many worthy fathers of the primitive Church for heretics.  
Pag. 102. He slandereth us most palpably, as though we taught this doctrine, viz that The Church hath power to change the Sacraments ordained even by Christ himself. we utterly deny it, what evidence doth he bring to convince us He quoteth in the margin Concil. Trid. ses. 5. cap. 2. where no such thing is to be found. He must give us leave to suspect, that he used art in setting down the quotation, when the thing is most false which he objecteth against us. The place he meaneth is Ses. 21. cap. 2. where the Council delivereth this doctrine. Praeterea declarat etc. Furthermore the Council declareth, that this power hath always been in the Church, that it might in the dispensation of the Sacraments, their substance remaining sound and untouched, appoint or change those things, which it should judge to be more expedient for the profit of those that receive them, or that veneration which is due to the Sacraments, according to the variety of things, times, and places. The Council in express terms affirmeth, that the substance of the Sacraments can not be altered, and consequently that the Sacraments ordained by Christ can not be changed, which yet Mr. Rogers directly contrary to their own words, fathereth upon them.  
Pag. 112. Some writ (quoth he) as Busgradus, that if the Pope believe that there is no life to come, (as some Popes have done) we must believe it as an article of our faith. Who this Busgradus is I know not, and as little where the place is to be found: neither am I like by Mr. Rogers: for he neither telleth the one, nor quoteth the other. It is not unlike, but that he is one of his Suersbies', some odd compannion or other, which he hath in store for such holy purposes. The untruth is so abominable, that it smelleth before God and man. Himself must father it, until he can name some known Catholic for author thereof which he will never do before the wordls end.  
Pag. 115. If S. Hierom (quoth he) had been away at Chalcedon, that Council had erred. Then surely did it err, seeing certain it is, that he could not be there, having ended his days before, under Honorius the Emperor. The authority of jewel 
Prosper in Chronico. anno Christi 422.  (who died most miserably in our memory whom he quoteth) is to light for so weighty a matter. No marvel if Mr. Rogers run into many untruths, if he followeth such a lying master, as was of rare note for that quality.  
Pag. 116. By Counsels (quoth he) the Traditions and books of foolish men, have been made of 
Ses. 4, decret.  equal authority with the word of God: as by the Council of Trent. He meaneth the Histories of Toby, judith, and the Maccabees &c. as I suppose, and not all there admitted for Canonical, lest he sweep away the whole Bible. And were not I beseech him, these books authorised also for Canonical, by the third Council of Carthage twelve hundred years ago, in which glorious S. Augustin 
Can. 47.  was present: Will he also lightly reject this Council as Popish, and condemn them also for authorizing the books of foolish men: it were plain dealing I confess, but far better manners rather so to censure himself for contradicting such a learned, ancient, and venerable Synod. Again, shall the Apocalypse, or Revelation of S. john, be the book of a foolish man, because it was made Canonical by the Council of Trent, and the third of Carthage. For as the books of Toby and the Maccabees were before doubted of by divers, and not ratified by the decree of any Council before that of Carthage, so was the Apocalypse of S. john, and therefore their case is all one. Furthermore be it, that Mr. Rogers alloweth them not for Canonical, yet ought he not to term them the books of foolish men: for than may we give that name to all the books of the ancient fathers, yea to their Synod of nine and thirty articles, upon which he maketh his commemary: and that which were most pity of all, both this, and other books of his own may claim interest to the same title. Lastly doth not the congregation of England publicly read both soble and judith in their Church service, in the same rank and order with the other scriptures: and yet with Mr. Rogers, they be the books of foolish men: verily in this point, he seemeth to be one of the disciplinarian fraternity.  
Pap. 121. He citeth Eckius for holding that not only venial sins but mortal also, are purged after this life. He slandereth that learned man, he teacheth no such thing, for than it would follow, that all men should finally be saved: It may be that he saith, the temporull pain due to mortal sin, after the eternal is forgiven, is purged after this life: of mortal sin itself he speaketh not, and I do without all fear accuse him of an untruth, though for lack of the book, I can not peruse the place he allegeth, so learned was the man known, and so sound in religion.  
In the same page he abuseth Durandus affirming him to think that the souls in Purgatory have rest some times upon Sundays and Holy days. In the place by him quoted de officio mortuorum lib. 7. no such thing is found.  
Pag. 124. He chargeth us most untruly to hold that repentance is not of necessity unto the salvation of man: For without the same a Popish pardon (quoth he) may serve. A great untruth for a pardon profiteth not any man, but such as is in the state of God's grace, which presupposeth penance or repentance. No Catholic author he noteth that teacheth any such doctrine: & no marvel, for none can be named. Thus is a gener all untruth received amongst them, and therefore it should seem that they have obtained some pardon for that purpose, to imitate their phrase of speaking.  
Pag. 158. He chargeth us to abuse the sacrament of Baptisem. So have the Papists (saith he) baptised both Bells and Babel's. Before he noted it in us as an error, that we teach the Sacraments to confer grace ex opere operato. But I hope he is not so gross as to imagine, that we should suppose that either Bells or Babel's be capable of grace. The Sacramet of baptism is only with us, given to reasonable creatures: and though bells (for babels we leave to him for his recreation) and other things be hallowed, with holy water, and other prayers, and have sometime a name given them, by reason whereof they are said by the common people to be baptised or Christened, in an improper and metaphorical sense: yet none whom malice possesseth not, will either say or think, that they be truly and properly baptised, when as the necessary and formal words of Baptism, viz, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, are not used. It would better become Mr. Roger's gravity, to dispute formally like a divine, then to cavil upon the improper speech of the vulgar people, like a wrangling Sophister.  
Pag 159. speaking of the Eucharist, he chargeth us most falsely to use it magically as a salve against bodily sickness and adversity: citing no author for proof of so bold and false an assertion.  
Pag. 157. entreating of the Sacrament of Exteme unction he cometh upon us with this false charge. The minister thereof usually is a Priest, but may be any other Christian: and a little after he affirmeth us to hold, that a woman may be the minister of that sacrament. A most gross and palpable untruth, jorged as it seemeth by himself, when as he nameth not any other author. They are accursed by us that shall say, that the proper minister of Extreme 
Concil. Trid. se●. 14. can. 4. de extrema unctione.  unction is not only a Priest, which showeth us to be free from his false imputation.  
Pag. 168. He laboureth to insame us after this manner. Baptism (quoth he) serveth for the putting away of Original sin only: and that we teach this doctrine he proveth out of S. Thomas of Aquine, whom he quoteth in the margin, but in such sort, that it seemeth he meant not that we should ever find it: he referreth us to his book, De Sac. altar: which hath two and thirty long chapters, not specifying any one in particular: ensorcinge his Reader by this means either to believe him, or to great labour before he can reprove him: but this cunning must not serve his turn. I challenge him confidently of an untruth: never shall he be able to justify either out of that book, or any other what he objecteth against that myrrhour of learning glorious S. Thomas of Aquine as who teacheth far otherwise, as I will by more particular reference now declare. Wherhfore in the 
3 part. q 69. Artic. 1.  third part of his Sum he propoundeth this question. Whether by Baptism all sins be taken away: to which he answereth affirmatively. And in the articles following, he confirmeth the same verity especially in the seventh: Where he moveth the question, whether the opening of the gare of the kingdom of heaven be an effect of Baptism, which he resolveth in this manner. I answer and say, that to open the gate of the kingdom of heaven, is to remove the impediment, by which one is hindered to enter into the kingdom of heaven: and this impediment is sin, and the punishment due to sin: but before it was proved that by Baptism all sin, and all punishment due to sin, is taken away, whereof it followeth, that the opening of the gate of the kingdom of heaven, is the effect of Baptism. Let Mr. Rogers now go and tell such as will believe him, that S. thomas taught Baptism to take away Original sin only.  
Pag. 169. and 170. He accuseth us as though we taught Baptism given to infants by Protestant ministers, not to be lawful. An untruth, as he may learn out of the Council 
Ses. 7. Can. 4. de Bapt.  of Trent, where this Canon is delivered. If any shall say that Baptism which is given of Heretics in the name of the father, and the some, & the Holy Ghost, with intention to do that which the Church doth, not to be true Baptism, be he accursed. But saith he, in France and Flanders the contrary hath been practised: for prosse whereof, he sendeth us to an other place of his book, where no such thing is found, and never shall he show us to teach, that any baptized by Protestants, with due matter, form, and intention, aught to be baptized again.  
Pag, 183. Christ hath satisfied (quoth he) and was offered only for Original sin: an error of Thomas Aquinas. Nay rather, it is a most shameless untruth of Thomas Rogers: no place doth he quote, and no marqaile, when he knoweth not where to find it, Is this the fidelity, this the sincerity & conscience of the pretended preacher of the word? If the good Reader vouchsafe to read S. Thomas he shall find in him the clean contrary doctrine, to 
3. part. q. 49. art. 5.  wit, that we are by the passion of Christ, delivered both from Original and all actual sin whatsoever.  
Pag. 198. He runneth upon the jesuits thus. The jesuits (quoth he) can not brook Episcopal pre-eminence: and in their high court of reformation, have made a law for the utter abrogation of all Episcopal jurisdiction. A most notorious slander, as the whole world knoweth? They live under Bishops, without any mislike of their dignity, nay with condemning them of heresy, that teach otherwise, as is apparante in Cardinal 
Lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 14. Comment. in 2. 2. disput. 10. quast. ●1.  Bellarmin and Gregorius de Valentia. The book which he quoteth I have not seen, yet I make no doubt but the author is one of trust, some false brother or other. The thing itself is so false, as I marvel he blusheth not to put it in print. That they have made a law to abrogate Episcopal jurisdiction, is most ridiculove: as though forsooth it were in their power to effect any such thing, and as though they labour not both in word and writing, for the upholding of that dignity against disciplinarian Caluinists. The author he allegeth for proof is some Quodlibet arian minister, though poor Wat son beareth the name. So palpable an untruth known to those that know any thing, is sufficient, both to cassier the credit of those Quodlibets, and other like libellatical pamplets, published under his name, and also deeply to touch the reputation of Mr. Rogers. True it is, that those religious and learned men to stop all suggestions of ambition, which hath been the bane of many, have a severe constitution amongst themselves, ratified by vow, that none shall not only not procure any Ecclesiastical Prelacy, but also resist what he may, (reserving due obedience to whom he is subject) not to be advanced to any such dignity: yet may they when it shall seem so good to the Pastor of God's Church, be promoted to prelacy: as that worthy man Bellarmine was not only created Cardinal, but also made Archbishop of Capua. Mr. Rogers as I suppose, is not acquainted with any such scrupulous niceness, being more like of the twain to have made a vow, that he will not refuse any Episcopal promotion if he can tell how to come by it.  
Pag. 220. To bring our religion into extreme hatred, with all that be of contrary faith, he chargeth us with this doctrine, viz, That faith is not to be kept with heretics. An odious slander and not only of Mr. Rogers, but commonly received amongst all Protestants. How doth he prove it? forsooth out of the Council of Constance which he quoteth in the margin, but noteth not any particular place: which argueth false dealing, the Council being passing long. God's Church assembled in that sacred Synod, is notoriously abused, and we daily injuried by the licentious pens of protestats. No such thing is in that Council defined. And I desire no more, then that the good Reader will not give Mr. Rogers or others credit, before they truly bring forth in particular words, what they so confidently avouch in general terms.  
Thus have I briefly by a sufficient jury of untruths, convicted Mr. Rogers, of false dealing, and most injurious and godless proceeding, against Catholic religion. To prosecute all, were a work of more labour: for never was book as I think, coming forth from such a one, of such a subject, with that authority, and that carried outwardly so brave and glorious a show, and inwardly was so ugly, foul, and deformed, to the infamy of the author, discredit of the book, disgrace of their religion, and high commendation of our faith, which standeth upon so sure grounds, that it can not be impugned but by those means, by which the author of it Christ himself, was condemned to the shameful and opprobrious death of the cross.  
Being thus dispatched of Mr. Rogers: it remaineth to speak a word or two of another book, which was not long since sent me and is entitled. A brief view of the weak grounds of Popery, compiled together by one Mr. Udall, a lay gentleman out of divers English Controvertists, as himself seemeth to insinuate, and in all probability can not otherwise be thought, and so no marvel, if the waters be not sound, when they were drawn from corrupt fountains, & who can ever look for a well shapen garment, made after a crooked measure. Grapes are not gathered 
Math. 8. v. 16.  of thorns, nor figs of thistles, as our Saviour saith: yet doth it so much please Mr. Udall, that he doth seem to take great heart of grace, for that he was not answered with that expedition he expected. The more hast he maketh, the more he urgeth his own disgrace, if malice hath set him a work: but if it be true zeal of truth, and saving his soul as he pretendeth, I despair not of his conversion: wherefore either for the spiritual profit of himself, or the commodity of other, or common good of both, I will now present him with a short sample of such soul flaws as be in his book, minding afterward with more full hand to prosecute that subject.  
In his Preface to his dear Cousins, (whom with poison lurking under sugared words he laboureth to invenime) he accuseth us of open blasphemy against the sacred scriptures: which I think will rather prove a gross untruth on his part and where is this blasphemy contained? in a book as he telleth us of Cardinal Cusanus, which is entitled De authoritate, etc. Of the authority of the Church & Council, above and against the scriptures. But I beseech him, did he ever see this book, which so confidently he allegeth: if he hath, than should he have done well to have noted where, that the Reader also might have found it, seeing it is not amongst the three Tomes of his works, set out at Basill, 
In the ●eare 1565.  neither mentioned by Trithemius, who hath diligently gathered together, the works of learned writers: nor yet by Possevinus who hath lately entreated of the same matter. If he hath not: what indiscretion is it, in so weighty a point, to rely upon the credit of others. verily, would such as read Protestants books, but vouchsafe sometime to examine the quotations, it were not possible that they could be so pitifully deceived, as they daily be: Cusanus is abused, he vever wrote any such book. This untruth it may be he borrowed from Mr. jewel, who doth not only cite that book, but also (as 
Detection lib. 5. pag. 410.  though he had known it very well) quote very many places out of the same, as he is charged by Doctor harding: which argueth that out of true books he could have proved any thing for himself, that out of one, which was never written, found so many testimonies to serve his turn. I would not wish Mr. Udall, to employ his time so badly, as with the touch of his credit, and peril of his own soul, to retale the untruths of such gross merchants.  
In his fourth page, thus he writeth. Yea Arias Montanus a chief Papist, in his Hebrew bible, writeth in the forefromt and principal leaf of the book, There are added (saith he) in this edition, the books written in Greek, which the Catholic Church following the Canon of the Hebrews, reckoneth amongst the Apocrypha. The true sense of Arias Montanus words is corrupted, either by Mr. Udall, or some other from whom he had them, by foisting in divers of their own. That learned man in the edition of the 
Antuerpiae ex osficina Christoph. Plant. 1584.  Hebrew Bible, with the latin interlineall interpretation, in the title page saith. There are adjoined to this edition, the books written in Greek, which are called Apocrypha. He saith not, they be Apocrypha: but that they are so called by some, that is the jews, who exclude them from their Hebrew Canon which he had there sett● forth. That other addition; viz which the Catholic Church following the Canon of the Hebrues reckoneth amongst the (Apocrypha) upon which the force of his charge dependeth, are not in Arias Montanus: where Mr. Udall had them, himself best knoweth.  
In fift page he writeth thus. The Council of Laodicea, assured by a general Council in Trullo did set down the same Canon of the script urs 
Can. 59  which both the old Church had, and our Church holdeth: and commandeth. Ne aliqui, etc. that none besides be read, and received in to authority. How many things of note, are comprised in these few lines against Mr. Udall. First he seemeth greatly to reverence these two Counsels, which yet is but a copy of his countenance, to delude the ignorant Reader, for I do not think that he will stand either to the one or the other, though content he is, to press us with their authority. For example, the Council of Loadicea, commandeth Chrism to be received after 
Can. 48. Can. 50.  Baptism: and that the fast of lent be observed: neither of which, I am sure, pleaseth Mr. Udall. Likewise the Council of Constantinople holden in Trullo alloweth of images, and their veneration, when it calleth them, imagines venerabiles: venerable images: which I make no doubt nothing pleaseth his taste. The same Council forbiddeth 
Can 82. Can. 6. Can. 58.  Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons', to marry wives after taking of Orders: and commandeth bishops not to dwell with their wives, which they married before they entered into the higher Orders of the Clergy: which severity of theirs must utterly dislike him, as being in his opinion, contrary to the word of God.  
Secondly this Council of Constantinople in Trullo is of no authority, as in which the Pope neither by himself, nor by his Legates, was present, and Pope Sergius, who then lived, 
Lib. de sex aetatibus. in justiniano.  did disannul that erratical Synod, as venerable Bede writetht with what conscience then can Mr. Vdal call that agenerall Council, and urge the authority thereof as authentical: when as not only we, but also the Protestants utterly reject it, albeit in this point we for our parts see no cause to refuse it. Thirdly true it is not, that the Council of Laodicea, setteth down the same Canon of the scriptures, which the Church of England alloweth: for the Apocalypse or Revelation of S. john is omitted. Fourthly, this Council forbiddeth the reading of others, not there expressed: yet the Church of England readeth the histories of judith, and Toby in their public assemblies: which Mr. Udall I suppose, will hardly show, how it agreeth with the decree of that Council. Fiftly he hath corrupted the Council by adding somwhatof his own: for these words: and received into authority be not there found. Would any ever have thought, that so many things, could have been notedagainst him, in so small a sentence. If Mr. Udall hath viewed the Original, hardly can he be excused from malice: if he hath not, let him beshrew their fingers, upon whose credit, he committed them to writing.  
In the same fift page, he maketh us to allow the fourth book of Esdras most untruly, and that contrary to his own knowledge, when as in the second page he confesseth, that we account both the third and fourth of Esdras for Apocrypha.  
Page 51. To eneruat the force of general Counsels thus he writeth. Bellarmine rejecteth wholly seven general 
Lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 6. and not lib. 10. cap. 60. as Mr. Vdal quoteth it.  Counsels. That learned Prelate is iniuriousoy entreated, for who would not think, that Mr. Udall spoke of lawful and true general Counsels, as though such were rejected by Bellarmine, which is nothing so: for he speaketh of certain detestable conventicles, assembled by the Arrians and other like perfidious heretics which they called general. Primum generale &c. The first general Council (saith Bellarmine) in the opinion of the Arrians which is rejected, is the Council of Antioch, etc. Is these be detested by Protestants also for unlawful and wicked, why is Cardinal Bellarmine singled out as though he alone refused them? or the matter so cunningly delivered, as though they were reverenced by Mr. Udall and Protestants for lawful general Counsels? This is not to deal sincerely, and to seek truth with a pure and upright heart, unless he be so careless, as to receive all upon the report of others, which yet can not wholly be excused.  
Thus much shall serve at this time, for by God's assistance, I intent hereafter more to lay open the manifold maladies of his treatise, and to show with what weak engines he laboureth to undermine the impregnable grounds of the Catholic Church. God grant that the happy news of his conversion, may cross these my designments, whereof I see no cause to despair, if truly zeal of religion, and desire of salvation, which so much he would seem to thirst after, hath embouldened him being a lay man, to launch into the depth of these mystical matters. Let him not rely too much unto those, from whom he receiveth the substance of that he writeth, lest together with the loss of his reputation, he incur also the danger of eternal damnation: and if upon this small warning, he findeth himself to have been deceived, wisdom would, he should more carefully look how he trusteth, where he hath been abused: & with greater diligence both to examine his own writers, and also to read our, namely Cardinal Bellarmine, where he shall find the most of his objections answered, as the Catholic author of that letter, which he hath put down in his book truly informeth him. To which, that giveth no satisfaction, alleged by Mr. Udall for answer, to wit, that Beauties' reasons, are by the learned of his side sufficiently handled and replied unto: when as the most of the arguments in his book be answered by Bellarmine and nothing do I find brought by Mr. Vdal to insringe his solutions: which giveth me just cause to suspect that he is with the preconceipted sincerity of his own doctors, carried away into error, and so looketh little into the Originals: which if he did, he could not but find that which he pretendeth to seek for, if he shut not his eyes against the truth, as he professeth he will not. Which that he may do, I shall not forget to commend him to his mercy, who desireth not the death of a sinner, but that all should come to the knowledge of his name. But if it shall shall out, that he will still proceed forward in his former course, yet I would wish him in writing, to abstain from all biting and bitter words, which sometime he breaketh into, that the quarrel of God may not he prosecuted like the quarrels of this world; but with that modesty, which becometh the prosessors of divinity and religion. And for my part sorry I am, that Bell hath so far given the reins to his passion, as with such virulent terms, and insupportable insolency, to cast forth his gauntlet of defiance, and to insult against the whole Church of God, which hath made my style before in the Preface, more stirring and quick, then otherwise I would or thought convenient, lest we might be condemned of cowardice or sear, (to the prejudice of truth) which so often, and so opprobriously he objecteth against us.  
Thus much of these matters: now it remaineth to encounter Bell, and to examine, and make trial, what substantial stuff is contained in his Trial of the new religion.  
B. C.   

BELLS TRIAL EXAMINED CENSURED AND REFUTED.  
The poem.  
Intending to note the principal untruths of Bells Pamphlet, (the principal part and fundamental substance thereof) I have thought good (to take my work orderly before me) first to salute his Epistle, and see what wholesome stuff he presenteth in that to his patrons.  

Bells Epistle Dedicatory.  

THE 1. UNTRUTH.  
THE Minister standeth upon coals, till his fingers be at work, and his pen busied about his heart's delight, and therefore not to lose any time, hefalleth roundly to the matter, presenting his patrons with a trick of his occupation in his very first entrance. His words be these. The visible church (quoth he) as writeth Egesippus, 
Egesip. apud Eusebium host. lib. 3. cap. 32.  remained a virgin free from all heresies and corruptions during the lise of the Apostles, that is to say, about one hundred years after Christ, to which time S. john the Evangelist was living. But after the death of the Apostles saith he, errors by little and little crept into the church, as into a void and desert house. This assertion is doleful enough and yet very profitable against all Popish Recusants of our time, as who are not ashamed impudently to avouch, that after so many hundred years from Christ's ascension, there hath been no error at all, in their Romish Babylon. This collection will prove doleful enough to himself, and not very profitable to the congregation, by that time we have sifted his words, and examined the authority alleged, for it is powdreed with lies, and juggling tricks, thick and three-sould. For first if he meaneth any such error, as may stand with the integrity of the Catholic faith, most false it is, that we deny any such error may creep into the Church: for we willingly confess that Papias, S. Ireneus, and some others held the error of the Chiliasts (as himself mentioneth strait after) that S. Cyprian, and divers others with him, were carried a way in to the error of rebaptisation: but yet notwithstanding these their errors, they were true members of the Catholic church, seeing that in questions newly springing up, error may be incurred but not always heresy, which importeth not only an error in the understanding, but also malice and obstinacy in the will, by contemning the Church her decree and determination. But if by error, he meaneth heresy, as no question he doth, both because he saith, that during the lives of the Apostles the Church was free from all heresies and corruptios, but after their death, error by little and little crept in, and also for that he termeth our Church Romish Babylon or as he speaketh in his Survey (where he handleth the very same matter) whorish Babylon; by which 
Page 342.  words it is plain, that he meaneth heretical errors, for such only maketh our Church Babylon, and to forsake her true spouse Christ, and to commit spiritual fornication by cleaving to new, damnable, and heretical opinions: and lastly for that otherwise he proveth nothing against us, the scope of his book being to show, that our religion is not old, but new, as being far different from the pure faith of the Apostles.  
This then being his meaning, most false it is I say that any such errors crept into the Church (I mean with the corruption of the Churches sincere doctrine, though I willingly grant that divers of the Church, have by heresy fallen from true doctrine, as namely the minister himself) either in the Apostles time, or shall do until the worlds end, and that by the singular providence of Christ, who promised that hell gates should not prevail 
Math. 16.  against his Church, and many like places to that purpose might be alleged. But what say we to the authority of Egesippus who lived strait after the Apostles, cited by Bell for justification of that he affirmed? Nothing else, but that he belieth both Egesippus and also Eusebius, whom he quoteth in the third book of his history cap. 32. as the relator of those words of Egesippus. Read the place he that please, no such thing shall there be found, nor the name of Egesippus so much as once mentioned. The minister was not content to 
Bells epistle dedicatory borrowed from his survey pag. 341. 342.  present his Patrons, with a cast paragraph of his Survey, making it the begining of his Epistle, for almost two pages together, but he must also abuse both them and others with a notorious untruth of his own, fatheringe that upon Eusebius which is not there to be found.  
Neither can this dealing of his, proceed from other root then mere malice: for immediately after this sentence cited out of Eusebius in the 32. chapter of his third book, he produceth out of the 33. chapter of the same book how Papias and Ireneus were infected with the error of the Chiliasts, and that very truly, which showeth that he perused the place. And in his Survey the foresaid 
Pag 341. 342.  places be found in like manner alleged the one truly and the other most falsely. Can this proceeding of his stew from any other sink then the filthy puddle of his own corrupt conscience. Beside this, who knoweth not acquainted any thing in antiquity, that Simon Magus set his heresy abroach in the Apostles time, and before the death of S. Peter, (as Eusebius recounteth,) whose 
Lib. 2. hist. cap. 12.  death was long before the death of S. john the Evangelist, no less than fifty years by Bells own computation: for S. Peter was crucified as he saith 
Survey pag. 172.  at Rome under Nero, the fourtith and fourth year after Christ: Nay the same Eusebius noteth though briefly, how Simon Magus was overcome by S. Peter. Cerinthus also the heretic was in the 
Lib. 2. hist. cap. 1.  Apostles time, for Ireneus maketh mention how S. john the Evangelist, coming to wash himself 
Lib. 3. cap. 3.  in the bath, finding there Cerinthus suddenly departed, saying, that he feared least the bath would fall, for as much as the enemy of truth was then in it. But what do I dispute further in a matter so evident, for certain it is out of sacred scripture that heresies were taught long before the death of S. john. S. Paul (who was beheaded 
Survey pag. 172.  at Rome the same day and year with S. Peter as Bell confesseth) writing that Hymenaeus and Philetus erred from the truth, saying the resurrection is done 
2. Tim. 2. v. 18.  already, and had subverted the faith of some: which convinceth playenly that their doctrine was heretical, otherwise it could not have subverted faith. Doth not S. john also himself speak of the damnable Nicolaites. This being so, could Egesippus or Eusebius men of great learning, and conversant 
Apoc. 2.  in the scriptures, be ignorant of this, or knowing it, can it enter into any man's imagination, that they would write as Bell allegeth them, directly contrary to the truth, and opposite to their own knowledge: will not any sooner believe, that the minister hath grossly slandered them, and coined this f●ction in the forge of his own brains, employed about nothing more, than the hammering of lies, cavils, and corruptions against the Catholic faith.  
The minister proceeding forward, laboureth to show how errors crept in after the death of S. john, and telleth out of Eusebius, that Papias and Ireneus were Chiliastes, which I willingly grant: but withal deny, that they were therefore heretics, as before hath been said, and so they help his cause nothing at all, for he speaketh of such errors as be joined with heresy, from which they were free. Melchior Canus also (quoth he) opposeth himself against all the Thomists and Scotists, both the old and latter Papists: and this he bringeth to prove that heretical errors have crept into the Church. He slandreth that great learned man and professor of divinity, when he would make him of his own opinion: what he thought of the Church's infallibility in not erring, he delivereth in these conclusions. The first. The faith 
Lib. 4. de locu cap. 4.  os the Church can not fail. The second conclusion. The Church can not ere in believing. The third conclusion. Not only the old Church could not ere in faith, but neither the church which now is, and which shall be to the end of the world, either can or shall ere in faith. And yet the minister produceth him as I said, to prove that heresies crept into the church, after the time of the Apostles: how truly let the reader judge. The question then whereof Canus speaketh, concerneth not any point of faith; as in express terms he there affirmeth, but a matter debatable in schools. True it is that Bell maketh him to say that he doth oppose himself against all the Thomists and Scotists, both the old and latter Papists: but the word (Papists) is foisted in by himself, by which he would have the reader to think that he spoke of ancient fathers, when as he talketh only of old and new Schoolmen, as he might learn out of the very title of that chapter, which is Of the authority of the School Doctors. The like may be said of Caietanus, Navarrus, and Roffensis, alleged for the same purpose by Bell: all which lived in our age, and were well known not to have swerved from any thing defined by the Catholic church, as I could show and in particular demonstrat how he abuseth them, were it not to be tedious, especially about the Epistle, whereof I was once determined to have said nothing at all. Yet must I not omit S. Augustin cited by Bell: What saith he? any thing perhaps to prove that the Church strait after S. john was infected with heretical error. Mary (quoth Bell) he reputed 
Epist. ad Hieron. 19  no man's writings wholly free from errors save only the writers of the holy scriptures. This serveth not the turn: S. Augustin must speak of heretical errors, or else he nothing helpeth Bell: but I trow he will not make all others beside the writers of the scriptures to have run into any such errors: No nor it is not be imagined, that he will grant that the Communion book, or the late Provincial council of England confirmed by royal assent, and least of all his own books to be stained with any such errors, yea or any errors at all: and yet if S. Austin's words be true as Bell allegeth them, how these will be excused I know not, unless he will tell us that S. Austin's spoke of his own & former times, & not of those which should follow after, and so attribute more prerogative to modern writers, then to the venerable & learned fathers of the Primitive church, which were a desperate shift, meet for a man of his shifting conditions. But where I beseech him hath S. Augustin these words? He quoteth, epis. ad Hierom. ep. 19 Where no such thing will be found: only he faith, that no books are comparable for truth with the books of the Prophets and Apostle which is not to censure all writers for erroneous but not to match them with the Prophets' al● Apostles. That holy doctor was far enough fro● thinking that the church could ere. Speaking the church of Rome, and that blessed successi● he saith: Number the Priests yea even from the ve● 
In Psal. count part Donati.  seat of Peter, and in that order of fathers see who succded whom: that is the rock which the proud gates of h● do not overcome. And to general counsels, I● which the church is represented he did attribue so much, that he excuseth Cyprian from here● 
Lib. 1. de Baptismo cap. 18.  because in his time, there was no general Counc● which had defined that question of rebaptisation which showeth evidently that he thought the could not ere. And the custom and authority of the church he reputed so infallible that h● saith: To dispute against that which the universal chur● 
Epist. 118.  holdeth is most insolent madness. Cold comfort dot● S. Augustin afford Bell to prove that heretica errors have crept into the church.  
another sentence alleged out of S. Austi● where that holy Father saith, that he doth not repute 
Cont. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 32.  S. Cyprians writings as canonical, but judge them ● the canonical, and whatsoever doth not agree with t● scriptures, that by his leave he doth refuse might for well have been spared, for who taketh them fo● canonical? nay who knoweth not that some ● his writings be erroneous, though not errorneou● in that sense which Bell pretendeth? and so h● saith much but to little purpose, unless it be t● show with what facility he can cite author's untruly, making them to justify that, to which their words can not be drawn. The premises duly pondered, the prudent reader can not but understand that I have dealt friendly with Bell, noting him only for one untruth, when as divers might very well have run upon the reckoning.  
The rest of his Epistle containeth little else, but a recapitulation of the chief contents of his books, or a bundle of untruths trussed up together, which must be examined in the chapters following: only here, whereas according to his great modesty he saith, that he will set before the eyes of all indifferent readers as clearly as a glass of crystal the original and daily excrements of Popery, I can not but add, that the excrements of the Catholic church be principally such Apostates as Luther, Bucer, Peter Martyr, and many more, that forsook their profession of chastity & a religious life, and the better to lay the foundations of the new gospel, betook themselves to the mortification of new wives, drawn out of Nunneries or other places, where they could best meet with such kind of cattle. Had it not been for these and such like other excrements of ours, the congregation would have had poor increments, and hardly would they have been furnished with Apostles, had not our church voided forth such Apostates. verily he might with far less harm to his soul employ his talon by setting down their original and proceeding, than he doth in discovering the beginning & increasing of Popery, especially 
Bel borne at Rascal in Yorkshire.  if he would remember an old acquaintance of his, one Sir. Thomas of Rascal that excrementical companion, for I know not a man in the parish, that can better perform it, being furnished with a rude rustical style, fit for such a subject: and one that hath perfect intelligence of his heavenly conversation, and righteousness of life. The counts being cast, and the sum set down, what hath he got by his voluntary error, to degorge his malice against us (for his disposition considered, and the quality of the fault, I can not think otherwise) or what hath he gained by his gross girding, and filthy fleering at the excrements of Popery.    

Bells I. chapter Of this name and word (Pope.)  

THE II. UNTRUTH.  
DIsputing of this name (Pope) and showing out of S. Cyprian and others, that it was given in old time to other Bishops, and not only to the Bishop of Rome, he addeth these words. But aster that the Emperor justinianus, had in his legal constitutions, named the Bishop of Rome (Pope), the arrogant bishops of Rome, began to challenge the name, as if it were proper to them alone. An untruth: why did he not name those arrogant Bishops of Rome, that challenged the property of this title, or some author of credit that reporteth it? And what reason had the Bishops of Rome to lay hold upon the Emperor's words, rather than the words of the general Council of Chalcedon (which was many years before) in which he was called by that name, as shall strait be handled. This therefore must remain for one untruth, until he can better discharge himself. One thing I must here add, which will little please the minister, and that is, albeit the name (Pope) was attributed also to other Bishops, yet was it in such special manner given to him, that it did sufficiently declare his supreme authority over all other, which appeareth first, because when any was called Pope without further addition, it was understood only of the Bishops of Rome, as is evident out of the Council of Chalcedon where it 
Act. 16.  is said: The most blessed and Apostolic man the Pope doth command us this thing. Secondly because the Bishop of Rome was called Pope of the whole church, as we read in the same Council, where Leo is called Pope of the universal church: and Liberatus affirmeth, 
Act. 16. In Breviario cap. 22.  that there is no Pope over the church of the whole world, but the Bishop of Rome. Thirdly because he is called the Pope or father of general Counsels, and of the whole world, but he calleth not other Bishop's Popes or fathers, but his brethren or sons, as is apparent out of an epistle of Pope Damasus to the Eastern Bishops, recited by Theodoretus: and in the Epistle of the Council of 
Lib. 5. c. 10.  Chalcedon to Pope Leo. To this may be added, that seeing (Pope) signifieth (father) as Bell according to the truth confesseth, it followeth that the Bishop of Rome was in old time reputed superior to all, in that he was called the Father of fathers: for Stevene Bishop of Carthage, writing to Pope Damasus in the name of three councils, celebrated in Africa giveth him this title. To Pope Damasus our 
Epis. ad. Damrsam.  most blessed Lord, exalted with Apostolical dignity, the holy father of fathers. And this may be the reason; that albeit sometime in the Primitive Church, the name was also given to other bishops, yet seeing in foresaid manner it agreed peculiarly to the Bishop of Rome, as declaring his sovereign authority over others, the former custom ceased, and so it remained alone to him.   

THE III. UNTRUTH.  
WIth the former he hath coupled an other, saying thus. And so in process of time the bishops of Rome were solely and only called Popes, and of late years Our holy father, and, His holiness, is his usual name. A gross untruth, for the name of (his holiness) is not of late years, being long since given to the Pope by justinian the Emperor, and Theodoretus writing to 
In epis. ad Ioa●. 2.  Pope Leo useth the same phrase. Obsecro vestram sanctitatem I beseech your Holiness saith that learned and venerable 
Epist. ad Leonem Papam.  father: and the Council of Chalcedon in their letters to the same Pope Leo, invaighing against Dioscorus the heretic, that presumed to excommunicate the Pope saith thus, Etpost haec omnia. 
Epist. ad Lenem ●apam.  And after all these things he did also extend his madness against him, to whom the custody of the vineyard was committed by our Saviour, that is against thy Apostolic holiness. And if S. Cyprian, and S. Augustin, were called most blessed Popes, as Bell here confesseth, can any marvel that the title of holiness should be given to their superior, and yet doth he never make scruple to say that it is a title only of late years, making it to have sprung up long after that the title of Pope. was appropriated (as he would have it) to the Bishop of Rome, which appropriation as he saith was about the year of Christ 528. and so the name of his holiness much later: and yet is that title more ancient than the said year of Christ 528. as is evident out of Theodoretus, and the Council of Chalcedon, both which were long time before the said time as Bell will not deny.   

THE FOUR VNTRVIH.  
PRosecuting his former matter he saith. But this Emperor (that is justinian) lived after Christ his birth about 528. years, Ergo this point of Popery is a rotten rag of the new religion. In which words he venteth out an untruth, for be it that it was then appropriated to the Pope as he saith, yet how can it be new, which by his own confession was used an elevene hundred years ago, that is so many ages before the foundations of his religion were laid, or the name of a Protestant heard of in the whole world. I omit here how many ecclesiastical names have been brought into the church as, Homousios' or Consubstantial against the Arrians, Incarnation against other heretics, the better by a new name to declare an ancient article of faith. Will Bell for all that call these words rotten rags of a new religion. He naver dare offer it, & yet with no less reason may he do it, than he doth here the name of the Pope.  
As for his rustical scoffing (the special grace of his writing) at the silly people for reputing the word Pope a most sacred thing though ignorant as he saith what is meant by the name I say no more but that he may with like grace run upon the name of jesus Christ: for thousands amongst the Protestants which reverence them for sacred, can tell as little what is understood by it, as we can by the name of the Pope. But we are beholding to Bell that he vouch safeth to explicate the original of that name, telling us that it signifieth Father: and for that after so terrible a persecution of those few letters, as though some mystery of iniquity had lurked in them, (in such sort that in the time of Henry the eight it was razed out of all books) and after many spiteful terms, and most odious conceits framed in the minds of the vulgar sort concerning that name, he hath discharged it from all suspicion of secret venom, assuring good people, that it is indeed venerable, as that which was given to most holy and ancient bishops, and might in his opinion be given to himself, could he have the luck to finger that dignity. Thus much of the Pope's name, now we are come to talk of his office and authority.    

Bells II. Chapter Of the Pope's superoiall power.  

THE V UNTRUTH.  
TO season the beginning of his chapter with a little of his mendacious powder, he writeth thus, Bonifacius Bishop of Rome, and the third of that name, above six hundred years after Christ, obtained of Phocas then Emperor of Rome, that Rome should be the head of all churches. Before which time no authentical writer can be named, who ever ascribed the headship and universal government of all churches to the church of Rome. To convince this manifest untruth, something hath been said in the precedent chapter: but plentifully have I proved the contrary in The doleful knell, published not long since against his Ministership both 
Pag. 45. 46. etc.  out of other authorities, as also by the confession of the Lutheran Centuristes', his dear brethren: and lastly out of his sweet self, that more cannot be desired. Something also shall be said in the sequel, his own words ministering just occasion, and here I will adjoin a little more. In the Council of Chalcedon, Maximus Bishop of Antioch, was 
Act. 7.  confirmed by S. Leo the first: Pope julius the first also restored Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria to his seat; Paulus Patriarch of Constantinople, and Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra, depofed vinustly by an Eastern synod as writeth Sozomenus, whole words be these. For as much as the care of all did belong to him for 
Lib. 3. cap. 7.  the dignity of his sea, he restored to every of them their church: And a little after. Athanastus and Paulus do return to their seats and sent the letters of Tulius to the East. Bells best and most speedy answer to these proofs will be, to say that he was superior to the patriarchs, and other Bishops, but had not any authority over inferior ministers. Alas poor soul, to what pitiful straits hath he brought himself, whiles upon zeal he lieth for the credit of the congregation.   

THE VI UNTRUTH.  
IN his arguments propounded against the superiority of the Bishop of Rome (whereof afterward I mean more fully to entreat) this is one. Seavently the famous council of Chalcedon gave the bishop of Constantinople equal authority with the bishop of Rome in all ecclesiastical affairs. In which words is one untruth cunningly couched: for he calleth that here the decree of the Council, which was by the ambition of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, effected in the absence of the Roman legates. If Bell can prove that this surreptitious decree of the Eastern bishops, was ever confirmed, then were it some thing which he bringeth. But the Bishop of Rome his legates withstood that their indirect proceeding, pronouncing it to be contrary to the decrees of the Nicene Council, and Lucentius in particular 
See the 16. Action.  spoke confidently saying, that the Apostolic sea ought not to be abased in their presence, with other notable words tending to the same purpose. And Pope Leo himself in his Epistle to Anatolius did bitterly inveigh against him for this his presumption and going against the Nicene canons, admonishing him also how his legates which in his stead were precedents of the Council, did withstand that his unlawful attempt, for which cause he disclaimeth utterly for giving his consent. Far be it 
●pist. 53.  (quoth he) from my conscience, that so wicked a desire should be helped with my labour, and of all that mind not high things, but consent to the humble: and he giveth the reason: because it were (as he saith) to infringe the Canons of the Nicene Council, and to deprive the sea of Alexandria, of being the second in dignity, and Antioch of being the third, and all Metropolitan Bishops of their honour.  
About the same matter. he wrote also to the Emperor, showing his great dislike of Anatolius ambition, putting him in mind, what special favour he had afforded him concerning his consecration: insinuating plainly, how he deserved to have been deposed, for falling into the heresy of Eutiches, and for being wickedly promoted by Dioscorus of Alexandria, to be Bishop of Constantinople: yet because he renounced his heresy, & at the entreaty of the Emperor, the Pope dispensed with him. We (saith Pope Leo) having respect to your faith 
Epist. 54.  and intercession, whereas the beginnings of his consecration were not sound, by reason of them that did it, desired rather to be gracious then just, to the end we might thereby, by applying of remedies pacify all stirs, which the devil had procured, which things ought rather to have made him modest then immoderate: & in the end, he exhorteth the Emperor to labour about the repressing of his insolency. Endeavour (quoth he) to do that, which becometh Christian and royal piety, to wit that the foresaid Bishop would be obedient to the fathers, have regard to peace, and not to think that it was lawful for him to ordain the Bishop of Antioch without any example, against the decrees of Canons as he presumed, which thing we would not make void, for the desire we have to restore faith & preserve peace.  
Lastly writing to the Empress Pulcheria about the same argument, he utterly maketh void whatsoever Anatolius had cunningly caused to be decreed concerning the primacy of Constantinople. We make 
Epist. 55.  void (quoth he) the consent of the bishops repugning to the rules of holy Canons established at Nice by the united piety of your faith with us, and by the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter do with our general definition wholly frustrate and make of no effect.  
Now, to return to Bell, I say that he overreacheth when he informeth his reader, that the famous Council of Chalcedon, gave the bishop of Constantinople equal authority with the Bishop of Rome in all ecclesiastical affairs: for it cannot truly be called a decree of the Council, which was not confirmed by the head. Should a Parliament in England make ten several acts, nine very good and beneficial to the realm, but one clean opposite to former acts, and prejudicial to the sovereign dignity of his Majesty, whereupon he confirmed the nine, but the tenth he did utterly irritate and make void; would Bell call that an act of Parliament, or could he with out an untruth so term it in true and good meaning? most certain he could not: what followeth I leave to Bells collecting vain. But it may be he will say, that the confirmation of the Council belonged not to the Pope. It is not possible that he dare offer it: will he make Pope Leo so ancient for time, so renowned for virtue, so famous for learning, such a simple or arrogant creature, as to send his legates to be Precedents of the Council in his place, to write unto the Empress, how he did make frustrate that decree, if his authority had not been certain in that behalf, and so made himself a laughing stock to the Empire, and the whole world: and would the Council have admitted of his legates, or ever have made suit to him for the confirmation of their decrees, as they did, when they wrote to him in this manner. And we beseech thee (say they) honour our judgement 
Act. 3. in fine.  with thy decrees, and as we with willing minds have agreed together in good things, so thy highness also would accomplish that for thy children which is convenient: which 
Centur. 4. ●ol. 551.  petition of theirs is also formally recorded by the Lutherans of Magdeburge.  
The good reader hath also further to note, that this pride of Anatolius was so exorbitant, that at length he gave it clean over, excusing himself to Pope Leo, as we read in the letters of the same Pope, which he wrote unto Anatolius, in which after he had given order about certain things in the church of Constantinople (an argument of his jurisdiction in that place) he cometh to that excuse which Anatolius alleged in his own hehalf for having laboured about the primacy of his own church, and writeth thus. But as touching that sin 
Epist. 71.  which you committed as you say by the persuasion of others concerning the increase of authority, your charity should more effectually and sincerely have washed away, if that which could not be attempted without your liking, you had not laid only upon the counsel of the clergy: for as offence is committed by giving of bad counsel, so likewise by giving of bad consent. But it is very grateful to me most dearly beloved brother that your charity professeth, that it doth now displease you, which ought not then to have liked you. The profession of your charity, and the attestation of the Christian Prince is sufficient for your return into common grace, neither doth that amendment seem late, which is accompanied with so venerable a witness. Let the desire of unlawful authority which made dissension be wholly cast away. This w●● at that time, the end of that arrogant presumption: but had Bell then lived it seemeth he would have stood more to his tackling, and never have showed himself so base minded, as to have given over any title of honour, or any wise submitted himself to the Pope, who now pleadeth so earnestly in defence of that outrageous ambition:  
Here also the good reader hath to note, that as the minister doth make that the decree of a Council, which as hath been said was none at all, so doth he make bold with truth beside a trick of corruption: for no where do I read in the acts of that Council that it gave equal authority to the Bishop of Constantinople, with the Bishop of Rome in all ecclesiastical affairs, as Bell affirmeth: that word (all) is foisted in by the malice of his ministership, neither have they the word (authority) but (privileges) which consisted, for as much as I can learn out of those Acts, in these two points. The first was, that the metropolitans of the dioceses of Pontus, Asia, and Thrace, should only be consecrated and ordained by the Bishops of Constantinople, as also such Bishops as lived in the same place amongst barbarous people. The second was, that Constatinople might have the second place in dignity next after Rome. These I say were the privileges which Anatolius desired should be confirmed by the Pope: for to think that he desired to have every ways superiority, and as Bell writeth, equal authority in all ecclesiastical affairs with Rome is contrary to all reason, and not agreeable to the recited words out of the Acts, for though Anatolius with others decreed that Constantinople should have equal privileges, yea in ecclesiastical matters, yet is that strait limited to the consecration of Merropolitanes, and to have the second place in dignity, as before was said and is evident also out of the 15. Action can. 28. and out of the 16. Action and lastly out of their relation to the Pope, in which they craved his confirmation: for there they mention nothing of equal privileges and advancement in ecclesiastical causes, causes, but only speak of consecrating the metropolitans of Asia, Pontus, and Thrace, and of having the next place after Rome, and yet they affirm that they did there signify unto him all the force of the Acts: whereof it followeth that other privileges or eminency in ecclesiastical dignity was not then desired: and surely it were mere madness to think that Anatolius would every way have had equal authority in all ecclesiastical causes, as the minister affirmeth, seeing than we must grant that he desired jurisdiction in Italy and Rome itself; nay what were it else but to condemn Anatolius of gross foolery in suing for that superextravagant grace of the Pope to the injury of his own See and dignity.  
Much more might be said to the same purpose, but it shall not need, when as the thing is so clear that our mortal enemies confess it: for the Magdeburgian historiographers, after relation how the Roman Legates withstood the audacious attempt of Anatolius and his confederates, writ thus. Wherefore the judges of the Synod decreed that the 
Centur. 5. col. 949.  principal primacy and honour, was to be left unto the Bishop of Rome, and that notwithstanding, something was to be given to the Church of Constantinople, because that city was adorned with the dignity of the Empire, and was called new Rome, that it might have power to ordain metropolitans, in the dioceses of Asia, Pontus, and Thrace, yet so, that it might be lawful for the metropolitans of every province to ordain Bishops. This was that dignity, and equality of privilege which they desired: which notwithstanding they obtained not, Pope Leo wholly irritating that decree as hath been said. Thus have we not only convinced Bell of lying and corruption, but so far prevailed against him, that by means of that decree by which he would overthrow the superiority of the church of Rome, we have abundantly proved the contrary, and so we may say with the Prophet. The arrows of little ones are become their wounds. 
Psal. 63.  Never had gallant Minister worse fortune, for not only his blow is still defeated, but his weapon disgratiously beaten back upon his own face. What saith he now to the famous Council of Chalcedon? The Pope's authority maugre his malice is clearly proved out of that as hath been said, and so nothing found there, that can relieve his cause, but such unguentum baculinum as he list not to meddle with all, and that not only touching the Pope's superiority whereof we have spoken sufficiently, but also other matters: for example, that Council decreed thus Virginem, etc. It is not lawful for a virgin 
Sessi. 16. ●●n. 16.  which hath consecrated herself to God, and likewise a Monk to contract matrimony. But if they be found doing any such thing, let them be excommunicated. Did Bell for all that never in his whole life hear of any such creatures, that remain so far from being excommunicated, that they be highly commended as the principal advauncers of the Gospel? and doth he not know a dear friend of his, that hath written 
See Bells survey pag. 231. 235. etc.  in defence of such wicked and filthy wedlock. Gladly then would I be informed, how his Ministershippe can either defend such sacrilegious wretches, from the force of that Canon, or his friend from being opposite to the doctrine of that Council. To deny the authority of that Synod which himself urgeth, calling it a famous Council were a base shift, and nothing becoming his gravity and constancy, but rather the levity of some mutable minister, especially that being authorized by Act of Parliament, which for certain reasons he must defend, but how in this case God knoweth that knows all things.   

THE VII. UNTRUTH.  
IT followeth immediately in Bells book. Eightly the Council of Nice prescribed limits as well to the Bishop of Rome, as to other patriarchs. This is a manifest untruth, and that by the judgement of any that is indifferent. The place he meaneth 
Can. 6.  (for he noteth none) is in the sixth canon in these words Let ancient customs be kept throughout Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria have power of all these because the Bishop of Rome hath that custom. Out of which words so far of it is, that the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, is confined within any limits, that her ample and universal superiority is confirmed: for nothing is here determined concerning the church of Rome, but that is made the rule of other churches, as Pope Nicholas the first noteth, who also affirmeth 
Epist. ad Michaëlen.  that the Nicene Council appointed nothing about the Roman church, because the authority thereof was not from men, but from God. In the former untruth divers, times was it mentioned our of Pope Leo, as also out of his legates in the Council of Chalcedon, that the Grecians went against the Nicene Canons in their presumpreous attempt. But to make the matter most clear, to w●tt that the Council of Nice did not limit the Pope● jurisdiction, but contrary wise allowed and approved nis supreme authority, beside the testimony of Pope Nicholas already, alleged, I will demonstrate the same out of the Chalcedon Synod which Bell calleth a famous Council (as it was in deed, and therefore worthily admitted by our country) In the sixteen session Paschasinus the Pope's legate cited this very Canon for the Pope's primacy, for after the judge had said: Let both sides propound 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 16.  canons, ●t followeth in these words. The reverend man Paschasinus Bishop and vicar of the Apostolic sea recited The sixth canon of the three hundred and eighteen holy fathers: That the Church of Rome hath always had the 
These words are more clear in ●h● Nicene Council ●t self See a little before.  primacy. But let Egypt hold that the Bishop of Alexandria have power of all, because the Bishop of Rome hath this custom. Behold Paschasinus proveth the Pope's supremacy out of that canon, from which Bell would deduce the contrary. And the Grecian Bishops were so far from contradicting this; (which no question they would, had the canon been plain to the contrary sen●e, as the minister maintaineth) that their silence confessed it to be most true. Yea the judges themselves though desirous to advance the dignity of Constantinople, yet were they so overcome with the light of truth shining in that canon, that upon the former evidence they said. Weperfectly perceive all primacy and principal 
Act. 16.  honour according to the canons, to be kept for the Archbishop of old Rome, most beloved of God. The true meaning ●nertore of the canon is, that the bishop of Rome, before the definition of any Council, used to commit the government of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, to the Bishop of Alexandria, as Pope Nicholas the first doth expound it, and is plain out of the Council of Chalcedon: which being so, Bell remaineth guilty of an untruth, and the Pope's eminent authority confirmed by that very canon, which he brought to overthrow it. What an unlucky hand hath this minister, that striking at others, still woundeth himself.   

THE VIII. IX. AND X. UNTRUTHS.  
AFter Bell had produced many arguments against the Pope's sovereign superiority, he maketh a recapitulation of them all, but so handsomely, that for their better grace he doth flourish them over with new lies. To stand upon one, that hath a couple of followers. Fourthly (quoth he) seeing Polycarpus, S. Polycrates, S. Ireneus, and S. Cyprian, with many Bishops of Europe, Asia, and Africa, contemned the Bishop of Rome his decrees and supposed supremacy. That S. Polycarpus contemned the Pope's decrees is most false, and untruly collected out of his former argument, in which no mention is made of any decree concerning the keeping of Easter (the matter then in question) as shall appear afterward when we come to answer that argument, how could he then contemn that which was not extant. See the scrupulous conscience of the minister, because before he passed over the matter without the mark of his occupation, he hath here made lewd restitution clapping three untruths together, one in the neck of an other. The first is now recited, and to make it the more manifest I will adjoin what he writeth of this matter in his Motives. His words be these In like manner (quoth he) though with more modesty dissented Anicetus 
pag. 145.  an other Bishop of Rome, from S. Polycarpe, Bishop of Smyrna: where I desire the good reader to note his malicious dealing & his rooted hatred against those Popes, whom he confesseth to have been blessed Martyrs. Anicetus (quoth he) dissented from S. Polycarpe: and why I beseech him doth he not rather say, that S. Polycarpe dissented from Anicetus: I trust he will not deny but that S. Anicetus had the better quarrel, except he list to condemn the church of England, and the whole Christian world that observe Easter according to the custom of Rome. Besides this, is it not most certain that S. Polycarp was far inferior in dignity to S. Anicetus, when as so much is evident out of the premises, in which we have heard how the patriarch of Constantinople, did emulate some prerogatives of Rome, and not any of Smyrna. another trick of his rancour also showeth itself, when as the one is with him plain Anicetus, the other S. Polycarpe, why I beseech him, was not blessed Anicetus also a martyr as well as S. Polycarpe? it can not be denied: and yet doth this minister out of his damnable devotion to the sea of Rome, entreat him in this disgracious manner. But sufficient it is for my purpose, that he confesseth dissension betwixt S. Anicetus, and S. Polycarpe to have been with more modesty (to wit than it was betwixt S. Victor and the Bishops of Asia) which argueth plainly, that no decree was made by S. Anicetus, for then the dissension could not have been contained within the limits of modesty, if Polycarpus had resisted his decree, neither could he have been in better case than the bishops of Asia were, who withstood S. Victor's decree, and so the dissension had been as immodest: which seeing Bell denieth, consequently he granteth, that he hath dealt falsy in accusing S. Polycarpe to have contemned S. Anicetus decree, when as he never published any such, what soever Bell with lying lips affirmeth to the contrary. This is the first untruth.  
The next is where he saith, S. Polycrates contemned the Bishop of Rome his decrees, for where doth he find him enrolled for a Saint? not in the Roman martyrologue, not in Eusebius or S. Hierom. no nor in the Centuries of Magdeburge where they talk of him. He is a Saint only of Bells canonisation, because he resisted the Pope, which title if it will procure any such grace, the minister himself is like to prove a great and monstruous Saint, for never (I dare say) did Polycrates carry himself so insolently, and in such unspeakable contumelious manner, as Sir Thomas doth.  
The third untruth is, that S. Ireneus contemned the Bishop of Rome his decrees, and his supposed supremacy: for what father so ancient as he, writeth more clearly for his supremacy. Speaking of the Roman church these be his words. To this church by reason of the more potent principality, it is necessary 
Lib. 3. cap. 3.  that every church should come, that is those faithful people which be every where, in which that tradition which came from the Apostles, hath been kept of them which be in all parts. Thus he writeth in defence thereof: but that ever he oppugned the Pope's decrees, or contemned his supremacy is most falsely affirmed by Bell, as shall appear when we come to examine his second argument against the Pope's Supremacy, from whence he would seem to have collected this: but before I come to that point, I must here admonish the good reader, that whereas Bell desperately affirmed that the Bishop of Rome's superiority was not heard of till six hundred years after Christ, the contrary hath not only been proved sufficiently before, out of other authorities, but also out of those testimonies, which he bringeth as most clear against it, to wittout of the Chalcedon and Nicene Counsels, and also out of S. Ireneus as in the premises hath been said: and yet further occasion will be offered to verify the same truth out of some of those arguments also, which come now to be examined, such is his great grace in beating down of Popery, and writing against himself.  
The rest of his chapter consisteth of eight arguments culled together, to show that the Pope's supremacy began in the time of Phocas the Emperor, in the year of Christ 607: which in particular I will discuss. But before I must have a little crash with him about the title which is of the Pope's superroiall power, for the word (superroiall) I suppose slyly mocketh at that which venerable antiquity confesseth, and himself must not deny. To content myself with the testimony of S. Chrisostom who speaking not only of Bishops, but inferior clergy men, instructeth them how to deal with secular potentates coming unworthily to the Sacraments, in this manner. If a duke (quoth he) if a Consul, if he that weareth 
Hom. 83. in Math.  the crown, cometh unworthily, stop and hinder him, thou hast greater power than he: and the minister denieth that the late Queen might preach the Gospel or administer the Sacraments etc. which 
Motivos pag. 80.  functions not withstanding other of their clergy might execute: whereof it ensueth that in these spiritual points their power was above that of the Queens, and so truly in a good sense may be called superroiall, which so much his superscoffing gravity seemeth to deride and taunt. Now to his arguments.    

An answer to Bells arguments against the supreme spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope.  
FIrst then (quoth he) S. Polycarpus would not yield to Anicetus' Bishop of Rome in the controversy abou● Easter, which for all that he would and must have done, if the Bishop of Rome had had any true prerogative over him.  

THE ANSWER.  
IT more argueth the Bishop of Rome his superiority that S. Polycarpus, the scholar of the Apostles, in his old years undertook so long a journey to Rome, to confer with S. Anicetus, than it proveth that he was not his superior because S. Polycarpus retained still his former opinion: for why should he more have travailed to Rome then S. Anicetus have gone to him to Smyrna, being a man reverent for his grey hairs, and venerable for his acquaintance and conversation with the Apostles, had it not been, that he acknowledged superiority to Anicetus, as being the successor of S. Peter. But the reason why Polycarpus might still keep his former custom of celebrating Easter, and also perform due obedience to Anicetus was, because Anicetus would not for so small a controversy or variety break peace, but was content to tolerate the same, and therefore false it is, that Bell saith, to wit that Polycarpus would and must have yielded to Anicetus, if he had acknowledged him for his superior, seeing no such thing was commanded him, but the matter left to his own election.   

Bells II. objection.  
SEcondly Ireneus, and other holy and learned bishops of France joining with him, reproved Victor then Bishop of Rome very sharply and roundly, as one that had not due respect to the peace and unity of the church: which doubtless those holy and learned Bishops would not have done, if the Bishop of Rome had had in those days the supreme sovereignty over them.   

THE ANSWER.  
HAd Bell recounted the cause why those bishops reprehended so roundly (as he speaketh) Pope Victor, with other necessary circumstances, he had marred all his market, and proved the Pope's superiority by that argument, by which as he perfidiously handleth the matter, he would overthrow it. The blessed martyr Ireneus, with other reprehended Victor, not for any wrong opinion about the keeping of Easter (him self, & they being of the Pope's mind, as also the Prorestantes now be) but for that he excommunicated the Bishops of Asia, refusing to conform themselves to the Church of Rome: neither did S. Ireneus this upon conceit, that the Pope exceeded the limits of his power, for no such thing appeareth in Eusebius from whom this story is fetched, but for that he did use it out of due season, to the great trouble of the Church, and for a small matter, as he and they thought: which showeth plainly, that they made no doubt of his authority, otherwise many misliking his fact, would easily have contemned his censure, and justly have objected presumption, in usurping that authority which belonged not to him, where of no mention is made.  
Superiors, yea and the Pope himself, may with due respect be admonished and reprehended, especially by Bishops, if any great scandal or trouble of the Church be feared. S. Paul resisted S. Peter in face because he was reprehensible: 
Galat. 2. v. 11.  whereof our Protestants absurdly gather, that S. Peter had no sup riority over the Apostles: a collection not known to an iquitye, when as the matter was then so famous and certain, that wicked Porphiry that paganical philosopher, reproveth S. Paul of sauciness, for that he presumed 
Proaem. come. in Galatas. & epis. 11. ad Aug. inter epistolas Augustini.  to reprehend Peter the Prince of the Apostles, as S. Hierom reporteth. S. Cyprian highly commendeth the humility of S. Peter, that took so quietly the reprehension of S. Paul being his inferior. For neither Peter (saith S. Cyprian) whom our Lord chose the first, and upon whom he built the church, when Paul disputed with him about circumcision, arrogantly took any thing to himself, saying that he had the primacy, and therefore 
Epist. 71. ad Quin.  the latter disciples ought rather to obey him. S. Augustin showeth excellently by this example, that S. Cyprian erring about rebaptisation could not nor would not have been offended, to have been admonished by others his followers or inferiors, much less by 
Lib. 2. de Baptis. cap. 1.  a Council. We have learned (saith he) that Peter the Apostle, in whom the Primacy of the Apostles by excellent grace is so praeeminent, when he did otherwise concerning circumcision, than the truth required, was corrected of Paul the later Apostle. I think (without any reproach unto him) Cyprian the Bishop may be compared to Peter the Apostle, howbeit I ought rather to sear lest I be injurious to Peter, sor who knoweth not, that the principality of Apostleshipp, is to be perferred before any dignity of Bishop whatsoever: but if the grace of the chairs differ, yet the glory of the martyrs is one.  
These authorities show two things: the first is, that S. Peter was reputed with the ancient fathers, head and prince of the Apostles, and also that the very Pagans were not ignorant of that thing, which I suppose will not greatly content Bell, for certain deductions that may be drawn from thence. The second (which is the cause why I have alleged this of S. Peter and S. Paul) is, that dislike or reprehension of an other man's action, doth not argue the man reproved not to be the others superior, how soever Bell would infer that: when as hath been said, S. Paul inferior to S. Peter, reprehended him. And therefore the most that can deduced out of the ministers idle discourse is, that if himself were a Bishop he would look as the devil (God bless us) is said to have looked over Lincoln: and none might without incurring of is mortal indignation admonish him of any fault or scandalous demeanour. Great pity surely it is, that one qualified as he is, and endowed with such an humble spirit, should not be preferred to an Episcopale or (to use his own phrase) some overseing dignity, Thus by dismol destiny, Bells argument hath rather hurt him, then given him any help at all.  
But one necessary adjunct belonged to this controversy, which he thought good not to touch, for scalding of his fingers, to wit that S. Victor excommunicated the bishops of Asia as I noted before: for seeing Bell confesseth, that the old 
In his Funeral. lib. 2. cap. 2.  bishops of Rome, were very godly men and taught the same doctrine which S. Peter had done afore them: and most certain that S. Victor was one of those holy Martyrs, it followeth that he usurped no authority, but exercised that which lawfully he might, neither that he taught any doctrine, but that which S. Peter had done before him: Out of which and the precedent discourse three or four memorable notes may be inferred against Bell. The first and principal is, that the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, began not six hundred years after Christ, as before he maintained, having been practised four hundred years before by S. Victor, and descended to him from S. Peter. The second is, that Bells argument against the supreme authority of the Bishop of Rome, being duly and truly examined, proveth the clean contrary. The third is, that the minister cunningly concealed the cause why S. Ireneus reproved S. Victor, as nothing fitting his purpose. The fourth may be, that most perfidiously he inferreth out of the reprehension of S. Ireneus, that he contemned the Bishop of Rome his decrees, and supposed supremacy as before hath been noted.  
I add lastly, that whatsoever S. Ireneus and others thought, yet blessed Pope Victor proceeded most prudently, for as much as he perceived how that observation (which in the time of Anicetus was only variety of rite, without prejudice of religion) began now to corrupt the soundness of the Catholic faith, one Blastus (who lived in Victor's time, as 
Lib. 5. hist. cap. 15. De proscript. in fine.  Eusebius saith) under colour of that, cunningly labouring to bring in judaisme, as Tertullian recordeth. And this sentence of Victor was afterward approved in the Council of Nice, as is manifest out of Eusebius, 
Lib. 3. de vita Constantini. cap. 13. Heres. 53. Heres. 75.  and afterward those that held the Asian error, were accounted heretics as appeareth in S. Augustin and S. Epiphanius.   

Bells III. objection.  
THirdly S. Polycrates, and many bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand the same Victor than Bishop of Rome in his presumptuous proceedings touching Easter.   

THE ANSWER.  
ANd how many Emperors and Kings, as we read partly in scriptures, partly in profane histories, have been resisted, most disgraciusly entreated, and abused by their subjects: were they not for all that their superiors? yea jesus Christ himself suffered many indignities at the jews hands, was he not for all that their Creator, king, and Saviour? His camnonization of Polycrates rather showeth his malicious cunning than any ways bettereth his cause, whereof I have spoken before, and here can not but adjoin as a matter of note, that the letters of Polycrates and other to S. Victor in defence of themselves, make more for his ecclesiastical superiority, than their disobedient resistance showeth that he had not authority over them, when as many have withstood their lawful Pastors. For why should they have needed any such Apologetical letters more to him, then to any other Patriarch or Bishop, had it not been for the dignity of his sea: or can it sink into any man's head, that the Asian bishops would not have reprehended his usurped authority (had they been of Bells mind) for censuring them, that were not subject to his jurisdiction. His terming S. Victor's proceedings presumptuous, showeth his inveterat malice to that blessed Pope and martyr: and beside declareth his folly in condemning him so deeply, whom else where he commendeth so highly.   

Bells FOUR objection.  
SAint Cyprian roundly opposed himself against Stephanus then Bishop of Rome, contemning his decree and deriding his reasons.   

THE ANSWER.  
WEre not Bell one of Cham's confraternity, he would never mention that which turneth to the disgrace of that blessed martyr, and nothing toucheth the authority of the Pope at all. For that S. Cyprian was in an error I dare say Bell will not deny, and therefore the more roundly he wrote to the Pope, the more is his fault increased. Far was blessed S. Austen from the spirit of this minister, who wholly to take away, or at least to diminish 
Epist. 48. ad Vincē●iam.  this stain of S. Cyprian, saith, that either those writings be none of his, in which these things be found, as some then said, or else that afterward he repent him of his error, & changed his opinion, though the retractation be not found. As for the authority of the Pope it doth nothing prejudice that at all, for albeit the Pope commanded that rebaptisation should not be practised (the point of controversy betwixt them two) yet did he not define that question, nor pronounce any censure against Cyprian or others of his opinion, much less was it condemned by a general Council, which reason also S. Augustin bringeth in his defence, and 
Lib. 1. do Baptism. cap. 18.  so it was free for him without danger of heresy to persist in his own opinion especially seeing he had on his side a provincial Council of fourscore Bishops, & as he thought much probability for his part. Many good men no question both have, and hereafter may be carried away with ignorant zeal to defend an erroneous opinion, yet with all subjection to the Pope, remaining all ways with ready mind (when they shall see their error overthrown by Apostolical definition) to submit themselves with all obedience.   

Bells V objection.  
FIftly the Apostles at jerusalem, sent Peter and john to confirm the faithful in Samaria, and consequently if the Pope be not above Peter, but his supposed successor, he may be sent of bishops his brethren as S. Peter was. But who is that Bishop, and where dwelleth he, that at this day dareth do the now Pope such supposed villainy.   

THE ANSWER.  
NOt any supposed, but the true and real folly of the minister appeareth in this argument: for he would infer, because S. Peter was sent of the Apostles that therefore he was not the chief and Prince of the Apostles: but if his illation be of any force to bereave him of his superiority, which Bell urgeth, it hath the like strength to make him their inferior (which I think he will not grant) for commonly they be such that be sent of others. Wherefore I answer that although it be no usual thing, yet sometime in great and important affairs, superiors are sent of their inferiors, not by power and authority: but by request and entreaty, to which they may yield if they think it expedient for the common good, or refuse it if they like not to undergo that charge. A great question arising at Antioch about circumcision and other legal ceremonies, Paul and Barnabas were sent by the faithful 
Act. 15.  there to jerusalem, to confer about that point with the Apostles: Will Bell therefore infer, that Paul and Barnabas were their inferiors. josephus also reporteth, how the jews 
Lib. 20. Antiq. cap. 7.  having a controversy against Agrippa their king, and Festus their Precedent, sent unto Nero the Emperor, ten legates of the principal jews, and with them Ishmael the high Priest, and Chelcias the Treasurer, who seemed next to him in dignity. For as much therefore as the conversion of the Samaritans was a matter of great moment, they being reputed in as bad case if not worse, than the Gentiles, For which cause our Saviour said: Into the way of the Gentiles go ye not, and 
Math. 10.  into the cities of the Samaritans enter ye not S. Peter and S. johne were sent as most meet for that business: S. Peter being the chief and to whom the managing and disposing of fuch matters appertained: but not by any authority or command, but only by request and petition as hath been said, in which manner both in former times, and hereafter in like cases of the common good, Princes and superiors without any touch of their high office or dignity, may be sent by their inferiors: their sending proceeding from petition, nothing impeacheth their high sovereignty, and their willing undertaking such a charge for the common good, proclayminge their great love to God and their country.   

Bells VI objection.  
Sixthly the fathers of the famous African council, in which S. Austen, that holy father and most stout champion of Christ's Church was present to the great honour and credit thereof, would in no wise yield to Celestine then Bishop of Rome, in the controversy of Appeals concerning Appiarius. And when Pope Celestine alleged for himself and his supposed sovereignty, that the ancient and famous council of Nice gave liberty to appeal to Rome, the Fathers of the Council answered roundly, that the true copies of the decree were otherwise: where I wish the reader to observe with me these two points seriously: Frist that the Pope could not, and therefore did not, allege any better reason sor his usurped and falsely pretended supremacy, than the authority and decree of that famous Council of Nice. Secondly that the Pope Celestine falsified the canon and decree of the Council, so to gain credit and authority to himself if it might be.   

THE ANSWER.  
TO the first of these two points I answer; that there was no question betwixt them, whether the Pope's jurisdiction did extend into Afsrike or no: or whether appeals in rigour might not be made to Rome: but whether it were a thing convenient: for on the one side, not to allow appeals, seemeth to give occasion to metropolitans and Bishops, to oppress their subjects: and on to the contrary to allow appeals, seemeth the next way to make endless quarrels, & often to vex Bishops without all cause: of which inconvenience and great trouble of the church, holy men have complained. This doubtful point than was defined by the Council of Nice, or Sardica, which declared that it was expedient for Priests, to appeal from their Bishops unto a provincial Council: and for Bishops to appeal unto Rome: For that it was lawful and usual before the time of this Council to appeal unto Rome, is evident out of S. Cyprian, who reporteth how Fortunatus and Felix deposed by himself, appealed unto Cornelius bishop of Rome. 
Lib. 1. ep. 3.  And one Basilides deposed in Spain, appealed to Pope Stephen, as the same S. Cyprian recounteth. Not to speak of Martion that ancient heretic, 
Lib. 1. ep. 4.  who excommunicated of his bishop in Pontus, came to Rome for absolution, as Epiphanius relateth: and 
Heres. 42.  therefore Pope Leo calleth it an ancient custom to appeal unto Rome. This was the cause why 
Epist. 89.  the Bishop of Rome urged especially the decree of the Nicene council, to show that it was not only lawful, but also very expedient: sor albeit the African Bishops desired, that Appeals might not easily be admitted, for the great injury to justice, & vain protraction of suits, which they daily perceived to follow thereof: yet knowing full well, that they could not forbid such appeals of themselves, they humbly made petition to the Pope, for more moderation therein. In their epistle which they wrote to Pope Celestinus, these be their words. The office of dutiful salutation premised, we earnestly beseech you that hereafter you would not easily give audience to such as come from hence. Had they been of Bells mind, they would never have used any deprecatory petition, but have roundly and readily told him, that he had no authority to admit any appeals, neither was his jurisdiction over them, and therefore that they did owe him no obedience or subjection.  
But far were they from any such conceit, as being not ignorant of his jurisdiction over them, according to which belief they proceeded in like manner, For which cause the same very Bishops of Africa, when this matter of Appeals and the Nicene council, was one foot, and Pope Sozimus had sent unto their council three legates, wrote unto Bope Bonifacius the Successor of Sozimus in this manner. Because it hath pleased our Lord concerning such things as our holy hrethrens have handled with us, Faustinus our fellow Bishop, and Philippe, and Asellus, our fellow Priests, that our humility can not write unto Sozimus a Bishop of blessed memory, from whom they brought both precepts and letters, but to your veneration, who by God's ordinance, are succeeded in his place, we ought briesely to insinuate those things, which by the agreement of both parts were determined, in which we stayed indeed without breach of charity, but not without great altercation: in which words making relation of their Acts to Pope Bonifacius, and testifinge that they had received precepts or commandments from his predecessor Pope Sozimus, what do they else, but acknowledge their obedience and subjection to the Apostolic sea. Beside, not long after this Council 
●pist. 87.  Pope Leo writing to the Bishops of Mauritania in Africa, saith that he restored the communion to Bishop Lupicinus, because he appealed to him out of Africa: and likewise that he sent unto them for his legate, Bishop Potentius who should in his stead, have care of the affairs of Africa. All which abundantly testify, both the authority of the Bishop of Rome in Africa, and that appeals were made to him, and also that the African fathers denied not this, though for the reason before alleged, they desired more moderation therein to be used.  
And albeit S. Augustine was one of these Bishops, and so his voice passed in the common letters with others, yet because Bell doth here so magnify him, as though he had been a mighty enemy to the Pope's supremacy, I will in particular show out of that venerable and learned father, what reverence, subjection, and dutiful respect, he carried to the Pope, contenting myself only with that, which he writeth of this very point, or of the three Popes in whose times this matter of appeals was handled, and some of which, the minister very bodily, if not somewhat saucily, but out of all question most falsely, pronounceth to have corrupted the Nicene canons. This holy father writing most plainly, how himself and other Bishops came to Caesarea, by the commandment of Sozimus, what doth he but clearly proclaim his primacy over Africa. The same Augustine was most 
Epist. 157.  subject and dear to Pope Bonifacius as we learn out of the beginning of his first book, against the two epistles of the Pelagians, directed to the same Bonifacius. The same Augustine writing to Pope Celestinus, referreth the cause of a certain African 
Epist. 221.  Bishop to him after this manner. O holy Pope, most blessed Lord, venerable for piety, and with dutiful charity to be received: labour together with us, and command all things which are sent, to be recited unto thee: and on the contrary Pope Celestinus doth highly commend S. Augustine 
Epist. add Gallos'.  as one that had always remained in the communion of the Roman church and had been reputed always of himself, & his predecessors, for a great Doctor.  
Out of that which hath been said, the ministers first doubt is solved, why the Pope rather alleged the decrees of the Nicene Council, than any other proof out of the Gospel, because as I said the question was not about his supremacy in general, as Bell cunningly or maliciously maketh it, but of Appeals, which though it be a thing consectary to his supreme jurisdiction, yet for the reasons before mentioned, some doubt might be made about the exercise thereof: for the satisfying of which, no better resolution could be devised then of a general Council. The good reader also can not but sufficiently gather out of the premises, an answer to the second question, to wit, that neither Celestinus the Pope, nor any of his predecessors forged any canons, as Bell and such like with lying lips affirm, (who measure others according to themselves) both for that, they appealed to Rome, out of Africa, before the time of the Nicene council, and so little needed they (had they been so wicked) to forge any thing to prove that which was practised before: and for that strait after appeals were likewise admitted, and also for that the Bishop of Rome, had his Legate there resident amongst them, for the dispatch of ecclesiastical business, as out of Pope Leo hath been declared. The same thing also appeareth, in that neither the African Bishops nor S. Austen ever objected any such crime of forgery to any of those Popes, as the ministerial fraternity of forgers do, but contrariwise behaved themselves in most dutiful manner, giving them very reverent & honourable titles, protesting also their obedience and subjection to them as hath been said: and so they be far unlike to our Protestant professors, that persecute them with scrrilous and odious terms. As therefore the unseemly carriage, and bitter accusation of our Gospelers doth manifestly argue their spirit to these Popes, and that they condemn them as guilty of forgery, so their dutiful and obedient deportment towards those holy Popes, give the world to understand that they were far from any such malicious conceit: and therefore albeit I might content myself with that which hath been said, yet more to clear them from the venom of Bells aspish lips, and to free them wholly from the malicious imputation of the minister, and that in the judgement of any indifferent reader.  
I say further that these canons of the Nicen● council allowing appeals to Rome, might be in that Council though now not found there, nor yet extant then in those copies sent from the East to the Bishops of Africa: for as much as most certain it is, that there were divers canons more, then be now found, or were sent to Africa, many being perished either by the malice of the Arrians, whose power overswaied the Eastern churches, and were most mortal enemies to that Council, which is very probable: else by some other dismoll accident of fire or otherwise. How soever it be, that many canons be wanting is most certain, for one of the canons of that Council, was about the observation of Easter day, as testifieth Constantine in his epistle, and also Epiphanius 
Apud Euseb. lib. 3. de vita Constantini. Heres. 69. Epist. do Synodis Arimin. & Seleucien. Lib. 10. hist. cap. 6. Epist. 110. Lib. 1. cap. 8.  and Athanasius: but this canon is in none of those twenty which be now extant, and of which only so many years since Ruffinus maketh mention in his history. It was prohibited also in the same Council, that there should be two Bishops in one place, as S. Austen affirmeth: but no such canon or decree now appeareth. And to omit divers other particulars: not only other Protestants, but Bell also both in his other books, and in this pamphlet in the next chapter, objecteth out of Socrates that a canon was made in the Nicene council by the suggestion of Paphnutius, which permitted Priests to remain with their former wives. but this Canon is no where to be found amongst amongst those twenty. Wherefore if Pope Celestinus must be condemned for a falsary, because he cited a canon which is not now extant, nor mentioned by Ruffinus: by the same reason, must Constantinus, Athanasius, Epiphanius, Augustinus, Socrates, yea and not other Protestants only, but Bell himself be sentenced of forgery, for citing of that canon which is not now extant amongst those twenty.  
Albeit that which hath been said, may give full satisfaction to any man of moderation yet more to mussel the mouth of the minister, I add and say, that these canons of appeal being found formally in the Council of Sardica, where in most ample and plain words, both in the fourth & seventh canons, 
Can. 4. & 7.  appellations to Rome are ratified and confirmed: both Pope Sozimus and others, call them by the name of the Nicene canons, though they be found in the Council of Sardica: and the reason is, for that these two Counsels are accounted for all one: both because the same fathers that were present at Nice, were also a great number of them at Sardica, and also for that no new thing touching faith was there enacted: whereas in other Counsels, new heresies were condemned: and this is the cause, why it maketh not any number, for being a general and approved Council, it should be the second in order, being celebrated an eleavene years after the death of Constantine the great, as the Magdeburgians themselves relate out of Socrates, 
Centur 4. col. 747.  Theodoretus, and Sozomenus: for they solemnly report the whole council together with these two canons of appellations to Rome, where Bell for his cold comfort may read them, it should I say be the second, being some years before that of Constantinople, but that for the reason alleged, it is reputed all one with that of Nice, and so maketh not any number.  
This also is confirmed, for that in the copy of one Dionysius, who a thousand years since, translated the Nicene Council out of the Greek tongue, (yet extant in the Abbey of S. Vedastus at Arras, 
Lib. 2. de Roman● pontiff. cap. 25.  as Cardinal Bellarmine reporteth) all the canons of the Coucell of Sardica are found adjoined with those of Nice, as of one Council. What marvel then if Pope Sozimus or Bonifacius, cite the canons of the Council of Sardica, for the canons of Nice, when as they were accounted for all one, and in all probability found them in their copies so joined together.  
Bells great difficulty is dissolved, and the Pope discharged from all forgery, and false packing. Now to come upon him, and to beat the end of his own weapon upon his own face: what saith he to the canons of the Council of Sardica, or Nice, which grant appeals to Rome, as the Legates of the Pope verified to the African Bishops? were they found formally in the Nicene council, Bell were overthrown for ever: but they be in the Council of Sardica, celebrated strait after, which is reputed one with this of Nice, and of sovereign authority: what starting hole will he find out to avoid this blow? O miserable minister whose carcase is still beaten like an anvil, with the hammers of his own arguments. His other reasons out of the Council of Chalcedon, and Nice, are answered before.    

Bells III. Chapter Of the marriage of Priests and ministers of the Church.  

THE VI UNTRUTH.  
THe minister pleading here hard for the wiving of Priests, hath these words. For this respect did holy Paphnutius stand up in the Council of Nice, at such times as the Fathers then and there assembled together, thought to have severed married Priests and Bishops from their wives, and told them according to gods word, that to forbid marriage to Priests, was too severe a law: He yielded this reason, because marriage is so honourable in all sorts of men. Thus writeth Cassiodorus, thus writeth Socrates, thus writeth Sozomenus. And thus lieth the minister, for none of these there speak any one word that Paphnutius should tell them, that according to God's word to forbid marriage to Priests was too severe a law: he speaketh not one syllable of such as were Priests already, as though he would have them permitted to marry as Bell falsely reporteth in the fore alleged words, and more plainly in the page following, where he saith that Paphnutius motion was approved of the whole Council and thereupon the matter was left as indifferent for every Priest either to marry or not to marry at his own choice. False I say it is, that either Cassiodorus, Socrates, or Sozomenus speak any one word of the marriage of Priests, or have any such thing that the matter was left indifferent for every Priest to marry or not to marry at his own choice. Why did he not quote the places where his reader might have tried the truth of his relation? what meaneth this flying of the light? what else, but that he had rather have his bare word taken, than the matter examined. It will not sorue his turn, that in the end of his Chapter, he referreth the reader to his Survey, where those places be cited: for that book is not always at hand, and beside no such special place is there named, that without difficulty what is desired can not be found. But view the places who please, and the fidelity and sincere conscience of the minister will soon appear, for as much as the contrary of that Bell affirmeth, remaineth there upon record.  
Cassiodorus the author of the tripartite history in the place quoted By Bell, citeth Sozomenus, from whom he receiveth that which he there reporteth which is this, speaking of the Nicene Council, that it did seem good to some to bring in a law that Bishops, and Priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons', should not sleep with their wives, which they had married before consecration. But Paphnutius the confessor rising yp in the midst, withstood it, confessing marriage to be honourable, and saying that the comapny of a man's own wife was chastity, and he advised the Council not to make any such law, affirming that it was a great cause, which might be to them or their wives, the occasion of fornication. This doth he allege out of Sozomenus, leaving yet something out which that author hath, the cause as I suppose (if any place be left for conjecture) why Bell rather quoted Cassiodorus then Sozomenus. For Sozomenus addeth also these words of Paphnutius immediately following. And that the old tradition of the church was, that those which were made Priests being not yet married, should not afterward marry wives: but they which were called to that order being married, should not be separated from their wives which they had. The very same thing hath Socrates. By which the good reader may judge what a conscience the minister hath, when he blusheth not to say, that the Council left it indifferent for every Priest to marry or not to marry at his own choice, when as there is no one word spoken of those that married after taking of holy orders, but only of those that were ordered after they were married, as both Cassiodorus out of Sozomenus, and Sozomenus himself together with Socrates jointly asfirme: nay when as Sozomenus and Socrates both say, that the old tradition of the Church was, that those which took holy orders unmarried, might not marry at all. This being so, who will deny that the minister had not great reason, neither to cite their words, nor quote their places, fathering so gross an untruth upon them.  
But some will say, yet at least it appeareth out of the former authors, that those which were married folk, and afterward became Priests, might still use the company of their wives, which is against the practice of the Roman Church. To this I say first, that our question is not now about that point, but whether Bell hath not slandered these authors, when he maketh them to say that thing, which they say not, but have the clean contrary. Secondly notwithstanding I answer, that this may seem to make for the custom of the Grecians, who retain still those wives, which they had married before entering into holy orders: but it helpeth nothing at all our late Apostates, that after their consecration and vow of chastity, without all scruple, nay if we list to believe them, with the testimony of a good conscience, provided themselves of young yoke fellows, for the comfort of their declining years, and spiritual begetting the liberty of the new gospel: yet in truth doth it neither relieve the cause of the Grecians: for so much as neither any such thing is extant in the Nicene Council, and pregnant proofs to show that no such thing was ever there decreed: for Sozomenus and Socrates being known heretics, deserve no credit, especially the first of them, being noted by blessed S. Gregory for 
Lib. 6. ep. 31.  one that hath many lies: and Socrates known for a man of like quality, as I could easily show, were it not that I desire all convenient brevity, but principally for that S. Hierom and S. Epiphanius (who lived more near to the time of the Nicene Council then the other twain did) affirm so much of the custom of the Eastern church as can not stand with their former testimonies, as strait after shall be handled. Wherefore seeing it must needs be, that either Sozomenus and Socrates err from the truth, or S. Hierome, and S. Epiphanius, none I think of indifferency, but will prefer Catholics before heretics: and those that lived nearer to the time of the Nicene Council, than those that were farther of: and this is so certain, that I durst remit the matter to Bell himself, and such like, did it not concern so much their own freehold, and that the ponderous passion of wiving without all respect of reason, did bear down the balance to the wrong side. But howsoever this shall fall out (whereof by and by I shall have more occasion to speak) Bell the Ragmaster remaineth convict of a Notorious untruth, notwithstanding his often protestation of sincerity and plain dealing.   

THE XII. VNTRUTHE.  
IN the same third Chapter, pursuing still his former subject, he uttereth two untruths with one breath in these words: For this respect was it, that Priests were ever married in the east Church until these our days, and in the west church generally, for the space of three hundred eighty and five years, at which time Pope Siricius excited by Satan, prohibited marriage as an unlawful thing. Here (I say) be two rouzinge untruths. The first is, Priests were ever married in the east church. For S. Epiphanius an ancient father, and one of the Greek church, testifieth the clean contrary. Sanctum sacerdotium etc. The holy 
Ad finem operis contra herese.  Preishoode (quoth he) is for the most part of virgins or of unmarried folk, or if those be not sufficient for the ministry, of those which contain themselves from their own 
Heres. 59  wives: And in another place. But the Church (quoth he) doth not admit the husband of one wife yet living and begetting children: S. Hierom likewise writing against. Vigilantius saith. What shall the Church of the east do, what the Church of Egipte, and the Apostolic sea, which take virgins for their Clerks, or continent, or if they be married, give over to be husbands. Will Bell for all this tell us, that Priests were ever married in the east church, and with out all respect give S. Epiphanius and S. Hierom ● word of disgrace: it would beseem him ●●ch better, quietly to digest it himself, his just deserts allotting him that special favour.  
Out of these two testimonies also the good reader may note, whether Sozomenus and Socrates are to be credited, affirming that by permission of the Nicene Council, Eastern Priests married before orders might still have the company of their former wives, as in the precedent section was handled. Nay the same is most certain out of the very Nicene Synod itself, where it 
Can. 3.  is forbidden Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, to keep any women in their house, beside their mother, sister or aunt: no mention is made of any wife, which yet should have been in the first place, if any such toleration at the suggestion of Paphnutius had been granted. And if their former wives were, as our adversaries pretend out of Socrates and Sozemenus, permitted them, why should the cohabitation of other women be interdicted? Did they allow them their wives and not suffer them to have maids, for the dispatch of household business, and bringing up of the levitical fry, which commonly is plentiful in that generation, if we may guess by those of our time: who so simple as seethe not the incongruity of these two, or perceiveth not, that the Council for biding any maid servant to dwell in Priests houses, did never grant them the cohabitation and carnal company of their wives, as our Protestants pretend. Furthermore how can it be true, that the Nicene Council permitted (as the same author's report) Bishops to enjoy the company of their former wives: when as some hundred years after, in the false Synod of Constantinople holden in Trullo, 
Can. 48.  howsoever the reins were loosed to other of the Clergy, yet Bishops were forbidden to dwell with their former wives: which convinceth that no such leave was granted by the Council of Nice, and so crazeth the credit of them, which affirm that Synod to have permitted Bishops, Priests, etc. to remain still with their former wives.  
To these former testimonies and reasons, I will adjoin one more, both against Bell, that desperately maintaineth, that the marriage of Ecclesiastical persons hath always been used in the east church, until these our days, and also against Socrates, and Sozomenus, saying that the Council of Nice did permit them to enjoy the company of those wives, which they had married before taking of holy orders: and it shallbe of a Greek Doctor, that lived in the time of the Nicene Council, to wit Eusebius, whose words be these: Veruntamen: Notwithstanding it is meet, that they should 
Lib. 1. Demonstrat. evang. cap. 9  refrain themselves from the company of their wives who are consecrated and busied in the ministery, and service of God. What plenty of authorities might be brought, to overthrow We this palpable untruth: but what need more, when as these already, tickle the Minister, and fetch blood: for they are so far of to be avoided any cavilling shift, that the Lutheran Magdeburgians dislike two of these fathers, because they speak not herein according to their mind, as is evident in their fourth Centurye, where they note S. Epiphanius as erring 
Centur. 4. col. 303.  about that point, citing part of his words, before by me produced: and afterwards they accuse many doctors for inclining too much unto that opinion, yea that they did publiklye profess, that it was not lawful for Priests to have wives: and amongst others, they tax Eusebius for one, citing the very words by me alleged, But what do I dispute in a matter so plain, when as the erratical Council of Constantinople, holden in Trullo, (which Bell so solemnly allegeth in his Survey 
Pag. 224. and 227.  for the proof of Priest's marriage) is in this point directly against him: for though it allowed such Priests as after marriage received orders, to continue still with their former wives, yet did it utterly forbidden Priests, after orders to marry, as appeareth out of the sixth Canon; Nay to this day, the Greeks have no such custom, which is sufficient to confound the bold assertion of the minister, if nothing else were added. Thus much of his first untruth.   

THE XIII. VNTRUTHE.  
THe next untruth, fellow to the former is, that in the West church, the marriage of Priests was generally lawful, till the time of Siricius. For refutation whereof, I have spoken so plentifully in my late book against Bell, that it is 
The Doleful knel. pag. 51. and pag. 97. 98.  in vain to say more There I have by irrefragable testimonies proved that Priest's marriage was prohibited before, and by divers reasons drawn out of Siricius own epistle, made it manifest, that he was not the first who enacted that law, but that commanded the due observation of that which Apostolical antiquity had in that behalf ordained. To that place therefore I refer the good reader, for I love not always to be jangling of one thing, after the manner of the great Bell of Rascal. Here sufficient it is, to chamber his clapper, to oppose unto him the words a little before alleged out of S. Hierom against Vigilantius, and to choke him with the authority of his Magdeburgian brethren, who reprehend S. Hierom for writing thus in defence of his books against jovinian. The Apostles are chosen either virgins, or continent 
Cent. 4. col. 477.  after marriage: Bishops, Priests, Deacons, are chosen either virgins, or only such as for ever remain chaste after priosthood: which words of Saint Hierom they much mislike: and to hamper him with the grave authority of the second Council of Arles, celebrated about the year of Christ three hundred twenty six, according to the account of the Centuristes 
Cent. 4. col. 604. Can. 2.  of Magdeburge, which decreed, that none ought to be assumed to priesthood being married, unless conversion were promised. What conversion could this be, but the forsaking of his wives carnal company?   

THE XIIII. UNTRUTH.  
SIr Thomas continuing still his declamation in behalf of Priest's marriage, proceedeth also forward in lying writing thus. Yea Priests continued still married in Germany, for the space of one thousand seventy four years, until the days of the ungracious Pope Hildebrand, who termed himself Gregory the seventh: so soon as he had crept into the Pope doom by naughty means. What this graceless gospeler writeth of blessed Pope Gregory (whom generally the Historiographers of that time, & divers of them saints in heaven do highly commend) little importeth: a sufficient argument for his innocency, & zeal of true religion it is, that all novelling sectmasters band against him: never shall Bell show that he crept into the popedom by naughty means, though most easy to prove, that his ministership ran from his priesthood upon no holy motives. But to the matter. An untruth it is that Priests still continued married in Germany for the space of one thousand seventy sour years, as he boldly affirmeth, which I have proved most demonstrativelie against him in the doleful knell. For his 
pag. 101. 102.  manner is, again and again to inculcate the same thing, & so never lacketh matter for new books, though botched together of such rotten rags, as were handled else where, so that Bell can make a new title and a little change of the order, to beget a new pamphlet at any time upon small warning. But I list not to imitate his vain though justly I might, for why may not I sing the same song, if he fiddle still the same tune; Wherefore referring the good reader to the former place I will here only adjoin one testimony not mentioned before, and it is of Pope Zacharie who lived eight hundred years ago, and so, long before the time he mentioneth. This good Pope writing to S. Bonifacius our worthy countryman, than Bishop, & the apostle of Germany, hath these words, speaking of Priests. From the day of taking priesthood, they are to be forbidden, yea even from their own wives. Of this decree the 
Centur. 8. Cel. 704.  Magdeburgians make mention. True it is, that they score it up for one of his errors (thatiudgement proceeding from the error of their doctrine) but it giveth us a sufficient warrant, to score up that also for a notorious untruth, which the minister speaketh of the long lawful liberty of Ecclesiastical wivinge in Germany.   

THE XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. AND XIX, VNTRUTHES.  
Now followeth a litter of divers lies, contained in three or four lines, of which I must speak in particular. Pleading still for the marriage of the clergy he saith. For this respect was it that many learned and holy bishops were married in the ancient time, and flourishing state of the Church, vz S. Gregory, S. Clement, S. Spiridion. S. Philogonius, S. Eupsichius and others. This he bringeth to prove, that they married after receiving of holy orders, or at least used still the carnal company of their former wives, or else he proveth nothing. But in these words is contained a notorious lie, with siue followers and others. Why hath he not noted in his margin sufficient authority to justify what he saith? will these tricks of trusty sir Thomas never be left? It serveth not the turn to tell us, that he hath done it in his Survey, and that for two reasons. The first is, because many have not that book, and no reason can he allege for not adding the quotations here, but only that he would have his ignorant reader, to take all upon the report of his word; Secondly for that I find not in all his Survey any Clement noted for a married bishop, and yet have I viewed over the third and fourth chapters of his third part, where he entreateth of that matter: But to run over his particular catalogue.  
That S. Gregory, the father of S. Gregory Nazianzen. did marry after he was Bishop is one untruth: for he was married before ever he was christened, as he may learn out of that funeral Oration of Nazianzen, which in his Survey he 
Pag. 222.  citeth to prove him a married bishop. That S. Clement after the dignity of bishop took any wife, is a second untruth: for I challenge him confidently, though little knowing what Clement he meaneth. That S. Spiridion was married I grant, but Bell must prove, that it was after he was created Bishop, and not before, or at least that he used the company of his wife which he will never do, and so that maketh the third untruth. The very self same thing I say of S. Cheremon, and S. Philogonius which make up the fourth and fift untruths.   

THE XX. UNTRUTH.  
OF Saint Eupsichius more consideration is to be had, for Bell not only here maketh him a married bishop, but also in his Survey 
Pag. 222.  saith, that he was Bishop of Caesarea and a married man, and soon after his marriage martyred for lesus Christ. For if this be true, which so confidently he affirmeth, it seemeth very plain, that his marriage did follow holy orders. But out upon the corrupt conscience of this casta way. I utterly deny that he was ever Bishop, or in any sacred orders at all, being only a lay man, and of an honourable family. How doth he prove the contrary? For justification of that he saith, he quoteth in the margin the Tripartite history, and Nicephorus. 
Lib. 6. cap. 14. Lib. 10. cap. 10.  The words of the tripartite history bethese. Furthermore at that time, they say that Basilius a Priest of the church of Ancyra, ended his life by martyrdom, and Eupsichius a citizen of Caesarea in Cappadocia having lately married a wife, being yet as it were a brydgroome. Where is here any mention of his being Bishop. Sozomenus from whom Cassiodorus (the compiler of the triparaite history) took those Words saith, that Eupsichius was ex patricies, of the senators or nobility, without any mention of his Episcopal dignity.  
Nicephorus his second author delivereth the story in this manner Hoc ipso tempore etc. At this very time Basilius also a priest of the Church of Ancyra ended his life by martyrdom, and likewise Eupsichius of Caesarea in Cappadocia, borne of an ancient family, and honourable kindred, who a little before had married a wife. and was as yet a bridegroom. And this is so certain, that the Lutheran Centurists who would as willingly hear news of a bishop married after his consecration as Bell, but being herein not so impudent as he (that seemeth to be ashamed of nothing but truth and honesty) teporte him only to have been a noble man. Eupsichius (say they) was 
Centur. 4. Col. 1430.  of the City of Caesarea, descended of the nobility of Cappadocdia, slain by the Citizens of Caesarea etc. and they cite Sozomenus before mentioned. Whether this be not a gallant untruth meet for such a reformed minister, and professor of the sincere gospel, I refer me to the judgement of the prudent and indifferent reader: & I cannot persuade myself, but had he not wholly consumed his conscience, with continual custom of careless sinning, it could not posibly be, that he would ever set abroache such manifest, gross, and shameless untruths.    

Bells FOUR Chapter Of the Popish execrable Pardons.  

THE XXI. UNTRUTH.  
THis chapter though it be but short, yet it lacketh not the seal of his occupation: for his conclusion is adorned with this notable untruth: The Pope's pardon (quoth he) is a rotten rag of the new religion, brought into the church after a 1300. years, by Pope Bonifacius the eight. This very tale he hath told us divers times before, and therefore the more reason I have to challenge it for a rotten  of the Ragge-maister of Raicall. That it is such a one, I have proved in the foresaid doleful knelle, both by the testimony of 
Pag. 52. 53. etc.  other catholic writers, and also of Kemnitius the Lutherance of Germany, and Perkins the Puritan of England, his dear brothers in the Lord. And to say something in this place, I will add one testimony more, and it shall be of our mortal enemies the Waldenses, called also Pauperes de Lugduno: Who appeared to the world about the year 1270. as testifieth Claudius Cussordius, and 
Libro contra waldenses. Lib. de heresibus. 4. part Examinis pag. 375.  Guido: one of whose heresies was against the Pope's pardons as is most certain, and Kemnitius confesseth, which argueth that pardons were long in use, before the year 1300. and therefore be it known to Bell that he hath often rung out a notorious untruth.    

Bells V Chapter Of Popish Purgatory.  

THE XXII. VNTRUTHE.  
IN this chapter after he hath disputed against purgatory, with the authority of Roffensis (of which else where I intend to speak more) he cometh to his recapitulation and saith. Secondly, that the church of Rome believed it not (that is purgatory) for the space of 250. years, after which time, it increased by little and little. This either he meaneth is gathered out of the testimony of Roffensis & that is not true, for nothing doth Roffensis speak of 250. years, or deny that Purgatrory was always believed in the church, although he confesseth that the doctrine thereof was not generally so well known as now it is, which is far different from this proposition: Purgatory was not believed of the church of Rome for the speace of 250. years after Christ: Or else he affirmeth of himself, that Purgatory was not believed until that time, which I make no doubt but it is his meaning, for as much as he teacheth the same thing in other of his books: and then I must be so bold to tell him, that it is also a manifest untruth, as I have proved against him in the Dolefulle knelle, out of S. Denis S. Paul's scholar, 
Pag. 55. 56.  and Tertullian: yea and to his utter confusion, convinced out of himself: in this place I will add the testimony of his brother Perkins. Who in his Problem confesseth, that Purgatory in the church was first received by Tertullian the Montanist, 
Verbo Purgatorium. pag. 185.  wherein is one open untruth, to wit that he was the first, for he only affirmeth it, but proveth it not, and no marvel when he can not, seeing most certain it is, that it came from the Apostles. Non 
Hom. 69. ad populum. Prayer for the dead cometh from the Apostles.  temere etc. Not without cause (saith S. chrysostom) these things were ordained of the Apostles, that in the dreadful mysteries, commemoration should be made of the dead: for they know that thereby much gain doth come unto them, and much profit. Much more to the same purpose, might be produced.  
another untruth he hath, but more secretly conveyed vz that the doctrine of purgatory is a branch of Montanisme: which is most false, none ever of antiquity noting that in Tertullian for any erroneous doctrine: which no question they would, had they reputed that of like quality with the other. Bell for that great skill which he hath in ancient monuments, and great dexterity in discovering the origine of Popery, whereof 
Survey epi stle Dedicatory.  he vaunteth to the solace of his soul, shall do well to justify these two points of his precise brother: or if his leisure serve him not for so much, at least let him defend himself from lying, when as Tertullian by the testimony of Perkins confesseth Purgatory, who was dead before the year two hundred and fifty.  
Here the judicious reader may also note how the minister contradicteth himself. In his survey entreating of Purgatory he sayeth: Thus by little and 
Bel contradicteth him solse.  little, it increased, till the late Bishops of Rome made it an article of Popish faith. Where in the margin he noteth the time thus: In the year of our Lord 250. Hear he saith, that the church of Rome believed it not for the space of 250. years; after which (as he telleth us) it increased by little and little: and so in this place he maketh the seed of Purgatory not to have been sown before the year 250, and after ward to have increased till it came to perfection: there he affirmeth, that the seed was sown before. and increased by little and little untille it became ripe and perfect Popery, which was in the year 250: and so Purgatory was sown & not sown: grown and not grown: an article of faith, and not an article of faith, in the same one year 250. I will not deny but the minister hath some skill in botching together of old ends of divinity gathered out of the rag market of Caluin & such like Ceneva-merchants: yet I fear me it will be to hard for him, so to cobble the sayings together, that the flaw of a contradiction appeareth not.   

THE XXIII. UNTRUTH.  
IN the same place he writeth thus. Fistly, that the Primitive Church was never acquainted with the Pope's pardons, nor yet with his counterfeit and forged purgatory. A notable untruth, for not to speak of pardons, but of purgatory: was it not the Primitive church which believed purgatory, when as himself confesseth, that it was made an article of Popish faith in the year 250. 
Survey pag. 297 Lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 3.  at what time all the Popes were martyred for Christ: and in his Funeral he acknowledgeth the first thirty for godly men, saying, that both they and divers others taught the same doctrine which S. Peter had done afore them, and most certain that one of these thirty lived in the year 250. and so I trow they were of the Primitive Church. The Minister is full of distinctions, and his brain a shop of solutions, having many I says for the answer of any objection: yet it is to be feared, that no devise will free him from a gorsse untruth, affirming here that the Primitive Church was not acquainted with Purgatory, and yet teaching in his Survey that Purgatory was made an article of fiath by the late Popes of Rome in the year 250. I let pass how purgatory must by his own confession be Apostolical doctrine, when it was taught by those Popes which he granteth to have holden the faith of S. Peter, as I have urged against him in the doleful Knell: I omit also how falsely and ridiculously he calleth the Pope's that lived 1450 years ago, the late Popes of Rome. verily it should seem by his writing that he little careth what passeth from his pen, so it be walking against the Pope and Popish doctrine.    

Bells VI Chapter Of Popish Auricular confession.  

THE XXIIII. UNTRUTH.  
SCotus (saith Bell) affirmeth resolutely, that Popish auricular confession is not grounded on the holy scripture: but only instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome. The minister resolutely slandereth Scotus. Where doth that learned man teach any such doctrine? View his margin and nothing is there found. Bell is old ipse he, the man that had rather be credited upon his empty word, then to have the matter come to the trial of his quotation. It helpeth him not to say, that he hath noted the place in his Survey, both because many have not that book, (neither doth he here in this particular place of Scotus refer him to that book) and beside what reason can he give not to quote the place also here? But to wink at this malicious cunning of his, how doth he prove him guilty of this assertion in his Survey. I will first set down the doctrine of Scotus, and then examine what Bell bringeth, for by this means the good reader shallbe the better enabled to judge of the whole matter.  
That learned man disputing of the necessity of confession to be made to a Priest (not mentioning the word auricular, whatsoever Bell sayeth) 
In 4. dist. 17. quast. 1.  inquireth by what law a man is bound to confession, and determineth first in general, that the precept must grow from one of these laws, either from the law of nature, or the law positive of God, or the law of Church: and descending to particulars, he resolveth first, that we are not bound by the law of nature: nextly he disputeth whether it groweth from the precept of the Church, and not liking that opinion, he proceedeth to the next member and saith. Breviter etc. To be short, it seemeth more reasonable to hold the second member, that confession falleth under the positive precept of God: But then we must consider (saith Scotus) whether it be found explicitly (or in express terms) in the Gospel immediately from Christ, because it is manifest (quoth he) that it is not in the old law, or whether it be from him expressly in some of the Apostles doctrine: or if neither so nor so, whether then it was given of Christ by word only, and published to the Church by the Apostles: And having made this triple division, how confefsion might come by the precept of God, that is either first commanded by him in the Gospel: or else secondly to be found in some of the Apostle writings: or lastly instituted of Christ by word of mouth only. And having disputed of the first two members with dislike-of the second, saying: It appeareth therefore that it is not of the law of God published by Apostolical scripture. Whereupon he concludeth thus: Vel igitur tenendum est. etc. Therefore we must either hold the first member, to wit that it cometh from the law of God published by the Gospel etc. or if that be not sufficient, we must say the third, that it is of the positive law of God, published by Christ to the Apostles: but published by the Apostles, unto the Church, without all scripture: as the Church holdeth many other things, published in word only by the Apostles without scripture, etc.  
How sayest thou gentle reader hath Bellbelyed Scotus or no, affirming him to teach that Popish auricular confession is not grounded on the holy scripture, but only instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome: When as he maintaineth plainly that it is de iure divino of the law of God, instituted of Christ himself in the Gospel, or by word of mouth delivered to the Apostles, and by them to the Church, yea and bringeth good reasons, which before I omitted, to show that it was not instituted by the Church, as for that the Church would not have gone about to impose so hard a precept upon all Christians, unless it had been the commandment of God: as also for that it is not found, where this precept is imposed by the Church, but that before it holy men did think that this precept of confession did bind. For if they allege (quoth 
Extra de Penitent & remissionibus.  he) that chapter out of the Canon law. Every one of either sex etc. it is evident that the constitution was made by Innocentius the third, in the Council of Laterane: but S. Augustin was before that time more than eight hundred years, who affirmed confession to be necessary, as appeareth in his book of true and false penance, and certain authorities of his are put here in the text, and certain in 
That is of the Master of the Sentences. upon whom Scotus doth comment.  the Canon law.  
And not only Scotus his own words now cited do discharge him from the ministers false imputation, but also the minister himself in his Survey (where he entreateth of this point) wholly freeth him: for having cited Scotus his words, to prove that confession to the Priest was not found in the law of God extant in any of the Apostles Epistles, as before hath been touched, he proceedeth forward and saith: Thus writeth their subtle school doctor Scotus, 
Survey pag. 502.  who not able to establish auricular confesiion in the fcriptures, flieth to their last refuge, to wit to unwritten traditions for in the end of all he addeth these words. It appeareth therefore that it is not of the law of God, published by Apostolical scripture: Therefore we must either hold the first member to wit that it cometh from the law of God, published by the Gospel, or if that be not sufficient, we must say the third, to wit, that it is of the positive law of God, published by Christ to his Apostles, but published by the Apostles, unto the Church without all scripture. Out of which words of Scotus (though recited by Bell in latin only) we learn that he doth not only give himself the lie when he saith in his Survey, that Scotus his opinion is, that confession came unto us by tradition, and affirmeth here the contrary saying that Scotus his opinion is that it was only instituted and commanded by the Church of Rome: but also by the grace of his juggling sincerity, playeth two or three 
Three pretty tricks of Bel. The first.  other pretty pranks in his Survey.  
The first is, when he saith Scotus flieth to unwritten traditions, and specifieth not what tradition Scotus speaketh of, for it is not of any tradition Ecclesiastical or Apostolical, but of divine tradition coming form the law of God, and instituted of Christ himself, by his own mouth declared unto the Apostles, and by them to the church, as before hath been said. The second is this, Scotus (quoth Bell) not able to establish auricular confession 
The second.  in the scriptures, flieth to their last refuge, to wit unto unwritten traditions: for in the words following cited by Bell in his Survey, Scotus doth as well establish confession (for the word auricular he hath not, though Bell doth forced it in) by the law of God founded in the God spell, as by tradition coming from Christ, as before hath been noted out of Scotus, and this, may pass for a notorious untruth. The third is, that to conceal, this his abusing both of Scotus, and also of the 
The third.  good reader, he cited Scotus his words in latin only, not vouchsafing to put them into English, but he is to be pardoned, for that were not only to lie, but also to hold the candle for other to view his treachery. What sweet stuff doth he preach to his auditors out of the pulpit, where he is free from all controlment, that publisheth such untruths and playeth such coney-catching tricks in the view of the whole realm.   

THE XXV. UNTRUTH.  
AT the heels of the former untruth, follow in the same chapter divers others, his words be these: The Popish Gloss, of great credit with the Papists, telleth them roundly, that auricular confession can no way be descended but by tradition of the church: he runneth on lying very roundly in this manner. Panormitanus, Richardus, Durandus, Bonaventura, Hugo, and all the Popish Canonists generally approve and follow the same Gloss. In which few words be contained at least three untruths, of that quality that they may justly deserve the whetstone.  
The first is, that Richardus joineth in opinion with the gloss, and thinketh sacramental confession, to come from the institution and tradition of the Church: for he teacheth the flat opposite doctrine. Respondeo quod omnes etc. I answer 
4. Sen dist. 17. ar. 1. ques. 1.  (quoth Richardus) that all are bound of necessity to confess their sins to the Priest, because Christ hath commanded this, etc. and he proveth it both otherwise, and specially out of these words of our Saviour joan. 20. Receive you the holy Ghost: Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose you shall retain, they are retained. There is one notable untruth, for the minister to tyer upon.   

THE XXVI. UNTRUTH.  
THe second untruth and that a chopper is, that Durandus is also of the same opinion with the gloss, when as he doth directly maintain the contrary, his words be these. De consessione 
4. Sen 1. dist. 17. quait. 8.  autem strict accepta etc. But of confession taken strictly, which is a manisestation of our sins before a Priest, with hope of obtaining pardon, it is to be said, that it is not of the law of nature, nor of any law that is pure human: but of the law of God delivered in the Gospel. And after he hath proved, that it cometh no● from any law that is mere human: he concludeth thus. Propter quod relinquitur etc. Wherhfore remaineth, that sacramental confession, of which 〈◊〉 speak, is only by the law of God: and strait after h● inveigheth very earnestly against the gloss, fo● holding the contrary. What may not this Minister prove out of any author, and quickly convince us by our own doctors, if when the● say one thing, he can without all scruple, maintain them to teach the clean contrary.   

THE XXVII. UNTRUTH.  
THe third untruth followeth, no less shall melesse then the former: so that it seemeth that he was now in the right vain of lying: fo● how doth he prove that against Richardus, and D●randus, which so boldly he affirmeth. For proofs strait after he voucheth his Survey, with quotation in the margin, and also his Motives, but without any quotation at all. Coming to his Survey, there he telleth the same tale against Richardus and Durandus, referring himself for th● 
Survey pag. 502.  credit of that he sayeth to josephus Angles, whom he quoteth in the margin thus: Vide joseph. Angle 4. S. pag. prim. I have not miss it one letter, o● tittle: and yet view that place, he that will, nothing shall be there found: it may be he would, or at least should have said, pag. 209. for I make some doubt, whether ever he meant to cite the place truly, seeing there is in my conceit, some difference betwixt the number, of one, and the number of 209. and suppose that this book wear in quarto, which is a larger size, yet must it much exceed the number of an hundred. Perhaps he would have said, quest. 1. de confession, for the syllables pag. & quest resemble one an other so lively that he might easily mistake the one for an other.  
The truth is this (good reader) if any probable conjecture may be admitted, that he willingly perverted the quotation: Whether I have reason to judge so or no, I leave it to thy censure, upon the examination of the matter: not to urge therefore how in his pamphlet he usually omitteth all citations of the authors themselves, which ministereth just cause of jealousy: nor to speak how unlikely it is, that he could so grossly mistake it: I stand only upon this, whether josephus Angles hath any such sentence by him alleged or no: if he hath, than equity willeth us to interpret all the the best, but if josephus hath no such thing, neither doth so much as name Richardus or Durandus, then can it not be denied, but that he hath not only belied those two but also slandered, and corrupted josephus, by foisting in those two names, not found in him, & for the concealing of this his treachery, quoted him not at all in this pamphlet, and gave a false quotation in his. Survey: but the truth is that josephus maketh not any mention of Richardus or Durandus: 
In 4. sent. quest. de confess. ar. 1. pag. 209. Editionis 1584. apud Bellerum.  his words be these: Confessio sacramentalis is etc. Sacramental confession is instituted of Christ jesus, and confequently by the luwe of God &c: There have been six errors which are confuted in this first conclusion. The first is of the Gloss of the decret, in the beginning of the fift distinction: Panormitan upon the chapter, omnis utriusque sexus etc. S. Bonaventure (and he citeth the authority of Hugo) all which affirm that this sacrament was instituted by the Church. How sayest thou good reader, is not Bell a trusty gospeler, for a man to rely his soul upon? God grauntall good people to take heed of such an inward wolf, roabed outwardly with sheep's clothing, that is protestation of truth, and sincerity.  
If any object here and say, that at least the Gloss and Panormitan were of that opinion, I willingly grant them to have been in an error: S. Cyprian erred about rebaptisation, and yet died a glorious martyr: if wefollow not the fathers, though otherwise never so ancient or learned, when they serve from the common opinion, and tradition of the Catholic Church: doth he think that the erroneous conceit of a modern doctor or two, shall oversway the Church, to the following of their particular and private opinions. We acknowledge no such rule of faith in modern Canonists, adding notwithstanding, that where obstinacy possesseth not the will, but true obedience to the Church remaineth, error may be incurred by human infirmity, negligence, obscurity of the matter, or the determination of the Church being not yet given, or not known, but by no means heresy, albeit the thing itself may be contrary to faith, or good manners. Thus much briefly for their excuse: but how the minister can be defended is without the conceit of all common capacity. I might add for a fourth untruth how both here and in his Survey he maketh josephus also to mention Rhenanus, of whom he speaketh nothing at all: But I have done sufficiently for this Chapter, let us now see what followeth in the next.    

Bells VII. Chapter Of Popish venial sins.  

THE XXVIII. UNTRUTH.  
COncerning his seventh chapter wherein he disputeth of venial sins, two things are to be noted, before we come to his untruths. The first is, that all Catholic writers both old and new, acknowledge and confess some sins to be venial, and not to deserve the everlasting pain of hell fire, as by and by shall more plentifully be proved. The second is, that there be two small things (commonly called school questions) wherein divers follow divers opinions. The first is whether venial sins be contrary to the commanundement, or beside the commandment: some learned men holding the one opinion, and some embracing the other: which is a curious quiddity, disputable in schools, and nothing touching the heart of religion, and besides none of these, but willingly submit themselves to the censure of the catholic Church: and yet the minister as though it were some fundamental point, noteth here very gravely out of josephus, that the one opinion is now more common in the schools, than the other, and out of that by main dexterity of learning inferreth the mutability of our religion: but he should have done well to have proved first that this concerned religion, that is any point of faith, as he would have it thought, or else he saith nothing to the purpose.  
The second school question though somewhat greater is, from whence it cometh, that some sins be mortal, some venial, whether from the nature of the sins themselves, or from the mercy of God. The common opinion, most received and most sound is, that some sins of their own nature be small or venial, others great and mortal. Bishop Fisher, and some four other alleged by Bell, think that all sins of their own nature be mortal: & that it proceedeth from the mercy of God that some be venial, because he would not upon divers smaller sins impose so great a punishment. But not withstanding this small difference, neither B. Fisher, nor any of the others deny venial sins, as Bell and his consorts doth.  
This being so let us consider what a notable untruth (and that often rehearsed) the minister offereth to the view of his readers, when he saith: Almainus, Durandus, Gerson, Baius and other famous Papists, not able to answer the reasons against venial sins, confess the truth with the Bishop that every sin is mortal. He doth cunningly abuse them in leaving out those words of it own nature, which ought to have been added according to their opinion, and he like wise doth add in citing of Roffensis immediately before: doth not this dealing of his argue that he would have his reader to think, that these learned men denied all venial sins, which damnable doctrine of the Protestants they detest: for example Bishop Fisher in his 22. article against Luther holdeth some sins to be venial: (that is such as take not away God's grace) Nec opinor te etc. Neither do I think (saith Bishop 
Cont. L● the 'em art. 32.  Fisher to Luther) that thou wilt say, but that a mortal sin so soon as it is committed, banisheth grace from the soul, and doth constitute the sinner himself in the hatred of God: and if a mortal sin doth take away God's grace, and not a venial, verily it is manifest, that there is no small difference betwixt a mortal and venial sin. Behold Roffensis teacheth some sins to be venial, and that there is a great difference betwixt a mortal and a venial sin. Of the same mind be the other, though by his cunning handling he would make the to deny venial sins, and to hold all mortal, according to the new doctrine of the Protestants.   

THE XXIX. UNTRUTH.  
AFter this untruth immediately followeth an other: Yea the jesuit S. R. (quoth he) with the advise of his best learned friends, in his answer to the downfall of Popery, confesseth plainly, and blusheth not thereat, that the Church of Rome, had not defined some sins to be venial, until he days of pits the fift, and Gregory the thirteenth, which was not fifty years ago: In which words he blusheth never a whit to slander that learned man, and wholly to corrupt his meaning. He saith not that the Church of Rome had not defined some sins to be venial, until the days of pius the fift, and Gregory the thirteenthe, as this licentious castaway corrupty fathereth upon him: for he knew well that to beseve venial sins, was an article long received before the times of those Popes: but he affirmeth only that to hold venial sins to be only such by the mercy of God, was censured and condemned by those Popes: why did Sr. Thomas his sincerity, cut a way these words by the mercy of God? forsooth because that without lying and corruption, he can object nothing against Catholic doctrine.  
The same catholic writer, noted him in the place cited by himself of two untruths, the one for calling B. Fisher the Pope canonised marty: the other for styling Gerson, a Bishop: neither of which be true, but he slily passeth over them, as not knowing poor wretch what to say in his own defence, in to such straits doth this dominiring doctor drive him. self by his talon of overlashinge.   

THE XXX. UNTRUTH.  
Strait after this trick of treachery, he crieth out in the fervour of his soul. O sweet jesus what a world is this, that silly foolish Papists should be so bewitched, as to think Popery the old religion, and in that bitter pang was delivered of an other abominable , for it followeth, W see it plainly confessed by our adversaries that for the space of a thousand five hundred, and three score years, all sins were deemed mortal. Had not this minister renounced all modesty and true dealing, never would he put in print such palpable untruths: for no one Catholic author can he name since Christ, that denied venial sins: the ground of this untruth is the precedent, where he affirmed that the Church of Rome, had not defined some sins to be venial until the days of Pius the fift, & Gregory the thirtebth, which being most false, as was there said, it remaineth also that this can not be true which so boldly here he maintaineth.  
Many sentences of ancient fathers and other notable authors do encounter us every where, teaching plainly and perspicuously some sins to be venial. To name one or two before the late time he for the confusion of the minister. The Council of Trent confirmed by pius the fourth, and so in orderly reckoning before Pius the fift, hath these words Albeit in this mort all life, holy and 
sess. 6. cap. 11.  just men do fall sometimes, at least into light and daily sins, which are also called venial: yet they cease not for all that to be just, for that saying of just men is humble and true, forgive us our debts. Glorious S. Augustin, teacheth the same doctrine in divers places: one I will cite, in which he hath the very name. Aly (quoth he) can not therefore 
In Enthi rid cap. 22.  be sometime commended, because we do sometymely to save others, wherefore it is a sin, but venial which benevolence doth excuse. But there is no better way to cool the heat of this challenger, then to cause his brother Perkins to let him blood. How doth he like 
In his Problem verbo Peccatu●● veniale. pag. 74.  these words of his? A venial sin that is beside the law not against the law of God, and that which of his own nature bindeth only to the guilt of tempor all pain, was not known to the fathers, at least for seven hundred years after Christ, after ward began openly to be taught and defended. This Minister dealeth very niggardly with us, yet very bountyfully to prove Bell alyer for none I think will believe him saying, that we denied all sins to bemortal for a thousand, five hundred years, when as our mortal enemy confesseth, that venial sins were taught and defended, nine hundred years ago. This being so, may not I far more truly, treading in his steps cry out, and say? O sweet jesus that any Protestant's should be so bewitched as to give credit to such● creature, that hath Apostated from his Priesthood and shown a fair pair of heels to the congregation: on given over so to shameless lying, that no cloak of defence can be found to shroud him nay when the case is so clear, that his own brother doth depose against him: or that they should be so inveigled by him or others, as to think our religion to be new, which was planted in our dear 
Catholic religion planted in Englaud a thousand yea●●s ago  country a thousand years ago by S. Gregory, as all our Chronicles, and ancient monuments testify, and the ruins of many Abbeys, do cry out and lamentably proclaim: and which that holy Pope received from S. Peter, by the current of his blessed predecessors: or so much as once dream, that Pro testantisme can be the old faith, which licentious Luther not long since began, neither the name being 
The beginning of the Protestants religion.  ever heard of before, nor any of that profession known then in the whole world, nor for many ages before, as their silence being therein urged, maketh them to confess and never indeed as we most constantly defend, and can easily by inevitable demonstrations convince and prove: and whose doctrine so little pleaseth our English Protestants, 
Luthera religion. detested of English Protestants.  namely about the real presence, that draw cuts they will, one part can not be excused from heesy, and for that crime, be in danger of everlasting damnation.    

Bells VIII. Chapter Of the Pope's faith.  

THE XXXI. UNTRUTH.  
BEfore I come to his untruths, I will speak a little of the entrance of his chapter, in which he that hath changed divers faiths, will needs dispute of the Pope's faith: and he beginneth in his coughing gravity, after this manner: Wisdom with the whole troop of virtues were needesull for him, that should dispute of the holy father's faith, or power. Very well, we penetrate his meaning: neither wisdom nor any virtues be needful for such a one: what then? it followeth I therefore post deosculationempedum, humbly pray to be heard in defence of truth, wherein I will desire no more of his Holiness, but that only he will grant me so much to be true, as I shall prove to be true by thetestimony of the best learned Popish writers. Note good reader the profound wisdom of the Minister: because neither wisdom nor virtue is requisite, for one to dispute of the Pope's faith & power, therefore he will take the matter in hand. Indeed were it granted that none but so qualyfied as he describeth, were to entreat of the Pope's faith & power: all voices I think would go clear both of his side and ours, that he were the most meet to entreat of that subject. Of his graceless gyrninge at the kissing of the Pope's feece I have in the Forerunner said so much, that in his pamphlette called the Pope's Funeral (the pretended answer of the Forerunner,) not knowing what reply to make, he smoothly over slipped that point, as I have noted in the doleful knell: and yet still he hath 
Pag. 247.  it by the end, so much the conceit doth please his heart. Again also he is flinging at the title of his Holiness, but of that I have spoken sufficiently before●  
His smaller untruths I do not mean shall here make tale, as where he fathereth a certain book upon the Seminary Priests, and yet a few lines after, saith that the book was written by Watson in the name of all the rest: whether Watson faith so or no I little know, never seeing myself any such book of his: but one thing am I most sure of, that most false it is, that any such book was set out by the Seminary Priests: or that they gave consent to any such book, seeing very few Seminary Priests or none at all as I verily think can be named, that liked of that his proceeding, as I have handled abundantly in the doleful knell, where the good reader 
Pag. 36. 37. etc.  may find, what little credit is to be given to watson's infamous works, which so oftern and sosolemnly this Minister allegeth. Now to examine that which followeth.  
Bell proceeding forward, collecteth out of the said watson's books, in this formal manner. First therefore if we mean to wring any truth out of the Pope's nose we must have recourse to his Holiness, at such time as he is sober and not when he is furious, lest he become stark mad and forget the knowledge of the truth: as though Watson had said that the Pope is some time sober, and sometime furious: he doth much wrong him, for his words reported by Bell himself in this very chapter, contain no such thing: only he saith that as the prudent Greek appealed from Alexander, furious, to Alexander sober, so may the seculars notwithstanding any decree, set down by his Holiness by wrong information, appeal even from the Pope as Clemens, unto his Hohnes as Peter: he speaketh of Alexander surious and sober: and not of the Pope. Bell showeth small conscience in belying the dead and laying more faults upon him unjustly, when alas he had other wise too many. Again Watson speaketh of matters of fact, wherein the Pope may by wrong information be deceived, & not of questions of faith, as the Minister cunningly insinuateth, if not plainly affirmeth, wherein Watson would never have admitted, that the Pope might be deceived: and so the foundation of all his cavilling against the Pope, as a private or public person, falleth to ground, as shall strait more clearly appear.  
His rustical immodesty and childish scoffing at the Pope's nose, little becometh the gravity of his ministership, and as I think little contenteth his best fauourits: but he that is led up and down by the nose like a Buffalo, by the Prince of this world, must to gratify his master, employ his railing talon according to his black inspiration. God give him true penance, for these and many more like sins, least fruitless penance in the next world, be the reward of such monstruous wickedness.  
Not long after he hath these words For first it is a constant maxim (quoth he) that the Pope, and none but the Pope, must judge in all controversies of faith and doctrine. Nay it is rather a most constant Maxim, that Bell seldom writeth any thing that is true: false it is that the Pope, and none but the Pope, is the judge in all matters of faith and doctrine: for a general Council also is judge, yea and by the opinion of many learned divines, the Pope judging alone without a general Council may err, as shall strait appear, and that out of Bell himself.   

THE XXXII. UNTRUTH.  
THe next untruth is contained in these words: That their Pope can not err in faith judicially is this day with Papists an article of their faith. An untruth I say it is, for though the more common and better opinion be, that the Pope in his judicial and definitive sentence can not err in faith, yet false it is that this is an article of faith, when as many divines both have, and do hold the contrary. To prove which thing, I need no better witness than Bell himself, whose great grace it is, to say that in one place, which he denieth in an other, making the wind to blow, as serveth best for the traffic of such a merchant.  
In his motives he setteth down this conclusion. 
Pag. 47.  Not only the Pope as Pope may err, in his public decrees, when he alone defineth matters of faith or manners, but also when he so defineth with a provincial romish Council. This conclusion is certain and undoubtedly true, even by the testimony of best learned Papists, and because Bellarminus doth not deny this to be so, I willalleage his words which be these: Secunda opinio est etc. The second opinion is, that the 
Lib. 4. de Roman. Pont. cap. 2.  Pope even as Pope may be an heretic and teach heresy, if he define without a general Council, and that this in very deed hath chanced so. This opinion doth Nilus follow, and defend in his book against the Pope's primacy: the same opinion. have some of the university of Paris follouced: as Gerson and Almain in their books of the church's power: and of their opinion also are Alphonsus, and Adrian, who all do not ascribe the infallibillity of judgement to the Pope, but to the church or to a general Council only, in all matters of faith.  
Out of these words of his I infer, first, that he trippeth when he sayeth: that their Pope can not err in matters of faith judicially, is this day with the Papists an article of their faith, for here he confesseth the contrary. I deduce secondly, that he grossly contradicteth himself, affirming that in one place which he denieth in an other. I gather thirdly, that he overreached (as I noted before) when he affirmed, that we make none but the Pope judge of all controversies, for generally all Catholics make a Council with the Pope also the judge, and some as hath now been said, in no case make the Pope alone the judge, but jointly with a general Council.   

THE XXIIII. UNTRUTH.  
AN other followeth immediately in the next words, in which he will needs prove cut of Sotus, that it is this day an article of faith, that the Pope can not err judicially. That their Pope (quoth he) can not err in faith judicially, it is this day wit● Papists, an article of their faith: the famous Papist Dominicus Soto, shall be the spokes man for the rest: alber saith he the Pope as Pope, can not err, that is to say, can not set down any error, as an article of faith, because the holy Ghost will not permit that, nevertheless as he is a private person, so he may err even in faith, as he may do other sin These words of Soto prove very well, that the Pope as Pope could not err, which the most an best divines do also maintain, but no word on syllable hath he, that this is an articls of faith: which was the point that Bell should have proved, and for which he pretended to cite his words, but in them no such thing appeareth, and therefore the minister doth know what followeth.   

THE XXXIIII. UNTRUTH.  
IN the words ensuing strait after, he runneth upon this doctrine taught by Soto, and generally holden of Catholics, vz that the Pope can not err in faith: and confidently avoucheth, that it was never heard of, till of late days: his words be 
Lib. 2. Doctrina. lis fidei cap. 47. & 48. Lib. 2. Sum cap. 109. etc.  these. This only will I say, that this Popish article: the Pope can not err in faith, was never heard of in Christ's Church for the space of a thousand five hundred years. A gallant untruth worthy of the reformed minister. Thomas waldensis, was long before that time, as also Turrecremata, both which hold that the Pope can not err in faith: and not only late writers but the ancient fathers have taught the same doctrine, reying themselves upon the promise and words of our Saviour in the Gospel: to name two or three. S. Augustin. Numerate sacerdotes etc. Number the Priests 
In psal. contr. partem Donati.  (saith he) yea even from the very seat of Peter: in that order of fathers, see who succeeded whom: that is the rock, which the proud gates of hell do not overcome. S. Cirill, mentioned by S. Thomas Aquinas, speaking of that promise 
In Catena.  of Christ, Math. 16. hath these words. According to this promise, the Apostolical Church of Peter, remaineth pure from all deceit, and heretical circumvention. Innocentius the third. He understandeth (saith this holy and learned 
Epist. ad episc. Arelatens.  Pope) that the greater causes of the Church, specially such as he about articles of faith are to be referred to the see of Peter, that knoweth how our Lord prayed for him, that his faith might not fail,  
And to be short, his dear brother Perkins once 
Verbo Primatus num. 17.  more shall testify against him. The Pope (saith he) hath not infallible judgement determinative: so all have taught yea the Papists themselves for four hundred years: insinuating sufficiently, that after that time, it was taught: which though it be an untruth, seeing it was taught before, yet it serveth to prove Bell no sincere minister, who mayntaineth confidently, that no such doctrine was heard of till the year a thousand five hundred: To conclude Bell himself contradicteth else where what he saith here, and so giveth himself the : By the uniform consent 
Motiutes pag. 18.  (quoth he) of all learned Papists, (Albertus Pigghius only excepted,) the Pope in his own private person may be a judas, a fornicator, a Simonist, an homicide, an usurer, an Atheist, an heretic, and for his manifold iniquities damnedin hell: That this is the doctrine of all Papists, as well concerning the Pope's private person, as touching his judicia definitions, is confessed by Robertus Bellarmnius, Bartholomen Caranza, Melchior Canus, Dominicus Soto, Thomas Aquinas Antoninus, Caietanus, Covarrwias', and others: but that the Pope as Pope, and public person can err, that all the said Papists, with their complices, constantly deny, as which only point once confessed, would utterly confound them, and make frustrate their whole religion. I leave it now to the good reader, to give his verdict, whither Bell hath no overreached, and also contradicted himself, affirming both that this Popish article, the Pope cannot err in faith, was never heard of in Christ Church, for the space of a thousand five hundred years: and yet affirming, that Antoninus, and Thomas Aquinas, maintained the very same opinion, the latest of which, died many a fair year before the time he mentioneth.   

THE XXXV. UNTRUTH.  
THe next is found in that very sentence, which he bringeth for the proof of his former false assertion, to wit, that this article, the Pope can not err in saith, was never heard of in Christ's Church, for the space of a thousand five hundred years. Many famous Papists (quoth he) I might alleaga, but one Alphonsus will suffice: we doubt not (saith he) whether 
Lib. 1. de heres. cap. 4.  one may be a Pope and an heretic both together, for I believe there is none so shameless a flatterer of the Pope, (ever except our jesuits and jesuited Papists) that will ascribe this unto him, that he can neither err, nor be deceived in the exposition of the scriptures. One main lie, with a pretty trick of lieger-demayn: for he is to prove out of Alphonsus that the Pope might err in faith judicially, for of that is the question, as appeareth in the premises: and that this article, was never heard of, for the space of a thousand five hundred years, and yet in the foresaid words of Alphonsus, no suehe thing is contained, seeing he speaketh in them not of his judicial decrees, but of private errors, which may befall him in the exposition of the scriptures: and that Alphonsus must needs mean of his private opinions in writing or otherwise, and not of his deflnitive sentence, is certain: for otherwise there be, and were in his time, that held the Pope could not be an heretic judicially or err as Pope, as in the precedent untruth hath been handled: much less doth Alphonsus say, that it was never heard of for the space of a thousand five hundred years, that the Pope could not err in faith judicially, for of this point he hath not one word or syllable.  
Beside this untruth there lurketh in the same sentence, an other coney-catching trick of the Minister, proceeding from his rancour, and inveterate malice: for these words, ever except out jesuits and jesuited Papists are none of Alphonsus, but a damnable dram of his own devotion: for with malicious slight, hath he inserted those words in the very same letter, with the other of Alphonsus, but included them in a Parenthesis, so that by this artificial cozenage of his, he hath laid a pittefall for the ignorant, and provided a buckler of defence against any accusation: for what meaneth the printing of them both in the same character, but to have the ignorant or unwary reader, to take them for Alphonsus his words, directed by him, against the flattery of jesuits and other jesuited Papists as he termeth them? Charge him with this juggling of his, and then he will plead, that he intended no such thing, but spoke them of himself, and therefore distinguished them by a Parenthesis: but had not his meaning been corrupt, he would have put the matter out of doubt, by printing them also in a distinct letter: Which because he did not, his devout dependents may think him clear from all sinister dealing: we that are so well acquainted with his little conscience of putting in practice any sleight, & fraudulent invention, that may tend to the disgrace of Catholics, and Catholic religion, can not but justly suspect him of sinister and malicious dealing.   

THE XXXVI. UNTRUTH.  
IN the recapitulation he taketh his leave with a cast of his occupation. And thirdly (quoth he) seeing this strange faith was not hatched, or heard of in the world, for the space of a thousand five hundred years, no not in Alphonsus his days as we have heard already. For in these words he adjoineth an other untruth vz, that to say the Pope can not err as Pope, was not heard of in Alphonsus his time, that is about some fifty or three score years ago, when as Dominicus Soto who lived in his time defendeth the same opinion, as before was showed: nay when as Caranza, Canus, Caietan, Antoninus, and S. Thomas teach the same doctrine, as a little before out of Bell himself was proved, all which were in his time, or before him: and Alphonsus in the former place alleged, hath not any thing to relieve Bell: for neither doth he say there, that the Pope as Pope may err, and though he did, yet were it a notorious untruth that none taught otherwise till his time, or in his time, when as Alphonsus saith no such thing: but on the contrary, that many in his days and before, taught that the Pope judicially, or the Pope as Pope, could not err, as out of Bell himself hath been proved: and so I leave the minister, plunged into a labyrinth of untruths.    

Bells IX. Chapter. Of the condign so supposed merit of works.  

THE XXXVII. UNTRUTH.  
THis chapter is bestowed against the merits of good works, wherein divers untruths are intermnigled to give it the better outward gloss, and to make the matter he speaketh of more probable to the ignorant reader. The holy Fathers (quoth he) do often use the word merit, and call the works of the saithful meritorious: yet this they do, not for any worthiness of the works, but for God's acceptation, and promise sake, who hath promised, and will perform, not to suffer so much as one cup of could water given in his name, to pass without reward. So he denieth the fathers to have ascribed any merit to good works proceeding from grace, for any dignity or worthiness in the works themselves, but only from God's promise and merciful acceptation, for the worthiness and merits of his sonnet This I challenge for a manifest untruth, when as plentiful testimonies want not, to prove that works proceeding of grace are meritorious, not only for his promise or acceptation, but also for the dignity of the works: yea the scriptures are evident in this point. Call the workmen and pay them 
Math. 10. ●. 8.  their higher: where reward is given to the works: where of it followeth that works deserved it: likewise our Saviour saith: Come ye blessed of my father, 
Math. 25. ●. 34.  possess you the kingdom prepared for you, from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungered, and you gave me me to eat. Where our Saviour signifieth, that heaven was given to good works: for in more usual significant words it can not be spoken, that heaven is given as a reward to the works of mercy, and beside in the same place, damnation is given to bad works. Get you away from me ye cursed (saith Christ) 
Ibidem.  into fire everlasting, which was prepared for the devil and his angles: for I was an hungry and you gave me not to eat etc. Seeing then the scripture declareth plainly, that bad works deserve danation, & be the cause thereof: as plainly doth it also signify, that good works merit heaven, and be the cause thereof.  
We find also in scripture that men are said worthy of reward, as: That you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for the which also you suffer: 
2. Thessal. 1. v. s. Apocal. 3. v. 4. Cap. 16. v. 15. Survey pag. 398.  and, They shall walk with me in wh it's, because they are worthy: Yea the word (merit) is found in the scripture: in Ecclesiasticus we read thus. All mercy shall make place to every one according to the merit of his works. Bell in his Survey giveth two answers. The first is, that the book is not Canonical as which (saith he) was not found written in the holy tongue. A pitiful shift, for who knoweth not that many parts of the Canonical scriptures be not written in the Hebrew tongue, as all or almost all the new testament: and sundry books be written in that tongue, which be fabulous and of no authority: and where did Bell learn, that a book, could not be canonical yea in the old law, except it were written in the Hebrew tongue? We have as good authority to prove it Canonical, as he hath for the apocalypse, which I trust he will not deny: and that is the ancient Council of Carthage, wherein S. Augustin was 
Carthag. 3. can. 47.  present: and be it that it were not Canonical, yet is the authority thereof very weighty, and of more credit than other authors, though learned, virtuous, and ancient: other wise why is it read in the English Churches, in that very place and order in which the Canonical scriptures are.  
This solution not fully satisfying him, he giveth a second, which is, that the text is not truly translated, invaighing against the vulgar edition, and the Council of Trent, that authorised the same: for it should have been translated saith he, according to his works: but this is a poor cavil, for in true sense, what difference is there betwixt these two, according to his works: and according to the merit of his works: verily the old interpreter, as learned as Bell, and of as good a conscience, more than twelve hundred years ago, and S. Hierom not inferior to Bell, in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, translateth thus: that we m● sight against Gabaa Benjamin and render unto it for to 
judic. 20.  works it deserveth, and yet the formal word (dese● veth) is neither in the Greek or Hebrew, but thou according to all the foolishness which, they have done Israel. The second place is in S. Paul where h● saith. And beneficence and communion do not forget, so 
Mebr. 13. v. 16.  with such hosts God is promerited: be hold here all the word (merit.)  
But because Bell speaketh of the Fathers, will briefly show, that he doth slander the● when he saith that they did term works meritorious, because God hath promised to accept them ● worthy, for the worthiness of his son, and for his merits reward them with heaven, as if they had merited the same for they teach that good works proceeding from grace, and in the virtue of Christ's moritts, hau● worthiness in themselves, & be meritorious, which Bell denieth them to hold, and no marvel when as himself teacheth, that good works are so far from having any worthiness in them, that he maintaineth this paradoxical proposition Good works are imperfect, polluted with sin, and i● rigour 
Survey pag. 400.  of justice worthy of condemnation. Wherefore t● name one of the Greek Church, and an other 
Hom. 4. de Lazaro. ●irca medium.  of the latin: S. Chrisostom writeth thus. If God (quoth he) be just, he will render both to them, and these according to their merits. Note that he acknowledgeth merits of justice, and so not only of mercy, liberality and free acceptation: s. Augustin saith, 
Epist. 105. ●d sixtan.  As death is rendered to the merit of sin, as a stipend: so eternal life to the merit of justice, is rendered as a stipend.  
More might be produced, but these are sufficiet, being of ancient, and learned fathers: and to say the truth, greatly requisite it is not to labour about the proof of this point, when as Caluin confesseth not only that the ancient doctors used the name of merit, but also addeth that he did most 
Institut. cap. 15. §. 2.  wickedly provide for the sincerity of faith that first invented that name: for had they meant no other thing by it, than Bell would persuade us, the sincerity of the faith had no ways been touched, neither needed he to have used any such bitter accusation: but this complaint of his, argueth that they intended more by that name, than he did admittt for true, and so I leave Bell convicted of an untruh.  
But saith Bell, the Fathers commonly joined merits and grace together. I willingly grant it, for without grace, our works are of no price, dignity, or merit, in the sight of God, and therefore the second Council of Arausica, saith excellently well: Reward is due to good works if they be they be done: but 
Can. 18.  grace which was not due goeth before, that they may be done. In which golden sentence, the merit of good works is taught: & the fountain from whence they springe, openly declared. That which he allegeth out of S. Bernard, to wit: It is sufficient to merit, to know that our merits are not sufficient: because it served not his purpose it may be that he did of purpose quote it false, for it is not in the 18. sermon, but in the 78. sermon upon the Canticles: and as that which he hath all eadged, doth nothing help him, so that which followeth, and omitted by him worketh his bane. It is sufficient to merit (faith S. Bernard) to know that our merits are not sufficient. Very well, than he acknowledgeth merits: but that which cometh after pertaineth to beat down presumption of merits, and not to deny them, for it followeth. But as it is enough to merit, not to presume of merits, so enough is it to judgement, to want merits: and a little after. Werfore see that thou haste merits, having them know that they are given thee: had hefaithfully cited all these sentences, there could no scruple have troubled the reader, what S. Bernard's opinion was about merits. That holy man acknowledgeth merits, but like a true spiritual father laboureth to plant humility, and to keep down pride and presumption.   

THE XXXVIII. UNTRUTH.  
TRue it is likewise (saith Bell) that not only the fathers generally, but the best Popish school doctors also, Durandus, Aquinas, Gregorius Ariminensis, Dominicus Soto, Marsilius, Waldensis, Burgensis, and sundry other, do unisormly and constantly affirm, that no man's works, how holy so ever they be, either are or can be meritorious pro perly, but only meritorious in an improper, and large kind of speech, as is already said: This is proved at large, in my other books. This indeed is handled in his other books: for his special grace is, with the same matter, to make many new pamphlets: but whether it be proved or no, is an other question. Should I shake up, & in particular examine these authors, many untruths would be discovered: but I intend it not, partly because it would be tedious, partly for that some of those authors, be not as hand, and lastly for that one S. R. in his learned answer to his Challenge of The downfall hath canvased all these authorities, and laid open his fraudulent and lying proceeding. To that book 
Art. 5. chap. 60  therefore for sifting of this sentence, I refer the reader. Here only I say briefly. First that all these Catholic writers, and all others do acknowledge that good works are meritorious of eternal life: only some of them named by Bell, vary about the manner of speech, for they would not have the words condign or congrual to be used: but only that we should say, that the works of just men proceeding from grace be meritorious of eternal life, as waldensis, and Burgensis. Others will have good works to be meritorious condignly, that word being taken in a large manner. So Durandus and Ariminensis. Secondly I say that neither Aquinas, Gregorius Ariminensis, Dominicus Soto, Marsilius, Waldensis, or Burgensis, do allow that good works proceeding from grace, are not otherwise meritorious, save only for the promise of Christ, and his free acceptation, as most boldly he affirmeth, and therefore doth he therein slander them, when he saith that all the former authors, do affirm works only meritorious in an unproper and large kind of speech as is already said, that is according to his precedent doctrine, that they be meritorious only for the promise of God, and his free acceptation, and not otherwise: this is an untruth I say, speaking thus of them all in general, for one particular instance to the contrary overthroweth him, yet I will add a couple. S. Thomas Aquinas shallbe the first, who teacheth, that a man in grace may merit everlasting life condignly: and he giveth the reason, because everlasting life is rewarded according to the judgement of 
12. quest. 114 art. 3.  justice, according to that 2. Timoth. 4. Concerning the rest there is laid up for me a crown of justice, which our Lord will render unto me in that day, a just judge. Behold Aquinas acknowledgeth reward of justice, proving it out of S. Paul, and so not of mercy only and Gods free acceptation: he confesseth also as is evident out of the very title of his article, merit of condignity, which Bell a little before calleth a monster lately borne at Rome: so we see that S. Thomas attributed more to the merit of works proceeding from grace, then pleaseth his humour, and consequently that he doth greatly abuse him, when he would have him teach no other merit of works, then by Christ's only promise and free acceptation.  
The second shallbe Dominicus Soto, cited here also by Bell, who aknowledgeth that works proceeding from grace, do merit condignly. The works of 
Lib. 3. de Natura & gratia. cap. 8.  a just man (quoth he) which are good in their nature and circumstances, all are condign merits both ofencrease of grace, and also of eternal life. And a little after, he refuteth two common solutions of Protestants. The first of which is that-urged here by Bell, vz that reward is due to our works, not in respect of themselves, but for the promise of God. Melancthon quoth he) and his companions do answer, that everlasting life is called a●rewarde, not because it is due to our works, but to the promise of God: which answer of theirs, he doth there examine and utterly reject. And will the minister for all this tell us, that Soto doth affirm works only meritorious, in an unproper and large kind of speech: that is as Bell saith, not for any worthiness of the works, but for God's acceptation and promise sake. He may if he please, but he must give us leave whether we will believe him or no.  
They that desire to know more of his juggling tricks, and untruths, touching these authors may read the foresaid author S. R. in his answer to Bells downefal of Popery. 
Art. 5. cap. 9    

THE XXXIX. UNTRUTH.  
IN his third paragraphe he citeth josephus Angles, who saith, that good works proceeding of grace without the promise of God are wholly unworthy of eternal life. This he allegeth, as though it were mortal doctrine to us: where as if himself were this day at Rome, and clear in all other things, never would he be called in question about that point: and yet doth he make a mighty matter of it, urging it almost in all his books. If the good reader desire a more ample discourse hereof he may find it in the doleful Knell, where josephus his words are thoroughly examined, and the minister 
Lib. 2. cap. 5. sect. 3.  for many mad tricks very handsomely laid out in his colours.  
Here I will note only one egregious untruth of his, cunningly commended to the view of his readers: for having produced josephus, (though not citing his whole sentence, but the last words only,) to show that works proceeding from grace, are not meritorious of eternal life, without the promise of God, but wholly unworthy: he inferreth thus. Then doubtless the best workess of all, can no way be meritorious: which is a false conclusion, gathered out of the premises, for it should have been thus: then doubtless the best works of all can no way be meritotious without the promise of God: why did he perfidiously curtal a way these words, and make josephus absolutely to conclude against the merits of works, when as in that very place, he teacheth the merits of works, proceeding from grace, together with the promise of God? To make his proof the more probable and passable, he would not cite any more of josephus Words than were for his turn. This is the sincerity of trusty S. Thomas: and yet after such a shameful prank, as though he had given us a great blow, he addeth with triumphant exultation in this manner. When any Papist in the world, can truly disprove this illation, let me be his bondslave for his reward. The illation is disproved, let him therefore provide himself to perform that penance, which he hath said upon himself, & try whether he that hath had such bad speed in the ministry, and ill success in his Priesthood, can find any better fortune in the new vocation of servitude and slavery. Of his fourth paragrasse, I shall have better occasion to speak strait ways: wherefore to his fift, in which the fourth also shallbe dispatched.   

THE XL. UNTRUTH.  
TRue it is fifthly (quoth Bell) that the late Popish Council of Trent hath accursed all such as deny, or not believe the condign merit of man's works, & confequently it hath made that an article of Popish faith, (O wonderment of the world) which was no point of faith, for the space of a thousand five hundred and forty years, viz: the condign merit of man's works, a monster lately borne at Rome. The minister mistaketh the matter: the monster he speaketh of, was borne at Trent in Germany and not at Rome in Italy, as the beginning of his words do testify: beside it was not in the year one thousand five hundred and forty, but one thousand five hundred forty and seven, as appeareth out of the sixth session of that Council.  
But more thoughly to examine, whether this by any such monstrous doctrine as he speaketh of, or whether it was never heard of before, or rather whether he be not a monster for malice and lying, I would know what he meaneth when he saith: the late Popish Council of Trent, hath accursed all such as deny or not believe the condign merit of wans works: and a little after. The condign merit of man's works a monster lately borne at Rome: for if he understandeth such works as proceed from man only, by the force of his own free will, and nature, without the help of God's grace (for some cause have I to suspect that he may mean so, both because barely he termeth them man's works, and am not ignorant, how they commonly infame us with that doctrine) if (I say) that be his meaning, then doth he most shamefully belly the Council of Trent, as I report me to the very first canon of the sixth Session, which is this. If any shall say, that a man can be justified before God, by 
Sess. 6. can. 1.  his works which are done by the force of human nature, or by the doctrine of the law without divine grace by jesus Christ, be he accursed.  
Mary if as he ought, he speaketh of man's works proceeding from God's grace, as I rather suppose he doth, then most false it is, that it is a● new doctrine, or monster, as the new monst● of the ministry would make it, as I could abu● dantly show, both out of scriptures and father's and something hath been touched before: here ● convince him of a gross untruth. I will have n● other witness against him then himself: for ● the precedent paragraph, he hath these forma● words: True it is four that the jesuit S. R. Robert Parsons, indeed I challenge the man, in his suppose and pretended answer to the Downfall of Popery, hat● set down these conclusions against both the Pope, an● himself. The first conclusion. There is merit of eternal life, and our supernatural works done by God's grace● are meritorious of eternal life and glory. The secon● conclusion. Good works done in God's grace, are condignly meritorious of eternal life. The third conclusion, This condign merit is not absolute, but supposeth the condition of God's promise, made to reward it. These are the jesuits conclusions, set down by the best advise of his best learned friends, among whom the jesuitical Cardinal Bellarmin must needs be one, which conclusions for all that do evidently prove as much as I desire.  
But these words of his, do manifestly prove, that either he little knoweth or careth what he desireth: before he came upon the Council of Trent, for accursing all such, as did deny or not believe the condign merits of man's works, and invaighed against that doctrine, as a monster lately borne at Rome: and yet now the same doctrine is against the Pope, and the jesuit S. R. and it doth evidently prove as much as he desireth: and so that doctrine which before was false and monstrous, is now become sound and heavenly: was there ever such an other changeable Chameleon, that as it were with one breath, denieth and affirmeth one and the self same thing? Certainly the poor man hath more need of a cunning Surgeon, to put his brains in joint, then of ink and paper to write such lunatical pamphlets.  
Of his false conjecture, proceeding from lofty vanity, in making F. Parsons the author of the answer to his Downfall, what shall I say, but that it is a ministerial pang coming from the rare conceit of his monuments, which must be also bombasted by adding, that he was assisted by the best advise of his best learned friends, among whom the jesuitical Cardinal Bellarmine must needs be one: thus patching only upon an other, for his own credit and reputation, as though forsooth one learned man were not any match for him, except he had the help of Christendom, Cardinal Bellarmine himself. A certain fond fellow of mean fortune, had a conceit, that all the ships that came into the haven of Athens were his own: and Bell hath such a spice of foolery fallen upon him, that he thinketh all the learned jesuits of Christendom to be mightily troubled, about the answering of his books, when he hath been so contemned, that none for many years ever stirred penue against him: and hath lately been so banged and canvased, that I do think h● hath often wished, that he had been a sleep, or el●playing at the bowls, when he published those ri● diculous and fantastical challenges.    

Bells x. Chapter Of Transubstantiation in Popish mass.  

THE XLI. UNTRUTH.  
TRansubstantiation (quoth he) is not only repugnant to all philosophy, but also so absurd in Christian speculation, that it was unknown to the Church of God, and to all approved Counsels, Fathers, and histories, for the space of one thousand, and two hundred years: it was first hatched by Pope Innocentius, the third of that name, in the late Council of Laterane, which was holden one thousand two hundred and fourteen years after Christ. A world of untruths be here packed together, did time serve to range at large: to be as brief as I may, I say first that the mystery of Transubstantiation is no more repugnant to philosophy, nor absurd in Christian speculation, than the mystery of the ineffable Trinity, and other articles of Christian faith: and I make no doubt, but had Bell lived in the time of Constantius the Emperor, the same argument should have gone in behalf of Arrianisme, for with as much probability, might he have urged the same: If he take it not in good part to have his reputation so touched, to omit his changeable disposition, let him give some reason why this maketh more against Transubstantiation, then against the consubstantiality of the son of God.  
That Transubstantiation was first hatched by Innocentius, in the year one thousand two hundred and fifteen, he boldly affirmeth, but how truly remaineth now to be examined. For either he meaneth only the name, or the thing imported by the nametyf the first we easily grant it, as he must also that the name consubstantial was not heard of till the Nicene Council: for new names may be invented by the Church, the better & more plainly to explicate an ancient mystery of faith, as Vincentius 
In suo Comm●nitori●.  Lirinensis that ancient father learnedly teacheth: wherefore if he hath no other quarrel against Transubstantiation, but the bare name, it is very ridiculous and foolish: for if the doctrine itself be found in the fathers and scriptures, a poor spite it is to cavil at the name, and with like grace may he descant upon the words Consubstantial, Trinity, Incarnation, Deipara, or Mother of God, etc. which if he like not to do, then let him neither do it here, or else give some good reason of his so divers a disposition.  
But if by Transubstantiation, he meaneth the very point of doctrine itself, that is the changing of the substance of bread, into the body of Christ by the words of consecration, then is it a most intolerable untruth, that Transubstantiation was first hatched by many pregnant profess being alleageable to the contrary. To begin: in the time of Leo the ninth, about the year of Christ one thousand and fifty, in a Roman Council, Berengarius was condemned: whose heresy as th● Magdeburgians suppose, came then to light, upon th● intercepting of his letters. written to Lanfranc● concerning his opinion of the sacrament. Berengari● 
Contur. 9 col. 454. 455.  Andegavensis, etc. Berengarius (say they) deacon of Anio● perceived that it was not truly taught, that after the speaks the words of the supper, the supper, the substance of the element did quite vanish and were transmutated or changed, in● the very body and blood of Christ. Behold transubstan● tiation by the confession of our mortal enem ye● was taught in the Church, much more than a● hundred years, before the time which he assignet for the first beginning thereof: The same Berengari● abjuring not long after his heresy in the Council of Rome, under Nicholas the second, and yet not lon●ge after returning to his former vomit, and pu●blishing a book in defence thereof, (such a worth) 
B●rengarius father of the Sacramentaries, a perjured person. Cent. 9 col. 459.  pillar, and constant father, have the Sacramentarie● for their heresy) Lanfrancus, as the same Magdeburbians report, opposed himself against it setting forth that book against Berengarius, which is ye● extant. Primum autem But first of all (say they) he goet● about with many words, to defend the doctrine of Transub●stantiation which which Berengarius did find fault with, to wit● that after consecration, the bread was essentially converted into the body of Christ, and the wine into his blood. Transubstantiation than was not first hatched at the time he speaketh of, when as it was oppugned and defended, many a fair year before, that is about the year of Christ, one thousand and three score, as Bells dear brothers confess.  
another brother of his, one Perkins, thought cast in a more precise mould, acknowledgeth Transubstantiation, about four hundred years before the time he mentioneth, for speaking of the ancient fathers thus he writeth. Et tenendum eos, etc. 
Rroblem. verbo Realis presentia.  And it is to be holden, that they knew not Transubstantiation at least for eight hundred years. False it is, that Transubstantiation was not taught before, as shall strait ways be justified against Perkins, but in the mean time the good reader hath to note how he giveth thely to Bell, affirming Transubstantiation to have been about some four hundred years before the time, in which by Bells calculation it was first hatched.  
The former Magdeburgians note S. Chrisostom and 
Centur. 5. 5. col. 517.  Theodoretus for teaching Transubstantiation. Chrysostomus Transubstantiationem, etc. Chrysostom (say they) seemeth to confirm Transubstantiation, for he writeth thus in his sermon of the Eucharist, dost thou see bread? dost thou see wine! do they pass like other meats into the draft? God forbid, do not think so, for even as wax put into the fire is made like unto it, no substance thereof remaineth, nothing aboundeth: even so think here the mysteries to be consumed with the substance of the body: and to this same effect they report strait after, certain words out of Theodoretus.  
The same author's note how that S. Ambrose in his preparative prayers before the mass, maketh mention of Transubstantiation, and application for the living and the dead. True it is, that they style him only by the name of the author of the first prayer preparative to Mass, amongst S. Ambrose's works, citing nothing else for proof, but the censure of Erasmus, as though the fantastical and partial affection of a modern mutable man, were an infallible rule, to measure the father's monuments. Perki● also very pertly censureth it for none of S. Ambros● his works, but yet giveth a reason, and that a pretty one: ibi adoratio sacramenti There (quoth he) is adoration of the sacrament. Let such reasons as these runn● for sound, they are none of the father's worke● because they are against us and our doctrine, and it will not be any difficulty at all to answer quickly, whatsoever is produced out of antiquity, yea or out of sacred scripture itself. Did strong reason more prevail, than preconceipted fancy, they would rather infer thus: adoration of the sacrament is allowed by S. Amhrose, ergo it is no false, superstitious or idolatrous doctrine.  
Furthermore the same Lutheran historiographers reprehend Eusebius Emissenus, (who died in 
Contur. 4. col. 975.  the time of Constantine, as the same men report out of S. Hierom) about Transubstantiation. De caena Domini etc. Concerning the supper of our Lord (say they) he spoke nothing commodiously of Transubstantiation, upon the words of Christ, unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man, etc. Behold a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech, hath by his unspeakable power, turned bread and wine, into the substance of his body and blood. divers other notable authorities might have been alleged, but I made choice of these as being so plain, that the mortal enemies of Transubstantiation, can not deny, but that they make clearly for that point: and beside, there is no better boxing of Bell, then with the holy fists of his crooked brethren.  
Lastly, what man of any insight, not furiously transported with the passion of noucltie, can persuade himself, satisfy his conscience, or once imagine if the Real presence and Transubstantiation, ●ad not been taught by Christ and his Apostles, ●hat it could ever have come into the Church, and anished the former opinion, especially that being mystery so far surpassing the reach of reason, and ●he other so fitting common conceit, and easy to understand. Can (I say) a doctrine so new and difficult possess the world, and exterminate former faith, coming from the Apostles, and so easy to apprehended, without infinite garboils and contradictions: or is it possible if any such thing had been, that it could have escaped the pens of all writers, none ever either of love to truth, or hatred to falsehood, complaining of that great ruin of veri●ie, and strange overflow of superstition. The Protestant's here can say nothing, to give true & real satisfaction, to any sincerely desirous of salvation. On the contrary, we can tell them, that when the doctrine of the Real presence and Transubstantiation began to be impugned, how it was strait resisted by learned men, and divers Counsels, as before was touched entreating of Berengarius, which is an argument, that our religion is ancient and Apostolical, and his a filthy rag of heretical novelty.  
And thus have I abundantly proved, that Transubstantiation began not under Innocentius in the year one thousand two hundred and five, as Bell affirmeth: but is far more ancient, being taught by the old doctors of Christ's Church: yea that it cometh from our Saviour himself, and his blessed Apostles.    

Bells XI. Chapter. Of Popish invocation of saints.  

THE XLII. UNTRUTH.  
OMitting Sr. Thomas his irreligious and injurious snatching, at that most constant martyr of Christ, S. Thomas of Canterbury, let us consider what else he bringeth. The Papists (quoth he) in their fond Popish invocation ascribe that to Saints, which is only and solely proper unto Christ himself: I prove it, because they make the Saints departed, not only mediators of intercession, but also of redemption. Most false it is, that we make them mediators of redemption and salvation, as he may learn out of the Council of Trent, where it is decreed, that it is good and profitable to invocate Saints, 
S●ss. 25.  and to fly unto their prayers, help and assistance, for the obtaining of benefits, by his son jesus Christ our lord, who is our only Redeemer and Saviour. But let us hear what potent proof Bell bringeth. Thomas Becket (quoth he) sometime Bishop of Canterbury, is invocated of the Pope, and all his Popish crew, not barely and absolutely as an holy man, but as the son of the living God, and the only Saviour of the world. Terrible words, and fearful speeches: what will be the end of this boisterous blast? it followeth. This assertion to the godly may seem wonderful, but it is such a known truth, as no Papist whatsoever he be, can without blushing deny the same, by that time the matter is examined. I verily think all modest Protestants will blush at the impudence of this lying Minister, that maketh such a solemn preface to so notorious and shameless an untruth. Now followeth the deadly crack and terrible threatened thunder clap. These are (quoth he) the express words of their ●hymne, which they both say and sing, upon that day which they keep holy for his praise and honour. Tu per Thomae sanguinem, etc. By the blood of Thomas which he for thee did spend: bring us thither o Christ, whether Thomas did ascend.  
I utterly deny, that any of these words, or all together, make S. Thomas a mediator of redemption, or do prove, that we invocate him, as the son oh f the living God, and the only Saviour of the world, as the Ministers lying lips lash out: nay I add more, that as no words here import any such thing, so some there be, that on the contrary free us from that imposed blssphemy: for we invocate and desire Christ, that he would for the merit of his martyrdom bring us to heaven: but did we make S. Thomas a mediator of redemption, and invocate him as the son of the living God, as Bell chargeth us, than would we not invocate Christ, as his superior, which yet we do, and so a most outrageous untruth it is, that we make s. Thomas, a mediator of redemption, or invocate him as the son of the living God, and the only Saviour of the world, as Saintles Sr. Thomas avoucheth.  
I pass over with silence, how falsely he also affirmeth, that the Pope and all his Popish crew, do upon the feast of S. Thomas invocate him in that manner: Bells lips are his own, he may employ them that way which best pleaseth him, for the Pope, and many thousands more, use the Roman Breviary, and Missal, in neither of which, any such prayer is contained, and as I suppose not foun● but in those of Sarum use, which be now an●tiquated and out of date: as both that, and all other long since were with Bell: howbeit the words import not any blasphemy at all, for the meaning o● the prayer is no other, but that Christ would bring us to heaven, by that singular and especial merit o● S. Thomas, in giving his life and shedding his blood for the love of him: for if one may merit upon earth, as the Catholic Church teacheth, that ● man by the grace of God and the merits of jesus Christ may, than none will deny, but the act of Martyrdom, and shedding of our blood for the testimony of truth is meritorious, as being the most high, and sovereign work of charity, fortitude, faith, patience, etc. that we can possibly do in this world. And if the merits of Saints do profit us, and we may pray to God by their merits, as straightways shall be proved, then may we pray to Christ by the merits of S. Thomas, and by that especial merit of the shedding his blood for his honour, and that without any injury to his merits or blood, S. Thomas his merits being inferior to the merits of Christ, these being the heavenly fountain, from whence both the merits of S. Thomas, and the merits of all other glorious martyra and Saints, have flowed, and received all their force and virtue.  
Thus we are freed from the wicked slander of the Minister, that blusheth not to say, that we make S. Thomas a mediator of redemption, and invocate him as the son of the living God, and the only Saviour of the world: and together is declared, how the prayer containeth not any blasphemy, but sound & good doctrine, taken in the true sense, though now not used in the Catholic Church.   

THE XLIII. UNTRUTH.  
AFter this prayer to S. Thomas, he citeth a sentence out of Polanchus added in the end of Absolution, to wit this. The passion of our Lord jesus Christ, the merits of the blessed virgin Mary, and of all Saints, and all the good thou do, and the punishment thou shalt suffer, be to thee for remission of thy sins, for increase of grace, and for the reward of eternal lise: which words of Polanchus he doth prosecute with this lying gloss. Lo the merits of Saints, are joint purchasers of salvation with Christ's blood, and our works procnre us remission of our sins, increafe of grace, and eternal glory. An untruth it is, that the merits of Saints are joint purchasers of salvation with Christ's blood, if he mean that the merits of Christ and his Saints do alike avail to salvation, as he must mean, or else he saith nothing: for the merits of Christ, are as I said before, the wellspring, from whence all the merits of all men's actions do proceed, and they he for the infinite dignity of the person acceptable of them selves, in the sight of his father: but the merits of Saints, are derieved from God's grace, by the merits of Christ, and are not grateful in the eyes of God, but for his sacred merits and passion: the merits therefore of Christ and his Saints, may avail us for the obtaining of spiritual gists: the merits of Christ, as the principal cause: the merits of Saints, as dependent of his, and the secondary cause.  
And that God and his creatures may in this manner, without any injury to his name be joined together, we learn out of sacred scripture: jacob 
Genes. 48. v. 15. 16.  desired God and his Angel to bless his children. The Israelites cried out; the sword of our Lord and Gedeon. In Exodus we read thus. They believed 
jud. 7. v. 20. Exod. 14. v. 31. 1. Timoth. v. 21. Act. 15. v. 28.  our Lord and Moses his servant. S. Paul testified before Christ jesus, and the elect Angels. And the Apostles doubted not to say: It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us. If in these and such like speeches, God and his creatures be joined together, without being made joint purchasers, (for I trust Bell hath not the courage to utter any such word) but as the creator, and the secondary cause: in like manner may the merits of Christ, and his Saints be conjoined, as hath been said.   

THE XLIIII. UNTRUTH.  
AFter a fit of railing at this doctrine of the Catholic Church, in praying to God by the merits of his Saints, he saith: No scripture, no Council; no approved history, was ever acquainted with this newly invented heresy, never known to the Church of Christ, for the space of one thousand years and odd. An untruth it is, that it is any heresy to pray to God by the merits of his Saints, as the heretical minister boldly afflrmeth: but allegeth neither scripture, Council or father, or approved history, to give credit to his assertion, so much he presumeth upon his own authority. Falsealso it is, that it was never known for the space of a thousand years. To prove one and the other against Bell: In the old testament, for so much as just men then dying went not strait to heaven their ransom being not paid, as here I suppose according to the Catholic doctrine, nor they ordinarily knowing the prayers of the living: therefore they did not in those times use to pray unto them formally saying, S. Abraham pray for us, as we in the new testament do: yet did they pray unto God by the merits of his servants, as we read in sundry places: neither doth that avoid the argument which Bell answereth in his Survey, viz, that 
Pag. 318.  not the merits of his Saints were urged, but his own promise and covenant set before him: for 
The merits of holy men prescnted before God. Psal. 131. 3. Reg. 15.  their merits also be remembered, and not only the covenant of God: for example Solomon prayeth to God, by the merits of his father David, saying. Remember o Lord David and all his meekness: and a little after: For David thy servant turn not away the face of thy Christ and in the book of Kings we read: For David, our Lord God gave him a candle in Israel, that he might raise up his son after him because that David had done right in the eyes of our Lord. S. Augustin relying upon these & such like sayings, teacheth that the merits of his Saints may avail us in the sight of God. 
Quest. 149. in Exodi●.  Admonemur cum merita nostra, etc. we are admonished (quoth he) that when our own sins do lie heavy upon us, that we be not loved of God, that we may be helped with him by their merits whom God doth love.  
In the new Testament we find the same doctrine confirmed. The sick man of the palsy was cured for their faith, which brought him to our Saviour: for the sacred text saith: and jesus seeing 
Math. 9 v. 2.  their faith, said to the sick of the palsy, have a good hear● son, thy sins are sorgiven thee. If the faith of hi● servants living upon earth, and daily offending him, procured mercy to others, how much mor● may the burning charity of his Saints in heaven free from all danger of sinning, obtain for v● spiritual benefits at the hand of our heavenly father? Much more might be brought, but not necessary when as Perkins confesseth sufficient to overthrow Bell, for reprehending the ancient fathers as attributing to much unto the intercession of Saints, he citeth these words of S. Leo as offending 
Problem. verbo Intercessio, invocatio, etc.  in that kind. We believe and trust that to obtayn● the mercy of God, we shall always be helped by the prayers o● our special patrons, that so much as we are kept down by our own sins, so much we may be listed up by the merits of the Apostles. And yet Bell invaigheth against this doctrine as blasphemous, and more confidently then truly affirmeth, that no scripture, no Council, no father, no approved history, ever knew it, and that it was never known to the Church, for the space of one thousand years and odd, how truly how sincerely, I refer me to the premises.   

THE XLV. UNTRUTH.  
I Must therefore conclude (saith the Minister) with this mevitable illation: ergo Popish invocation of saints, but a rotten rag of the new religion: and to show ●ow new it is, he quoteth in the margin the year, ●fter this manner: that is in the year of our Lord ●ne thousand four hundred and seven: which 
An. Dom. 1407.  ●s some two hundred years ago. But I may far ●etter infer, that for gross untruths and cunning lying, he may be let lose to any of the Ministry. what one of Bells dependents that read ●he former words, or any other, not acquainted with his tricks, would not verily think, that praying to Saints as it is used in the Catholic Church, is not above two hundred years old, as the tenor of his words import? and yet I do not think he will stand to that, for if he should most certain it is that it is a gross and godless untruth, as himself I suppose will not deny, when as he telleth us in divers others of 
Funeral. lib. 1. cap. 4. pag. 4. Survey pag. 536. pag 57  his books, that Popish invocation and adoration, was not known till the year three hundred and scutcheon. which though it be a loud lie, as I have proved in the doleful knell. showing the use of invocacation and adoration, before the year three hundred and scutcheon: yet is it nothing comparable to this here uttered, making that article a thousand years younger than in his former books, and plainly contradicting here what he saith in those former places. Content he was, that his ignorant reader should gather that sense, and for that end delivered the words in such a cunning manner: but let him be urged with that which he teacheth el● where, and then his refuge will be, that he speaketh not of the invocation of Saints in generally but of the particular manner of praying by their merits, or by the blood of Thomas: such be the● slights of the minister. But to prosecute him● flying: albeit that be his meaning, (if it be so, for● it may be that I have construed his words, to a● better sense than ever he intended) yet I say thate praying to God by the merits of his Saints, is also● older than the year one thousand four hundred and seven, and that both by his own confession, who in the precedent words saith, that it was never known to the Church of Christ, for the space of one thousand years and odd: signifying that not long after it came in, which is almost two hundred years before the time here assigned: as also by the verdict of his brother Perkins, who censureth S. Leo, that lived twelve hundred years ago for the same doctrine: but according to truth itself, it is as ancient as the Gospel, and the former days of the patriarchs and Prophets as before was said. Lastly that very particular prayer to S. Thomas, which he mentioneth, is as I make no doubt more ancient than the time he noteth, seeing S. Thomas was martyred more than four hundred years ago, and canonised strait after his death: and so in no sense his words can by any means be excused from an untruth, and in that which they represent to common understanding, from a monstrous  and palpable contradiction.    

Bells XII. Chapter. Of the Communion under one kind.  

THE XLVI. UNTRUTH.  
THe Minister speaking of the Communion under one kind, and desirous to show that we have broken the institution of Christ, like a god●esse gospeler corrupteth the very text of sacred Scripture. And S. Paul (saith he) urging Christ's institution to the Corinthians, telleth them plainly and religiously, that they must receive the holy Eucharist under both 
1. Corint. 11. v. 27.  kinds, which last words he printeth also in a distinct letter, to show that they be the Apostles words, and quoteth accordingly in the margin the particular place vz 1. Cor. 11. 27. but view it he that will, if he find S. Paul to have those words, we yield him the victory: if not, let his favourites consider how they venture their souls with such a minister, that offereth violence to the very word of God, which he would seem so much to reverence. The words of S. Paul be these. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread or drink the chalice of our Lord unworthily, he shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of our Lord: which be far different from these: That they must receive the holy Eucharist under both kinds, affirmed by him to be the very sentence of S. Paul. The most that can be gathered out of S. Paul's words truly cited is, that in his time the Eucharist was ministered to lay people under both kinds, which we deny not: but they prove n● that it neither was, nor might be given vnd● one kind. Mary out of the words as he cite● them, the matter is made cocksure, and t● text framed fit for their purpose: give him t● leave that he may coin scripture as he plea● and no question but as he hath upon a doubt change of religion, always found the word God for his warrant, so will he still (chaun● what chance may) never lack it to back him all his actions.  
No shelter can shroud him from the cryne of corruption. For to tell us that it is the me●ning of S. Paul, as it is most false, so can it n● justify his falsification: for than might any ci● the text, according to that interpretation whic● he thinketh agreeable thereunto, and as the ve●● words of the text, which is most impious ●● be said. For example. The Catholics alleadge● against the Arrians, to prove Christ to be of o● and the same nature with his father, this sentence of S. john I and the father are one: which pla●● 
joan. 10. v. 30.  in truth by the circumstance of the letter, an● exposition of venerable antiquity proveth s● much: yet who ever have presumed, or no● dare to cite it after Bells manner, and say, th● Evangelist S. john reporting Christ's words affirmeth plainly and religiously that Christ an● his father be all of one nature and substance for allow this, and the Arrians may with like authority cite it to the contrary, and rehearse the text after Bells manner thus: The Euanelist S. john reporting Christ's words teacheth plainly and religiously that Christ and his father be not one in nature and substance but in consent of will: which licentious proceeding being once brought in, nothing will be found sincere, nothing true and sound, but the broad gate set open to all corrupt dealing and falsification.  
Let us but acknowledge any tradition of Christ or his Apostles, not expressly found in the written word, though never so much warranted by antiquity: and strait in great zeal, he is upon us with the curses and threats out of deuteronomy, and the Apocalypse, of them that add or take away any thing from the word: and yet himself, I know not upon what dispensation, corrupteth, choppeth, and changeth as hath been said, and would be loath for all that, to be reputed for any other than a sincere preacher of the word, and one that handleth the scripture with great respect and reverence: but I hope such as carry due regard to their souls, will look better to his fingers, and upon trial of his treachery, avoid him for a false teacher, and detestable Doctor.   

THE XLVII. UNTRUTH.  
PRosecuting still the same matter of communicating under both kinds he saith. This was the practice of the ancient Church for the space of one thousand two hundred and thirty years after Christ: abo●● which time they began in some odd Churches, to leave the cup and to minister the sacrament in bread only: b● that was done as Aquinas confesseth in some few places only 
3. Part. quaest. 80. art. 12. in Cor.  An untruth it is, that the communion under on● kind, was not in use till the year one thousan● two hundred and thirty, as more boldly the● truly he affirmeth. Sozomenus and Nicephorus, report 
Lib. 8. hist. cap. 5. Lib. 13. cap. 7.  how a certain woman infected with th● heresy of Macedonius the better to conceal her religion, came to the Church, and received the sacrament from the hand of S. chrysostom, as it wer● with a mind strait ways to eat it: but sh● cunningly gave it to her maid, and received of he● other bread brought from home: which when she went about to eat, she found it strait turne● into a stone. This fact showeth that all than received not the chalice: for then this woman could not have dissembled, both because the chalice was not given into her own hands, (as the consecrated host than was) and though it had, no such evasion is imaginable.  
another example we have in Pope Leo the 
Serm. 4. de Qua●irages.  first, who saith that the Manichees to conceal their heresy, used to receive the consecrated host with Catholics, but not the chalice: which argueth that it was free at that time to receive the chalice or not, for had they been all bound to receive the chalice, the Manichees could not but have been known, as they which never took the chalice: and therefore S. Leo, commandeth not to observe them, who sometime did receive the chalice; and sometime did not, but those which did ●uer receive it at all: for at that time, it was a ●te of a Manichee, that sect detesting the drin●●ge of wine, as a thing utterly unlawful and ellinge it the devils gall. I omit much more ●hich might be brought out of antiquity, yea out ●● scripture itself, some thing before hath been ●●uched, and more to that purpose very strongly ●ight be urged, but brevity to which I am informed, maketh me to pass over many things.  
Only for a conclusion, I can not but note, how ●●norant Sir Thomas of Rascal, entreateth learned S. Thomas of Aquine, whom first he maketh by ●●nning insinuation to say, that about his time, ●hey began in some odd Churches to leave of the ●uppe, and to minister the sacrament in bread ●nly: whereof he hath not one word, and no marvel, when it was of far greater continuance ●s hath been said: but more plainly doth he ●aunder him, when he maketh him to say that to ●inister the Sacrament in bread only, was done ●n some few places only, his words are these. Therefore providently in some Churches it is observed that 
3. par. q. 40. art. 22.  ●he blood be not given to the people to be received, but be ●nly taken of the Priest: Where he doth not say, that ●his was in some few places only, as Bell maketh ●im to speak, but that in some Churches it was ●o observed, which might be very many, as well as some few, and that this was the real and true meaning of S. Thomas in the same very place, is gathered out of his own discourse, for having propounded some arguments after the manner of Schools against the truth, to wit that it was not lawful to receive the body of Christ without his blood: he cometh to the contrary opinion, which 
3. par. quast. 80. ar. 12.  he there defendeth and saith. But contrary to this i● the use of many Churches, in which the body of Christ au● not his blood, is given to the people that communicateth. In which words blessed S. Thomas informeth us, that the body of Christ and not his blood was given to the people in many Churches: Saintlesse Sir Thomas maketh him to say, that the body of Christ was given in some few places only, when as he hath neither the words nor the sense, but the clean opposite words and meaning. Halensis also more ancient than S. Thomas (as who was his master) testifieth that in his time, it was almost a general custom to receive under one kind. Very lawful it is (saith that learned man) to receau 
Part. 4. quast. 11. memb. 2. art. 4. num. 3.  the body of Christ under the form of bread only, allay men do almost every where in the Church: and yet all this not witstandinge, the minister blusheth not to father the direct contrary opinion upon blessed S. Thomas.    

Bells XIII. Chapter. Of private Mass.  

THE XLVIII. UNTRUTH.  
THat any Priest in the primitive Church said private Mass, that is received the mysteries all alone, none being to communicate with him, our adversaries generally deny, holding that they ever had other participants in that sacred ction. This was (saith Bell) the use and practise of the hurche every where, for more than a thousand years together. But afterward when the people's devotion began to be remiss, the Priests then devoured up all alone. This minister that hath devoured up all conscience, little ar in what manner he speaketh of those myteries, which antiquity so reverenced, that they would not speak of them but in covert terms before infidels: and S. Chrysostom calleth tremenda mysteria, 
Hom. 69. ad Pepulum.  dreadsull mysteries: and yet he speaketh of them as homely, as though he were talking of the English communion, which is had in such high reverence, that the communion book prescribeth, that the fragments remaining, shall be for the ministers private uses, and so giveth him leave to feed with them his chickens, or to sop his pottage.  
To the matter: an untruth it is, that private masses were not before the time he mentioneth. The twelft Council of Toleto almost nine hundred years ago, reprehendeth those Priests which offering sacrifice did not communicate. Quale illud sacrificium etc. what manner of sacrifice is 
Can. 5.  that (saith the Council) of which neither he that sacrificeth is known to be partaker: which words do show that none was present to communicate, and yet the Council requireth only that the Priest himself doth communicate. S. Augustin also recordeth how a Priest offered sacrifice in 
Lib. 22. de civit cap. 8.  a private farm, for the freeing of that place, from the molestation of wicked spirits. In so particular and extraordinary a place, and for so particular a business, no probability that there were any other communicants.  
But to come upon him with the authority ● his brother Perkins, who confesseth that th● 
Problem. verbo Missa privata.  kind of private masses, were not known to th● Church for the space of eight hundred years: n● denying but afterward they were used, which ● two hundred years more than Bell will graunt● In the same place he confe sseth, that private masse● began first in monasteries, for proosse whereof he citeth S. Gregory: which both convinceth Be● of overreaching, and seemeth not very well t● agree with his former assertion: for how wer● not private Masses known to the Church for th● space of eight hundred years, if S. Gregory maketh mention of them two hundred years before. The truth is (good reader) that no beginning here o● can be shown, nor any authentical author i● former time, that complained or opposed himself against any such custom as newly brought in, and contrary to the practice of the Church or institution of Christ: which is an argument that it is passing ancient, and was never reputed for false doctrine, or repugnarite to sacred scripture.    

Bells XIIII. Chapter Of Pope Martin's dispensation for the brother to marry his natural sister.  

THE XLIX. UNTRUTH.  
Such is Bells malice against the Pope, that when better matter faileth, he fetcheth lies out of the ●ard flint: his words be these. Pope Martin saith 
Part. 3. tit. 1. cap. 11. prope finem.  Antoninus the Popish Archbishop and canonised Saint, ●oke upon him to bispense with one, that he might marry his own natural sister. A magnifical untruth twice ● old before, and shall again, if he have any more ●ookes to publish: for his latter books, be nothing else but certain rags drawn from the dunghill of his former: what he saith of Pope Martin is a notable untruth, as is apparante out of S. Antoninus own words; which for love to sincerity he would not cite intierely in his Downfall, where this knocker crept first forth: some he alleged but so corruptly, that having been well canvased for that his treachery both in the 
Pag. 33. 34. etc. Lib. 2. cap. 7. pag. 226. etc.  Forerunner, and also in the doleful Knell, and not knowing how to defend himself, he hath for all that still entertained the untruth, but wholly concealed the words, for more sure dealing.  
S. Antoninus his words be these, having relation to others precedent, which make also against Bell. Nevertheless it is found that Pope Martin the fift, did dispense 
Part. 3. tit. 1. cap. 11.  with a certain man, who had contracted and consummated matrimony, with a certain natural sister of her, with whom he had committed fornication: yet with great difficulty, and because the matter was secret, and the man not fit for religion, or to remove into any other country, and so scandal would have followed of the divorce if it had been made. Pope Martin then dispensed not with a man, to marry his own natural sister, but to remain still in marriage with her, whose natural sister, before marriage he had carnally known: this is so plain and perspicuous, that the good reader can not but behold it, and perceive that the Minister had good reason not to allege Antoninus' words, the more handsomely to convey the untruth. Of this shameless dealing of his I have in treated so plentifully in the doleful Knell 
Lib. 2. cap. 7.  examining all the particular circumstances of Antoninus his discourse: and answered also what he● bringeth there out of Silvester, Fumus, Angelus, Navarre and Caietan objected also by him before in his Funeral, that I take it for a vain labour, to entreat again of the same matter. Wherefore to proceed    

Bells XV. Chapter. Of worshipping of Images.  

THE L. UNTRUTH.  
RVnning with his pen against the veneration given to sacred images, he saith: Ye● Gregory the great in his time sharply reproved the worshipp● done to images, albeit he disliked Serenus the good Bishop of Massilia for breaking the same in the Church. Neither S. Gregory nor Serenus any thing help Bell and such I conomachall companions, but both of them stand in mortal defiance against him S. Gregory 
Lib. 6. ep. 5.  severely reproved Serenus for his rash breaking down the images of the church, attempting to do that which as he saith, never any Bishop had done before him. Whereof I infer that images in the primitive Church were in use, yea and kept in sacred places, and consequently that our English Protestans be contrary to venerable antiquity, that suffer not any such holy monuments in the Church, out raze and deface them with all spite and cruelty: contrary also to S. Gregory who reprehending Serenus though nothing so guilty, would not I think have spared Bell and his fraternity, for their enormous & impious proceeding herein. Were I desirous to imitate the minister, very handsomely might I come upon him, with a concludinge inference in this manner: ergo this beating down of images, is a rotten rag of the new Calvinian religion, borrowed from jews, Mahometans, and such misbelieving miscreants.  
But S. Gregory (saith Bell) sharply reproved the worship done to images: true it is, but what kind of worship was it? The minister would have the reader to think, that it was the same, which the Catholic Church alloweth and teacheth: which is nothing so, for it was passing far different, for as much as S. Gregory allowed convenient adoration, as shall strait be said. Cardinal Bellermin thinketh that this erroneous worship was given by certain new Christians: & surely such were most likely to fall into that gross sin, of whom it is not so much to be marveled if accustomed before to idols, they behaved themselves in like manner to wards sacred images, and adored them for gods, as in Paganism they were taught & practised. Serenus upon this abominable accident, moved with zeal, but not according to knowledge, overthre, we those images: which S. Gregory reproved in him, for that he ought to have instructed them, & reform what was amiss, and not so deeply to have scandalised the Church with such a strange fact, as S. Gregory in express words signifieth that he did: and therefore adviseth himafter due instruction given to the people, to restore the images to their former places.  
This was the adoration which that holy Pope disliked, 
What adoration of images S. Gregory disliked.  for that he denied not all kind of veneration is most certain, for writing to one januaring a Bishop about the image of the blessed virgin and the cross, which he willeth to be taken from the Synagogue of the jews where they had been put, he speaketh thus: We exhort you in these words that the image and cross be taken from thence, with that 
Lib. 7. epis. 5.  veneration which is worthy. And in an other place writing to one Secundinus, who had sent unto him for the image of our Saviour, his words be these: I know verily that you do not therefore desire the image of our Saviour, that you may worship it as though it were god: but that by remembrance of the son of God, you may wax warm in his love whose image you see. And we fall 
Lib. 7. epis. 53.  prostrate before it, not as it were before the divinity. What hath Bell got by vouching the authority of S. Gregory? About the retaining of images in Churches, he is directly against him, as he can not deny: concerning their adoration also he nothing helpeth him, but teacheth that, which nothing pleaseth his reformed spirit, and therefore true it is not, that he reproved the worship done to images as Bell affirmeth, speaking of that worship which the Church alloweth, as the minister would have his reader to think: for the other worship we detest as much as he.  
Albeit sufficient hath been said, to she we that he wrongeth S. Gregory, yet is not this the untruth which I intended here especially to note, though willing I was, to purge our Apostle from his false imputation: but it is touching a learned schoolman, one Gabriel Biel, whom most notoriously he slandereth writing thus. Yea Gabriel Biel a religious Popish friar and a very learned school doctor, who lived long after Gregory and Serenus, even one thousand four hundred eighty and four years after Christ, doth sharply invaigh and reprove the worship done to images. This I challenge for a gross untruth. Where doth Biel thus sharply invaigh, & reprove the worship done to images, he quoteth him in Can. Missae ●ect. 40. Where nothing is handled of any such subject: it may be he would say lect. 49. A small fault especially in Bell, being one of such known truth that he never useth any such slights, unless it be for the better passage of the Gospel. To let that pass, why hath he not cited his words? he may pretend what reason he please, but he must give me leave to think that there is none other, save only that he knew not truly where to find them: he shamefully slandereth Gabriel Biel, he is so far from sharply reproving worship done to images, that he teacheth plainly, that they are to be worshipped.  
That learned man, propoundeth two opinions concerning 
In can. Missae lect. 49.  this matter: the one of them that hold, that the image is to be honoured with the same honour which is due to the prototypon or first sample: & after he hath bronght authorities for that, with an explication of the same, he cometh to the second opinion, which seemeth contrary to the former, teaching that images are not permitted in the Churches to be adored, but to the end that the minds of faithful people, may be stirred up to reverence and honour those whom they represent: & this opinion Gabriel supposeth to be Holcotes. Having delivered these two opinions, betwixt which (as he saith) there is more disagreement in words then in the thing itself, and disputed of them both, and the operation of our soul, as well in respect of that which is represented by the image, as the image itself, he concludeth in this manner. But the question (quoth he) is, whether that act or operation by which I an carried to the image, aught to be called adoration: to which I say, that it is called adoration analogically and improperly, & not properly because it is in respect of a creature. In which words Gabriel holdeth that images may be adored, though not properly, that is with that honour and adoration peculiar only to God, called Latria: but with a lesser kind of adoration, which he calleth Analogical or improper, because it is infinitely inferior to the former, and due only to the image, for that respect and relation, which it hath to that which it doth represent. judge now (good reader) whether Bell hath not most grossly slandered him, when so confidently he avoucheth that he doth, sharply invaighe and reprove the worship done to images, when as he is so far from reproving it, that he alloweth it in manner before specified.  
another thing here occurreth worth the nothing, and that is where as Bell hath the same matter on foot in the pamphlet of his woeful cries 
Cap. 18.  (as his manner is of the same very matter to make divers books) he citeth as Gabriels' words, those which be not his, but rather Holcots, though alleged by Gabriel, which also he doth interpret to a good sense, as before was said. But here without ever setting down any words of Gabriel at all, he maketh him sharply to muaighe against the adoration of images (when no such sharp words he loath or can name) and so injuriously abuseth him both in the one place, and the other, so little respect ●arrieth he to religion or fidelity, though he would seem to be the only sincere teacher, and of he most tender conscience in the whole world.    

Bells XVI. Chapter. Of Church service in the vulgar tongue.  

THE LI. UNTRUTH.  
TO prove that the public service of the Church, aught to be in the vulgar tongue, he citeth the names of many authors, without ever setting dowue their sentences, thinking it sufficient to refer the reader to his Survey where he hath laid out their words at large. How truly he behaveth, himself in divers of them, I know not, having not viewed the quotations, partly for that my purpose is not to examine his whole Trial: partly for lack of time, partly for that some of them make not so much as any outward show against us: & therefore a vain labour to bestow any time that way. One only will I speak of, and that shall be of S. Gregory our blessed Apostle, whom Bell abuseth so grossly, that it can not but appear strait to the eye of the attentive reader: for he bringeth 
Survey pag. 477.  forth his formal words, and then prosecuteth them with a false gloss directly repugning to his words. Pope Gregory himself (quoth he) confirmeth the doctrine in these words. Sed & Dominica oratio apud Grecos 
Lib. 7. ep. 25. cap. 63.  ab omni populo dicitur, apud nos autem a solo sacerdot Furthermore among the Greeks', all the people say the Lord prayer, but with us, the Priest alone saith it. This prover not that the public service of the Church was in any other language, then in the sacred tongue of the Greek, Latin, etc. for the Grecians might understand the Priest though their service were i● Greek, because that tongue was to them the vulgar and common. But suppose that it had been s decayed, that it was not understood of the commo people, yet might they say the Lords prayer with them, for generally all Catholics at this tym though ignorant of the latin tongue, can say our lords prayer in latin, & so might now say it together with the Priest, did the custom permit it.  
But I invite here the good reader, to the noting ●● a pretty slight, other wise called a false prank of S. Thomas. After the former words of S. Gregory, he addeth this gloss of his own, flat opposite to the text. Behold (quoth he) this Gregory lived five hundred and ninety years after Christ's sacred incarnation, & yet it his days the people of Rome prayed with the Minister even the time of mass. S. Gregory telleth us, that the Prie● alone said the lords prayer: Sr. Thomas maintaineth out of those words of S. Gregory, that the people prayed with the minister even in the time of mass. What may not his man prove or disprove, y● when a father affirmeth one thing, he can without all conscience, not only collect an other much different, but also the flat contrary.  
That the public service of the Church was in ancient time in that tongue which the people commonly understood not, omitting other arguments, I will prove it briefly out of the practice of of our country, in which the mass was always in latin, from the first conversion, until our own memory, If Bell deny this, let him for that great skill which he hath, in hunting out the original of Popery and superstition, tell us at what time, bet wixt the first conversion, and the late days of Edward the sixth, the use of latin service crept in. Shall we think that S. Gregory, whom Bell confesseth to have been an holy Bishop indeed, would ever 
Woeful cry pag. 62. Survey pag. 187.  have permitted that custom to have been brought into our country, if he he had thought it superstitious & wicked, nay if he had not reputed it requisite, good, and Apostolical.  
More than four hundred years before the time of S. Gregory, the ancient Britain's received the same manner of serving God, from the blessed Pope and martyr S. Eleutherius, that is in the latin tongue, which appeareth first, because venerable Bede 
Lib. 2. hist. cap. 2.  reporteth that there was not any material differece betwixt S. Austen sent by S. Gregory, and the Britain Bishops, save only in Baptism and the observation of Easter. Secondly, for that certain it is, that they had also since S. Austin's time, the mass in the latin tongue: but to think that if they had been once in possession of the service in their own vulgar language, that they could have been brought from that without infinite garboils, especially the opposition betwixt them, and the English Saxons, in ancient time considered, or that if any such contention had fallen out, that it could have been omitted by the curious pens of our historiographers, it were great simplicity once to surmise. Wherefore what followeth, but that they received that custom at their first conversion which was within lessen then two hundred years after Christ: and consequently that by Bells allowance, and the common computation of others it is sound, Catholic, and Apostolical, and no● any rotten rag of a new religion, as this rag master gableth: and that on the contrary, to have the public service in the vulgar tongue is a new patch of Protestanisme, fetched from Wittenberg or that mart of Martinists, the holy city of Geneva.    

A short admonition concerning Bells eleven chapters following.  
THese chapters I shall soon dispatch, seeing they concern not any weighty points of religion, but ceremonies, and such like: in which the Chureh hath authority to ordain, and abrogate, to make, or repeal laws, as shall seem most meet for the honour of God, and the edification of Christian people. For proof whereof I could allege many Protestants, but I will content myself only with one, whose authority the minister will not refuse being a dear friend of his own, the first letters of his name are Thomas Bell, who in a book set out not long since against the Puritanical presbytery, called by him The regiment of the Church, disputeth earnestly for 
Imprinted by T. C. etc. anno 1606. In his Regiment of the church cap. 7. pag. 53.  the authority of the Church in things indifferent, namely in his seventh chapter, where he delivereth these two Aphorisms. The first of things de facto altered in the Church: for proof whereof he reckoneth up six particular points recorded in scripture yet changed by the Church. The first is to receive the communion in the morning, though Christ did it after supper. The second is, to celebrate it in leavened bread, though Christ did it in unleavened bread. The third is, that the Apostles received the communion sitting, but now it is received kneeling. Fourthly, Christ premised washing of feet, which is now omitted. Fiftly, the Apostles commanded abstinence from blood, and that which is strangled: and yet the Church hath abrogated that decree. Sixtly, S. Paul prescribed prophesying to be done with bare head, yet small account is made thereof.  
The second aphorism is of things not expressed in scripture, and yet decreed by the Church to be observed and kept: and this he proveth by the dedication of salomon's temple, for seavene days: and out of 
2. Paralip. 7. Hoster cap. 3. & 9 1. Ma chab. 4.  the festival days appointed by Mardocheus and the Maccabees: and afterward upon this ground in his eight chapter he justifieth divers things in particular instituted by the Church: as the observation of festival days, kneeling at the communion, surplices, Tippets, and square caps, the ring in marriage, and such like.  
This being so what an old house hath this minister brought upon his own head: never did old Elderton so tickle the jesuits with gentle iyrks, as Sr. Thomas hath provided rods for the runnigate of Rascal: for if he infer against our ceremonies as he doth, because they were instituted since Christ, though very ancient, that they be rotten rags of the new religion: what shall become of their ceremonies, which either be borrowed from us, or of far later date? what can they be else, but piled patches of Protestanisme, and rusty rags of the reformed congregation? nay what must their communion book itself be, never heard of in the whole world, till the late days of king Edward the sixth, and drawn from our Portesse and mass books, as the thing itself speaketh, and their Geneva Gospelers often cast in their teeth? Was ever brave Ministers wits so misled by I know not what night ghost or colepixen, as to say that in one place with good grace, which in an other turneth him to great shame and disgrace: where is now Sr. Thomas, and how beats his pulse? are ceremonies instituted since the time of Christ and and his Apostles rotten rags or no? if not: why is he so hot on foot, to persecute them so eagerly, and intertaineth them with such homely terms? if they be rotten rags, as here he saith, how can he defend the English congregation, that ruffleth in such rags, or himself that disputeth for the authority of the Church in that case, or with what face can he ever look upon the Geneva generation of the mocking Martinists? Certainly were he not habituated to chopping of faiths, and changing of religion, and that careless contempt had armed him to digest any disgrace, these news were able to bring the pangs of death: but he that hath swallowed down millstones, will never make bones at such small choking oysters. How his Regiment of the 
Bells books contrary one to an other.  Church, written against Puritans agreeth with The trial of the new religion published against Papists, or this with that, be curious points of scrupulosity. Bell careth neither for contradiction, nor conscience, but only seeketh the glory of God and the advancement of that Gospel, which for the time present, and during the same revelation, he firmly believeth to be the everlasting truth. But to run over some of his chapters a little more in particular.   

Bells XVII. Chapter. Of the antiquity of Popish mass and the parts thereof.  
THe minister very profoundly scoffeth both at other parts of the Mass, and also at these following, writing thus. Gregory added the Kyrie eleyson. Telesphorus Gloria in excelsi is Deo. Gelasius the collects. Hieronymus the Epistle and Gospel. The Creed was received of the Nicene Council. Pope Sergius the Agnus Dei: after which he concludeth both of these and others which he there mentioneth, as the Introite, Halleluia, the commemoration of the dead, Incense, and the Pax in this manner. This being so, I can not but conclude that every patch and piece of the romish Mass is but a rotten rag of the new religion So earnest he is to make every piece of the Mass a rotten rag, that he hath also made many parts of their own Communion book patches and pieces, and rotten rags, (to the great exultation of all truly devoted to the Geneva discipline) in which Kyrie eleison. Gloria in excelsis. The collects, Epistle and Gospel, Nicene Crede, and Agnus Dei be found no less then in our Mass books. I omit here how falsely and blasphemously, he concludeth every piece of the Mass, to be rotten rags: for are the words of consecration, the most essential part thereof, which came not from any man, but from the institution of Christ himself, as also the Pater noster, rotten rags? who durst say it but Sr. Thomas.  
And here by the way, the attentive reader may easily answer a common and frivolous objection of the Protestant's, that marvel how we make the Mass the sacrifice of the new testament to have been ordained by Christ himself, when as Durandus & others, note at what time, and who they were, that composed the parts thereof: when as neither Durandus, nor any other make the essential and very substantial part of the mass, that is the words of consecration, to have come from any other than the son of God: but they speak of the accidental parts thereof, to wit either devout prayers, or ceremonies, which we willingly grant to proceed from the institution of Christ's Church.  
The like may be said of the Protestants communion, which they pretend to derive not from any other, than Christ himself: and yet many of their prayers & ceremonies which accompany that action, they can not show out of God's word, but must confess to come from later institution, & can not find more ancient authors than be alleged for ours, the most of which lived more than a thousand years since, and be glorious Saints in heaven: and therefore what doth Bell, and such like Ministers, that deride the ceremonies and parts of the Mass, but frump and flout at sacred and venerable antiquity from whom they come, as Sr. Thomas here confesseth: and mock and mow at their own communion book and parts thereof, being borrowed from us, or in what they differ can show no greater antiquity than the late days of Edward the sixth, at what time divers ministers did hammer them in the forge of their own invention.   

Bells XVIII. Chapter. Of the profound mysteries of Popish mass.  
IN this chapter the minister maketh himself some pastime for that one ceremony used in former times, is now given over and out of use: as though the Church hath not that authority as before out of Bell was proved. The English congregation, allowed by act of Parliament in king Edward's time the new communion book, for sound and agreeable to God's word: & yet was it in the same king's days, and not long after abrogated, & a new devised, not only different in ceremonies, but also in points of more importance. For example: in the first communion book, in the supper of the Lord or new mass, (for that name also they mention) they pray for the dead, saying: We commend unto thy 
Fol. 11●.  mercy o Lord, all other thy servants, which are departed hence 
Prayer for the dead in the first Englishcommunion book.  from us, with the sign of faith, and now do rest in the sleep of peace. Grant unto them we beseech the, thy mercy and everlasting peace, etc. But this doctrine was strait reform, and no such thing found in the next. And the minister himself in one Queen's days changed his faith twice, and would I make no doubt change it twice more, if any new and pleasing revelation should blow in the sky. He and his congregation, that have made so main mutations no ways maintainable, may be silent with shame, and not speak of the change of a small ceremony, which both according to us and himself, is lawful, and may be done by the Church, as the honour of God, and edifications of others shall require the same.   

Bells XIX. Chapter Of kissing the Pope's feet.  
THis chapter of his, flingeth at the kissing of the Pope's feet, which yet he confesseth here an Emperor to have done, nine hundred years ago. Let him answer what I wrote of that point in the Forerunner, (for in his Funeral he hath not 
Pag. 43. See also the Doleful knel. pag. 148.  done it, which yet is the pretended answer to that treatise) or for shame command the clapper to silence.   

Bells XX. Chapter. Of praying upon Beads.  
HEre the minister runneth upon Rosaries, and praying upon beads, making the beginning thereof some five hundred years ago, before that time he saith the people of God used altogether godly books of prayer. And what prayers I beseech him did they use, that could not read at all, or do now amongst them which lack that skille? of which sort the number is not few. This inconvenience with us is avoided by saying of the beads, which none so ignorant but can use, and so fruitfully spend their tyme. Mary with the Protestants they must use books, that can never a letter on the book, or pray by special revelation. As the Church setteth forth divers books of prayers, for the benefit of them that can read: so may she institute the beads, for those that can not. Let him show, that the prayers upon the beads be not good, or that no manner of prayer though good may be used, which was not in the Apostles time (neither of which he will ever be able to show) or else all his babbling against the beads is not worth a rotten bead. Thomas Sternhold, Robert Wisdom, and such like, have invented long since the coming up of the beads, the harmonious canticles of Geneva psalms: will he for all that say as he doth of the beads, that the rehearsal of the original is sufficient confutation, and call them a rotten rag of the new religion. verily I will not deny, but he may do it truly were it not that their religion indeed is so new that the rag as yet can scarce be rotten. The very same objection, which he maketh against the beads, may proceed against the very communion book itself, and that far more justly, seeing it is a la● crabstock of their own planting, as before hat● benesaid. It were better for him to look unto hi● own frippery and the cast canions of the congregation, then to meddle with the sacred wardroa● of the Catholic Church.   

Bells XXI. Chapter. Of changing the Pope's name.  
IN this chapter, he doth revel at the changing of the Pope's name: which no question is a fundamental point of religion. If our Saviour Chris● constituting Simon head of the Church changed his name, and called him Peter: what inconvenience 
joan. 1. v. 42. Math. 16. v. 18.  or absurdity is it that the Pope assumpted to that dignity, should imitate the same, and make choice of some one of his predecessors names, thereby to be stirred up to follow his virtue and solicitude, in governing the Church of Christ. Bell himself did but Apostate from his religion and Priesthood, and he had strait a new name, M. Thomson for soothe the Queen's pensioner, and yet is he carping and cavilling at changing of names, upon far better ground and reason.   

Bells XXII. Chapter. Of the Paschall torch.  
THis chapter of his, is directed against the ancient and laudable ceremony of the Pas●chall torch, into which upon Easter eve be inserted five hallowed grains of frankincense crosswise, to signify unto good people, how our Saviour Christ at that time rose from death, with his five wounds, and appeared sundry times: for representation whereof it is lighted at certain times, and upon Ascension day at the Gospel, after the Ascension of our Saviour into heaven is readd, that taper is put forth, and not any more used. What is there in this ceremony, that may offend any that love Christ, and desire to remember the benefits which he hath bestowed upon us? But it was invented first (saith Bell) by Pope Sozimu●, almost twelve hundred years ago: what then, the more ancient it be, the more venerable also it is, and therefore little doth it become his ministershippe, so lightly to contemn it, especially himself granting as hath been said, that the Church hath power to ordain ceremonies, and being himself a member of that congregation, which had the first beginning more than a thousand years after.   

Bells XXIII. Chapter. Of the Popish Pax, and mysteries thereof.  
IN this chapter, he is out of charity and all peace, with the ceremony of the Pax, given in Mass a little before the sacred communion, both to signify, and also to put good people in mind that none ought to approach unto that heavenly banquett but with peace of mind, and charity towards God, and their neighbour: which ceremony as it is holy and good, so have I heard it much liked of some Protestants. The institution thereof Bell referreth unto Pope Innocentius the first, who lived according to his own account in this place, twelve hundred years ago, and therefore the more to be esteemed. But the principal thing that disgusteth the minister is, for that the Pax is not given in a Mass for the dead: the reason whereof as he saith Durandus assigneth, for that 
Lib. 4. cap. 53.  the dead are not now in the troubles of this world, but rest hence forth in the Lord. At which reason as ridiculous, the ridiculous minister maketh himself much sport. For if the with holding of the Pax (quoth he) doth signify their rest in the Lord, then doubtless is the Mass idolatricall, which is offered for their purgation. Again if the souls be in Purgatory and so stand in need of the Mass, then is their ceremony false and fantastical, which signifieth them to be at rest.  
To this fearful and horned argument of his I answer, that the Souls in Purgatory, be in mutual peace and charity one with an other, and without all fear of falling from that happy state, and this signifieth the withoulding of the Pax or kiss of peace in a mass for the dead: yet are they not in rest from those torments, which the justice of God inflicteth upon them for their former sins, and so we pray for their rest in this kind, and offer up the sacred host for their purgation, and release from those pains. What is now become of his dilemmatical argument? the horns have miss us, and be run into his own sides. The rest of his chapter is the degorging of his malice against religious men, not worth the answering. Some thing notwithstanding he may hear hereafter if God send life and means.   

Bells XXIIII. Chapter. Of the Pope's Bulls.  
HEre he talketh of the Pope's Bulls, which as he saith began to be sealed with lead, in the year seven hundred scutcheon two: is not this a weighty point of divinity meet for such a Rabbin as Bell? and what if they had never been so sealed with lead at all, but with wax only. The poor man lacketh matter when he maketh his wits to work upon so mean a subject.   

Bells XXV. Chapter. Of the Popish Agnus Dei.  

THE LII. UNTRUTH.  
HIs five and twentyth chapter talketh much against Agnus Dei, though he confesseth that he can not find out their original which is no● small marvel: for in his Survey he promised lively 
Survey ●pis. Dedicat.  to discover, when, where, and by whom, and upon what occasion, all Popish errors, heresies, and superstitions, hau● crept into the Church: and yet in the same book he entreated of Agnus Dei (from whence he hath borrowed, 
Survey pag. 492.  what here he writeth) but telleth not when, nor by whom, nor upon what occasion, they crept into the Church: and in this place although he granteth frankly, that he is ignorant of the first author, yet he affirmeth confidently, that they began of late years. The Church of God (quoth he) was above a thousand two hundred years, without the use or knowledge of this Agnus Dei. And he noteth the time in the margin, of the first beginning thereof, thus. Ann. Dom. 1247. that is in the year of Christ, a thousand two hundred forty and seven: and his followers, if any he hath, may securely believe him, for though he neither proveth what he saith, and beside confesseth that he readeth not who was the author, yet he assureth all his good people, that they be of no greater antiquity than he affirmeth. Where he had it, or how he knoweth so much, that ●●ttle importeth, they must captivate their understanding, and think that he may have rea●●n for what he saith, though none of them can ●●e it.  
Thus Bell like an other Pythagoras, may preach ●● his own disciples, but he must give us leave, to ●●kamin his Ministership, where he found this ●●octrine which here he delivereth: Verily ●ood reader no where else, but in his own ●inge storehouse. A shameless untruth it is, ●nd contrary to the knowledge of his own conscience. For the book of the Sodality, which ●e quoteth twice in this chapter, not only brin●ech very good reason, to show that it is passing 
Lib. 4. cap. 13.  ancient, as instituted in the first springe of Christian religion: but also in particular noteth, how Pope Leo the third, about eight hundred years ●goe, bestowed an Agnus Dei upon the Emperor, Charles the great.  
The ancient book also called Ordo Romanus ●he author whereof, that did gather it together, Baronius affirmeth the more constant opinion to 
Tomo 8. anno Christi 693.  ●e, that it was Gelasius the Pope, who lived about ●n eleven hundred years ago. In this ancient book, mention is made of Agnus Dei: for speaking of the Octave of Easter commonly called Dominica in Albis (that is, the Sunday in whi●es, because those which were baptized on Easter eve, put of those white garments, which they received at their Baptism, as S. 
Serm. 110 de tempore.  Augustin noteth) he hath these words. In the same Sunday after the whites, that is in the Octave of Easter, lambs of wax in the city of Rome are given to the people, by the Archdeacon in the Church after mass and th● communion. This may serve to reprove the bold l● centiousnes of the Minister, affirming their beginning to have been in the year a thousand tw● hundred forty and seven.   

THE LIII. UNTRUTH.  
PRoceeding forward in his declamation against Agnus Dei, he saith. With this kind of paltry stuff (such is the phrase of the paltry minister) th● world is so bewitched that infinite numbers do ascribe part ● their salvation thereunto: which is an injurious slaun●der, taking it in that sense which I make no doubt he doth, and the ignorant reader quickly may. Fo● the more plain explication whereof I say, tha● our salvation may be ascribed unto divers things● though with great diversity: Men living in thi● world and subject to daily sinning, may be said to save us. For this doing (saith S. Paul to Timothy) tho● shalt both save thyself, and them that hear the. And I can 
1. Timoth. 4. v. 16.  not persuade myself, that Bell would quarrel with any, that should say that he, or his books, ● had saved many. The principal cause of our salvation is our Saviour Christ, and his merits. Secondary and instrumental causes are many things as the sacraments, and men that cooperate unto our salvation: yea other consecrated things, as holy Water, Agnus Dei etc. though nothing comparable to Sacraments, may also in a good sense be said to help us to obtain salvation, by the merits of Christ, for as much as all holy things have force to produce supernatural effects, as namely to chase ●way wicked spirits, and to extinguish the fiery ●artes of the enemy, which none will deny but ●inder us from salvation, and be the cause of many ● man's destruction, and so that which doth any ●aies cooperate, to preserve our Soul from the venomous infection of the devil, may be said to ●ett us forwards in the Way of salvation, and be a ●meanes though very remote, and in the virtue of Christ's passion, to bring us to heaven.  
Albeit this doctrine thus expounded be sound, ●nd nothing prejudicial to our redemption, wrought by Christ: yet in that sense which Bell meaneth it, and it is commonly taken of good people, I say it is most false, that infinite numbers ascri●be their salvation or any part thereof to Agnus Dei: and the reason is, for that when we speak of salvation, all generally understand the principal cause, and first fountain thereof, which is God himself, and the most precious merits of his holy life, and bitter passion, and not his sacraments, much less Sacramentales, and least of all such occasional means, as often times notwithstanding divine providence useth for the conversion of many. another reason is, for that the Sacraments, the conduits of divine grace, and all holy things, or what else soever, that any ways concur to the good of our soul and salvation thereof, receive their force and work not any thing, but in the merits of that most innocent lamb, which taketh away the sins of the world: and so whatsoever herein is attributed either to sacraments, or men holy things, or what else you will, redoundeth to the honour & glory of Chr●●● from the infinite treasure of whose grace and m●●rites all spiritual benefits, greater or lesser 〈◊〉 proceed and come. Lastly, for that thousan●● there be, that never saw, nor perhaps ever hea●● of Agnus Dei, and yet notwithstanding, be sau●● very well: which showeth that when we speak of salvation, our intention and understanding runneth to the principal cause thereof Christ Ies●● himself, and not to the sacraments though with out some of them none can be saved, much less 〈◊〉 such hallowed things, as Agnus Dei, without whic● any may be saved.   

THE liv. UNTRUTH.  
AN other thing that disliketh him abou● Agnus Dei, he delivereth in these words. He th●● hath an Agnus Dei about him must believe as he is taught 〈◊〉 our jesuits, that he shall be delivered by sea and by land from all tempests, thunder, earthquakes, from hail, thunder bolts sudden death and from all evil. For the justification whereof, he referreth us to the former book of the Sodality of the Blessed Virgin. He slandereth the jesuits most egregiously: they have no● such thing of believing the effects he speaketh, of nay they insinuate sufficiently that these effects be not infallible, when they writ thus, in the same place. Wherhfore not seldom wonderful effects, not without divine miracle do follow: and again. For as 
Lib. 4. cap. 12.  much therefore as experience doth passing often teach us, that these things are granted of God, these Agnus Dei are not rashly to be rejected, but to be carried about us with great devotion. In which words they signify, that divers times they have not any such effect, and consequently they do not teach, that men must believe as he faith that such effects shall follow. And the reason hereof may be given, for that such hallowed things, have not any such force, by the express covenant or institution of God, as the Sacraments have, and therefore work not infallibly, but the virtue in them proceedeth from the prayers of the Church, and devotiou of those that use them: Beside this it is not always haply cowenient that we should be delivered from such crosses and afflictions. Howbeit God's name be blessed, who in these times when such miscreants as he speak their pleasure both against other holy things, and also Agnus Dei, he hath vouchsafed to work many strange and miraculous effects, and that in our own country as I could in particular relate, might I do it as securely, as I may most truly.    

Bells XXVI. Chapter. Of Candlemas day.  

THE LV. UNTRUTH.  
THis chapter is bestowed against the ceremony of bearing candles, in the feast of our Blessed Ladies Purification. His words be these. The old pagan Romans in the Calends of February, used to honour Februa the mother of Mars, whom they supposed to be the God of battle: the honour they did exhibit unto her, was this, they went up and down the streets with candles and torches burning in their hands: in regard hereof, that the Christian Romans should not be inferior to the pagan Romans in heathenish superstition Pope Sergius decreed, that upon the day of the Purification of the blessed Virgin, being the second of February, they should go in procession with burning candles in their hands, thereby signifying the blessed virgin to be pure and free from sin. For proof of this, he quoteth Durandus in the margin, whom notoriously he abuseth as also Pope Sergius. For Durandus is so far from saying 
Lib. 1. cap. 6.  that this was done, that the Christian Romans should not be inferior to the Pagan Romans in heathenish superstition, as Bell writeth, that he affirmeth Pope Sergius to have changed that paganical fashion in melius, into a better thing: signifying plainly, that this ceremony was instituted for the abolishing of that heathenish custom which is a thing so far from just reprehension, that on the contrary it is most highly to be commended, as a most religious policy, tending to the destruction of superstition, and increase of piety and devotion. Neither doth Durandus make this the only cause of that ceremony, for the reckoneth up six in all whereof this is the second in order.    

Bells XXVII. Chapter. Of the doubtful oath which Popish Bishops make to the Pope.  
IN this chapter he complaineth, that whereas Bishops had free access to Counsels to speak the truth out of the scripture in former 
Anno Don 1229. Decret. Lib. 2. tit. 24. cap. 4.  times, Gregory the ninth ordained, that none should have voices in Counsels, but such as swore obedience to the Pope, and promised with an oath to defend his Canon law: adding that the express words of the oath the Reader may find in the Downesall of Popery: but he should withal have added also here that the form of that oath is justified against his cavils, by one S. R. 
Art. 7. chap. 14.  in his learned answer to that book of his, where he showeth that the like oath was made to Gregory the great. Bell not having yet devised with himself what to say in his own defence, dissembleth the answer, though in an other place of his pamphlett he confesseth to have seen S. R. his 
Chap. 9  book, and so he is fresh up with this oath, as though it had never been answered, or he had never spoken of it before, when as he had it also 
Pag. 60.  up in his Motives: and in his next work not unlikely but we may hear news of it again; such is his grace in writing, and the great choice he hath of abundant matter.  
Here I am to admonish the good reader of news, which I received lately, and that is after I had written thus much, Bells reply called The jesuits Antepast came piping hot to mine hands, from the palace of his kitchen, in defence of his Douwnesall against the answer of S. R. and therefore making no doubt but that he had at least attempted, to batter in pieces all that S. R. had said in defence of that oath, and so spoiled also the grace of that which I had brought out of him, I thought good to take a taste: whereupon I fell aboard with his Antepast, opened the dishes, and found there a miserable poor pittance, all the fat through the cook's negligence being fallen into the fire: for S. R. disputeth for the lawefulnes thereof 
Art. 30. chap. 14.  in this manner. As for the oaths of Bishops made to the the Pope, the lawfulness thereof appeareth, because it is made with all Catholic Prince's consent, and meant only in just and lawful things which are according to God's law, and holy Canons, and it hath been used above a thousand years ago, as is evident by the like oath made by a Bishop unto S. Gregory the great: and S. Bonifacius 
Lib. 10. ep. 31. Baron. ann. 723. See council. Tolet an. 11. can. 10.  the Apostle of Germany and worthiest man that ever England bred, did swear when he was consecrated Bishop, to concur with the Pope and commodities of his Church, in which words is contained that which I said in defence thereof. To all which this kitchen minister saith not one word, and yet in great bravery he writeth thus. Say on good friar, thou shalt be heard with all favour. To 
Antepast pag. 147.  imitate his vain, may I not rather say, it is not so Sir Liar, thou hast curtailed a way the beginning of his answer of good moment, and very sufficient for the justification of that oath in general: is this to be heard with favour? not so, but it is with cozenage to abuse the good reader, which carrieth with it a stinking savour.  
The rest of that which he jangleth about the oath, I leave to S. R. yet this will I briefly say, that for as much I have here readd, his answer standeth sound without the loss of any one drop of blood, notwithstanding the terrible Camnon shot of Bells Antepast. And the principal of that which he mustereth together, for the refelling thereof, is contained in this his Trial (about which I now labour) in the eight chapter, where he entreateth of the Pope's faith. Let that be perused which I have said before in the examination of that chapter, and it will soon appear that it is not the buckler of his Antepast, that can defend our new cook from the wounding of his old carcase.  
Thus much of his eleven chapters. Here for a conclusion, I must add a word or two. The first is, that how truly or falsely he hath alleged authors I know not, having perused the places of few, because the subject was not weighty, but only of ceremonies or matters of small moment. The second is, which I noted also before, that granting authority to the Church to ordain ceremonies, he goeth against his own doctrine, in calling them rotten rags of a new religion, & teacheth others how to entertain those ceremonies which either they have borrowed from us, or else brought forth by a later generation. The last is, that where as he confesseth many of our ceremonies to be very ancient, as the Introit of the mass, which was instituted as he saith by Celestine: the Pax brought in by Innocentius: and the Paschall torch ordained by Sozimus: (all which Popes lived about some twelve hundred years ago) with what face or grace, can he speak so scornfully of them, calling them rotten rags, when as disputing against the Puritanical fraternity, in defence of English ceremonies in his book called The Regiment of the Church, antiquity is urged, the practice of the Church inculcated, & with all his learning he laboureth to procure credit to their ceremonial laws institutions, as is evident out of all that treatise.  
And to speak some what in particular, To prove the use of the Surplice or albe, he allegeth a 
Can. 14.  Canon of the fourth Council of Carthage which he doth highly extol in this manner. At this Council 
In his Regiment. cap. 8. pag. 82.  (quoth he) were present two hundred and fourteen Bishops, of which S. Augustin was one, and yet all those holy men, living in those days when no corruption of religion had crept into the Church, affirm constantly, etc. Behold good reader there chaungable condition of this Chameleon: The Albe or Surplice is a commendable ceremony, and reverent rite, because it was allowed in the time of S. Augustin, when no corruption had crept into the Church: but the Introite in the mass: the Pax: the Paschall torch, instituted by those Popes in S. Augustinus time, are rotten rags, and entreated in all scornful manner, though no other difference can be found but only the ministers pleasure, having one doctrine and other principles to follow, when he disputeth against us, and an other, when he argueth against the 
See his Regiment in the Preface.  Puritans, whom he calleth. Cursed broods, untimely hatched, detested of God, and irksome to the world. God open the eyes of good people, to take heed how they follow the ianglinge of such a Bell, that can clink what religion you think, and commit their souls to the direction of such a mutable minister.  
I omit here, how before he would have the Church strait after S. john's time to have been 
Bel contradicteth himself.  infected with errors, because that served him well against us in that place: here the Church was in S. Augustins' time, clear from all corruption in doctrine, which was three hundred years after because it standeth him here in great stead against the Puritans: for it were an infinite labour to pursue him in all his tricks, quirckes corruptions, contrarieties, and absurdities, himself saying that in one place, which he unsaith in an other: proving that here, which else where he disproveth: sailing with that wind which bloweth, and making his commodity of that which may help the present necessity. Such be the conditions of the reformed minister trusty Sir Thomas.   

Bells XXVIII. Chapter. Of the Popish fast of forty days commonly called lent.  

THE LVI. UNTRUTH.  
Many mad gambols doth the minister fetch in this chapter, and among others he will needs prove, that the lenten fast is hurtful both to the soul and body, and disputeth out of Hypocrates, like a pretty pettisogger in Physic, to show that it is hurtful to our health. This albeit I dot not doubt but it is a notorious untruth, yet because it is not my profession to argue of any such subject, I leave him to the mercy of the Physicians, who I think upon the feeling of his pulse, are like enough for the curing of such an extravagant conceit, to condemn him to Hippocrates bands. omitting this, let us see what followeth. The fast of the ancient Church (quoth he) was free, voluntary, and not commanded by any law. An untruth: for it was a tradition of the Apostles to fast in Lent, ● so not free. We (saith S. Hierom) in the whole yea● 
Epis. ad Marcellam. Serm. 6. de Quadrages. Sabbato post Dom. Quinquag. de tempore serm 62. Sin not to fast in Lent. 4. Instit. cap. 12. § 20. Centur. 5. col. 686.  do fast one Lent according to the tradition of the Apostle S. Leo calleth it also the institution of the Apostle to fast forty days: and S. Augustin thus exhorteth his auditors in the beginning of Lent. beseech you most dearly beloved brethren, that in this most convenient and holy time, excepting the Sundays none presume to dine, unless haply such a one, as sickness doth no permit to fast, because to fast on other days is a remedy or reward, not to fast in Lent is sin. john Caluin speaking of the primitive Church saith, that the superstitious observation of Lent had prevailed every where. And the Lutheran Centurists reprove S. Augustin, for speaking in commendation of the Lenton fast: & in the same place, they writ of him in this manner. And verily in the third chapter of his thirtieth book against Faustus the Manichee, he doth expressly say that throughout the world Lent is kept in the Catholic Church every where with great diligence.  
Lastly was not Aerius scored up by S. Epiphamis 
Heres. 75. Heres. 53.  and S. Augustin for an heretic, because he denied the solemn and appointed fasts of the Church, And yet decree the Apostles what they will, about these Lent fasts, let S. Augustin call it a sin not to fast in Lent: Let Caluin and the Lutherans assure us of the observation of Lent in the Primitive Church: To conclude let S. Augustin and Epiphanius condemn Aerius of heresy, for maintaining freedom and liberty of fasting: yet will Bell defend that was free, voluntary, and not commanded by any law: how truly I say no more, but report me to that which hath been said.  
That which he bringeth concerning S. Spiridion his eating of flesh in lent, all circumstances considered hurteth not us, but maketh against himself: for we deny not, but that in some cases flesh may be eaten without violation of that fast. But that holy Spiridion did most strictly observe it, and that it was also the common custom of the Church, is gathered out of the same story, which doth condemn the licentiousness of our fleshly Gospelers.    

Bells XXIX. Chapter. Of the annulling of Popish wedlock.  

THE LVII. UNTRUTH.  
Whatsoever saith Bell the Bishop of Rome holdeth and defineth, that must every Papist hold, believe, and maintain, as an article of his faith. Though generally all Catholics do hold the Pope's definitions to be infallible, and the contrary opinion to be erroneous, yet is it not an article of faith, whatfolloweth? what but that Bell hath abused the good Reader with in untruth. See before pag. 84. 85.    

Bells XXX. Chapter. Of the Pope's pretended superiority, over and above a general Council.  

THE LVIII. UNTRUTH.  
BEll beginning with false asseveration, to tell us of the late opinion of the Pope's superiority over a general Council, interlaceth also an other shameless untruth against the Remists. The Rhemists (qhoth he) that jesuited brood, tell us plainly if will believe them, that there is no necessity of a general ● provincial Council, save only for the better contentation of the people. Thus he chargeth them yet not nothing any particular place: but I will help him: it is in their annotations upon the Acts, where they writ thus. If again it be demanded what need is there to expect 
Chap. 15. v. 27.  the Counsels determination, if the Popes or See Apost dikes judgement be infallible, and have the assistance of God also as the Catholics affirm? we answer that sor the catholic and peaceable obedient children of the Church, it is a comfort to have such various means of determination, trial, and declaration of the truth: and that it is necessary for them recovery of heretics, and for the contentation of the weak, who not always giving over to one man's determination, yet will either yield to the judgement of all the learned men and Bishops of all nations, or else remain desperate and condemned before God and man for ever. And as I said before, this assistance of the holy Ghost promised to Peter's See presupposeth human means of searching out the truth, which the Pope always hath used, and will, and must use in matters ●● great importance by calling Counsels, even as here you see ●●eter and Paul themselves, and all the Apostles though in●●●d with the holy Ghost, yet thought it notwithstanding nesesary, for further trial and clearing of truth, and maintenance of unity, to keep a Council.  
Let these words of the Rhemists, be compared with those of Bells, where he maketh them to say, that there is no necessity of a general or provintiall Council, save only for the better contentation of the people, and I leave it to any whether he hath not injuriously slandered them: yea this very note of theirs in the margin. Though the See Apostolic itself have the same assistance, yet are Counsels also necessary for many causes, doth proclaim them innocent from his false imputation: they acknowledge the necessity of Counsels for many causes: he affirmeth them to teach no other necessity of them, save only for the better contentation of the people.  
This untruth the minister had sert abroach once afore, in his Downfall, and quoteth the place 
Pag. 128.  very orderly in this manner: Rheims: test: in act. 15. but being taken up for halting by S. R. in his answer, 
Pag. 418.  and yet not willing to give over his slandering of Catholic writers, he hath here brought us the same untruth to lightagaine, but without any note where this place might be found, hoping that by this new kind of brandishing, it might pass with credit to the Gospel, and not be so subject to the controlment of the most of his adversaries.  
Here I must admonish the good reader as before, that after this was written, and shortly to go to the press, I was grieted with Bells new Antepast, whereupon turning to see what he said in his own defence for charging the Rhemists' 〈◊〉 falsely, I found him to behave himself in such fantastical 
In his Antepast pag. 158.  fashion, that his friends can not but ashamed of their Minister. Bell (quoth Bell himself chargeth you and your Rhemists truly: Thus he stands to his former assertion, but mark for God's lou● how effectually he doth prove it. It followeth. A● your religious friar (quoth he) Alphonsus de Castro shall b● the umpire in this mystery: and he citeth strait waie● 
Alphonsas lib. 1. cap. a. fol. 4. 1.  after, these words of his, That the Pope alone without the assembly of a Council may err in things pertaining t● faith, many divines of good authority do affirm, yea it i● sound that some Popes have erred in saith: Again if the authority of the Pope alone were as great as the whole Council fully and lawfully assembled, in vain were so great labour taken for the gathering together of a Council. What can Bell fetch from hence, to justify his injurious charge of the Rhemists. Alphonsus is one of those divines that think the infallibility of judgement to be in● Council and not in the Pope alone, as before wa● 
Pag. 84. 85.  handled: and he bringeth this reason, because otherwise (quoth he) in vain it were with so great labour to assemble so many Bishops together  
This informeth us very well, what Alphons●● his opinion was, but where doth he say that the Rhemists teach, that the determination of a general Council is needless, save only for the better contentation of the people, because the Pope's judgement is infallible: he speaketh not one word of the Rhemists, that they should be of the same opinion, and no marvel, for he could not, being dead many a fair day, before the Rheims testament was published. what can the reader here think, pondering the matter attentively, but that Bell is given up into a reprobat sense, when with broad face he would defend one●ly with an other. I hope the indifferent reader though otherwise affected to him, must in so apparent an untruth either sentence him to have offended of mere malice, or else in his excuse plead the weakness of his brain the cause of such crazed conceits, of which the first can not but condemn him: and the second, if himself or his friends will confess it, freeth us from further labour of answering.   

THE LVIII. UNTRUTH.  
THe minister maintaineth, that the opinion of the Pope's superiority over a Council is an upstart faith and doctrine, never known to the Church for the space of one one thousand four hundred and fifteen years after Christ, that is to say until the general Council of Constance: and how doth he prove this? it followeth immediately in Bell. Which Council defined by a firm and resolute decree as a matter of faith that a general Council was above the Pope. So the dexterity: of this minister in disputing. He pretended to prove out of the Council of Constance that the superiority of the Pope, was never known till that time: and he proveth the clean contrary. The Council defined (quoth he) that a Council is above the Pope. What is this to the superiority of the Pope above a Council which he undertook to justify out of the Council, and not only that, but also that it was never before. verily had Bell that care of his credit, which he ought, never would he suffer his discourse to pass abroad with such with such absurd and fantastical connexion.  
But not to speak any more of his little grace in formal disputing, let us come to the great gift he hath in bold lying. Cardinal Camer acensis (quoth he) Abbess Panormitanus, Nicholaus Cusanus, Adrianus Papa, Cardinalis Florentinus, johannes Gersonus, jacobus Almainus, Abulensis, and other learned Papists generally, (the jesuits and their jesuited crew excepted) do all constantly defend as an undoubted truth, that a general Council is above the Pope. In which words for a parting blow, he clappeth two untruths together. The first is, that the doctrine of the Pope's authority above a Council is no older than the jesuits, for that sense his words do plainly insinuate. The second is, that none teach it but the jesuits & their jesuited crew, as he speaketh, both which shall be conviuced with one and the self same testimonies. Not to speak therefore of many learned men, that either be now living, or wrote since the name of jesuits was of any fame in Christendom, for all these will be turned over for birds of that feather: I will name only those which shall hold the ministers nose to the grindstone. Wherefore to begin. S. Antoninus and johannes de Turre cremata, 
3. part. ●it. 22. cap. 6. Lib. 2. cap. 93. & 104. sum ecclesia.  neither of them being jesuits but both of the order of S. Dominicke, nor yet jesuited, as living before that name was heard of in Christendom, maintain that the Pope is above a general Council.  
To these learned men, I will add the testimony of the Lateran Council under Leo the tenth, which 
This Council was holden in the year. 1513. Sess. 11.  delivereth the same doctrine in these words. That only the Bishop of Rome, as having authority over all Counsels, hath full right and power to call Counsels, to translate them, and to dissolve them, is manifestly certain, not only by the testimony of sacred scripture, the sayings of holy fathers, and other Bishops of Rome, but by the confessions of all the same Counsels. Neither can Bell except and say, that this Council was jesuited where never a jesuite was present: nay when as their Society was not yet begun. For Bell telleth us, that they began in the year of our Lord, one thousand five hundred and 
Survey pag. 535.  forty, which was many years after the time of his Lateran Synod. divers other notable authorities might be produced, but these are sufficient for his condemnation. Only one remaineth which I will add, more potent than the former, especially in respect of Bell, and that is of himself, who when he saith that this doctrine was not known to the Church of God until the time of the Council of Constance. granteth that then it began at least to be taught, and so neither proceeded from jesuits or jesuited persons, as being of longer standing by his own grant, False also it is, that this doctrine was not known to the Church before the time of the Council of Constance. The glorious Martyr, our 
Dist. 40. cap. Si Papu●.  worthy country man S. Bonifacius saith, that the Pope is to judge all and to be judged of none, except he be known to err from the faith. S. Gelasius an eleven hundred years ago is a witness of the same truth. Appeals 
Epist. ad episcopos Dardani●  (quoth he) may be made to the Apostolic see, from any part of the world, but none is permitted to appeal from that: and he speaketh not only of appealing from private Bishops, but also from a Council, for he addeth after in the same epistle, that the Bishops of Rome have loosed them, whom Counsels have vn●iustly bound. And before we proved, how Pope Leo irritated, and made of no force, a decree enact 
Pag. 17.  in the Council of Chalcedon, which argueth his superiority over the Council. And so I conclude that not only in this point, but in so many befor● mentioned, Bell hath a rare talon in the art o● overlashinge, as I report me to the particulars of this treatise.     

THE CORRECTION OF faults escaped.  
Pag. 6. line 4. read the  
Pag. 7. line 17. read No nor it is to be imagined  
Pag. 33. line 20. read his mortal  
Pag. 36. line 7. read condemning him so deeply  
Pag. 41. line 32. read altercation.