CLarus Bonarscius, otherwise called Carolus Scribanius is a Iesuit now liuing at Antwerpe, and of much account amongst them; he wrote this booke, and spewed this blas­phemy out of his vncleane heart some foure or fiue yeeres agoe. And whereas both the Author and his booke deser­ued the fire and halter, it was so farre from being mis­liked in the Romish Sinagogue, or any way censured, that since then the booke hath bin reprinted and the Author and his booke stand enrolled, approued and commended (in their great volumes set out for that purpose) for good and Catholike.

Glori Bornascij Amphitheatrum Honoris Iesuitici, in quo Calunistarum in societatem Iesu criminationes iugu­latae. Prostant palaeopoli 1605 & postea 1606. Haec Po­sseuinus Palaeopoli h [...]c est Antuerpi [...]. Iesuit [...] in Apparar [...] sacro Tom 1. l▪ it. G. pag. 3 [...]7. edition is vltim [...].

And it is to be noted that these volumes of Posse­uine containe only an inrolement and approbation of no writers at all, saue such as are approued Romish Catholicks: and are set out with great and publike al­lowance of the Romish State, as may be seene at the beginning of the first Tome.

Besides, let all men know the booke stands yet vn­censured, and the man liues still vnpunished; nay, vn­reproued, or rather commended and rewarded for it: therefore this cannot be called an obscure or priuate fact, but may properly be held the fact of the Romish Church or State.

THE blessed Mother of our Lord, as the Church in all ages hath done, so doth ours, willing­ly honour, as the most blessed of all Saints, yet as a creature, and as one saued by her sonne, that Saui­our in whom her spirit reioyced: Luke 2. we know & acknowledge that not she but the holy ghost hath said that all generations shall call her Luke blessed: Yet we must confesse, we are of that fathers religion, who said, August lib. de virginit. her spiritual bearing of Christ was happier then her [Page 16] carnall, and her selfe more blessed by conceiuing Christ in [...]ellcior par­tus spiritualis quam carnalis beatior enim Maria suit concipiend, Chri­stum side quā earne materna enim propin­quitas nihil ei profuisset nisi felicius, chris­tum corde quā earne gestasse [...]. her heart then in her wombe, and by beleeuing in him then by bearing him: for her bearing him in her body would not haue saued her soule, if she had not more happily borne him in her heart. And in another place, Idem Inde felix quia verbum Dei custodiuit non quia in illa ver­bum caro fact­um est. Papists them­selues cannot deny but our men do (out of this case) speak and write most reuerently of the blessed Vir­gin, as namely, Luther, Oeco­lampadius, Brē tius, Spangen­bergins, vrb. Rhegus, Bucer Bullinger. All this is con­fessed by Coc­cius the great papist in his The [...]ure Ca­ [...]helico. To. 1▪ Li. 3: at 5. p. 300. she was happy and blessed, not because in her the word was made flesh, but because she heard the word of God and kept it.

This her blessednesse, far be it from vs to impeach: and who would not yeeld her all blessednesse and ho­nour that a creature may haue, of whom GOD vouchsafed to take the flesh of man? And if any of our Religion hath giuen any words of her, that may giue the least blemish to her blessed state, it was not done in any the least contempt of her, but in the zeale, they bare to the honor of their Sauior, whom they held dis­honoured by the vnequall cōparing of her with him: for what will not a Christian mans zeale cause him to do, when he seeth his God dishonoured? who would haue thought that Moses would haue cast so carelesly out of his hands, so precious a Iewell as were the two Tables written with the finger of God? and yet when he heard the name of the Lord blasphemed, he forgot himselfe and them, and as though he remembed none but God, he threw them away and brake them in pie­ces.

If Moses his zeale makes his hastines excusable, then no reason to condemne them whose [...] gaue pas­sage to their passions, and caused them for the honor of the Creator to forget the priuiledge of a Creature: & I dare say there was neuer learned man of our pro­fession [Page 17] that presumed to touch the very skirt of the garment of her glory, vnlesse they saw her set in com­parison with God or Iesus Christ: which seeing the Ro­mish Church dare offer to doe, thereby ecclipsing the glory of Gods mercie and the worthynesse of Christs sa­tisfaction, wee hold it our duties to bee zealous for the Bonauenture himselfe said that we must take heed least we so farre ad­uance the glo­ry of the mo­ther, that we diminish the glory of the sonne. glorie of our God, and to preserue as farre as in vs li­eth the prerogatiues of our Sauiour. If it be said, that they match her not with God or Christ: I answer they doe, and that in such a measure, as wee dare pronounce her or any Angell accursed that should either arrogate or accept of that which the Romish religion ascribes vnto her. Too good euidence hereof hath beene seene in all ages for these 200. yeares last past, wherein they haue fallen from honoring her as a Saint, to magnifie her as a Mediator: to pray to her as to a God, to trust in her as in a Sauiour: Many perticulars haue beene spe­cified by many of our writers which by the aduersaries could neuer be denyed (they are so euident) & yet were they neither recanted nor remooued, but contrary-wise Reinoldus de I­dolatria. Catalogus testi­um veritatis. Perkins, of the Idolatry of the last times. they haue proceeded from euill to worse, till their blas­phemy haue euen pierced the heauens and touched the Crowne of the Almighty, and confronted the wounds, merrits and bloud of our Sauiour. Perticular instances hereof are many, which may be collected out of the Au­thors of late yeares, part wherof shall if God permit be particularized in this Treatise.

But aboue all there is one, which as it is the latest, so is it the fowlest, and wherein Popish Blaspemy is at that height, as now it giues hope to all Chri­stian [Page 18] men that their prayers are heard, her end is at Reuel. hand, and that her iniquity is come vp before God, and there remaines nothing but the reuenging hand of God to bee stretched out vpon her. Wee haue it not from the report of merchants, from the letters of the Posts, nor from the Intelligence of Embassadours, for then our aduersaries might suspect it: Nor from the report or writings of our owne men, for then let the world not beleeue vs: but wee haue it from the foun­taine it selfe euen from the Record wherein it is written with the Authors hand: and surely if the eui­dence were not beyond exception, our selues would not beleeue it of them, though they bee our enemies. Thus standeth the case.

Amongst the late deuices that Romish pollicy hath forged to vphold their Hierarchy, a principall is, their art of Miracles, which they pretend to haue so ordinary, that in many Churches they haue more In So yeeres the Pope lost all England, Scotland, Ire­land, Denmark Sweden, and a great part of Germany, France, Swit­zerland, Po­land, and Hun­gary. miracles then sermons: but alas dayly experience she­weth that they be lying Wonders and no true miracles. Now because such tricks are most effectuall to delude the common people, and that they finde themselues and their cause to haue lost much of late in many parts of Christendome ^a therefore to recouer themselues and to gaine credit to their forlorne cause, they haue most busily applyed this point of late, and haue by the craft of Machiauilian Iesuits (as Watson their bro­ther In their quod­libets often. Priest often stiles them) so farre preuayled, that there scarce passeth a month wherin some new Image of our Lady is not found, or some strange miracle and [Page 19] wonders heard of.

Two yeares agoe they caused a story to bee written and published wherein they blush not to make their See the booke called, Iust [...]. lip­tij diua. Virgo. Hallensis. people beleeue, that more miracles, and greater then Christ did, haue beene and are dayly done at Hall (a towne on the borders of Brabant and Henault) by the Virgin Mary, at a Picture of hers in a Chappell there: and this is set out by no triuiall or vulgar fellow, but by that famous Apostata Lipsius, that the tale may carry the more credit: and the miracles are not of or­dinary but of the highest nature: for healing of frēsies, feuers, cōuultions, is nothing, nay: sight is giuen to the Iai [...] daughter blind, and whereas Christ raised but 3. from the dead (that we know of) our Lady of Hall (saith Lipsius) gaue life to 7. at least that were dead: Loe here how far short Christ himselfe is of his Mother: and now we maruaile Omniae quae fecit Christus fecit Franciscus plura quam fecit Chri­stus fecit Fran­c [...]. lib. confor­mitatum beati Francisci. no more if they haue written that St. Francis did all that Christ did, and more then Christ did, seeing the Picture of his Mother, can do more then he did.

I say the Picture of his Mother, because Georgius fabri­cius, the Popes censor of books, in his allowance of this Legend of Lipsius saith, that God giueth and commu­nicateth diuine power to worke miracles nor onely to the Virgin Mary and the Saints, but euen to their I­mages or Pictures: behold good reader a worthy piece of new refined Popery, Gods diuine power is Strange doc­trine of Popery communicated to the very pictures of creatures: And if any man obiect that miracles are not in these dayes to bee expected, Lipsius hath a learned and Catholike answer, [Page 20] that now indeed in respect of Christ, or to auerre his Doctrine, or to maintaine his honour, they neede not, but the ease is otherwise (saith he) with the Saints, for many do refuse to worship them, and grudge at the honour that in the Romish Church is giuen them, and therefore to defend them in this point, and to establish By Popish doctrine christ doth more to establish the worshipping of Saints then his owne. that worship which they do vnto them, God suffereth so many miracles to bee done euen by their Images: which answere being well considred of, what a kind of Doctrine it contayneth, I leaue to the learned and iudi­cious Reader.

I only say, that if this be true, then how forteth it with the very body and current of his story, by which no man can deny, but it is apparant that most of the mira­cles which he specifieth, were done almost 200. yeares a [...]oe, namely betwixt the yeares 1400. and 1500. long before Luther began to preach, and (as they say) afore our Religion was in the world, and consequently before the worshipping of Saints was withstood; therefore it followeth, that miracles were ordained at Saints Ima­ges, euen then when worshipping of Saints was not de­nied: Lipsius might haue done well to haue reconciled so euident a contradiction.

But what assurance haue we for the truth of these mi­racles? or how know we that this is an approoued Pic­ture of our Lady? Lipsius answereth that there was one Sophia daughter to the Landgraue of Hesse, by his Lady Saint Elizabeth: (a Saint of Pope Gregory the 9. making within foure yeeres after her death.)

This Sophia (saith he) as it is thought, had certaine I­mages [Page 21] of our Lady, giuen her by her Mother Elizabeth, (was it then but thought so, and must wee now beleeue it?) one of these she gaue to the Nunnes of the Nunry at Vilvord, and that was called our Lady of comfort: 2. more she gaue to Madam Machtild, or Maud, her hus­bands sister, who bestowed them thus: one she gaue to Grauesand, another to Harlem (two townes in Holland) the third (which it seemes stole all the vertue from both the other) to Hall a towne in Henalt, (and this is that we now speake of:) and to ad more credit to the story, he tels vs that this Lady Maude was Mother to that Lady Mawde, who bare at one birth 364. chil­dren, An old story, but greatly sus­pected by Eras­mus and other learned men, to be fabulous which were all borne aliue, and baptized by a Bi­shop: So (saith Lipsius) this is that Image, which now wee worship at Hall: and thus strong a foundation hath the Story: and now may not all Caluinists be a­shamed to doubt of this Story or to suspect these grounds?

Now therefore surely we must needes beleeue (els we are vnbeleeuing Hereticks) that one was before this Image dispossessed of a Diuell without any other meanes, for so he saith, & that ten at least were deliue­red from present death by but calling or thinking vpon our Lady at Hall, and that seuen were raised from death to life being but laid before the Image; and all these within the space of 20. yeares, and in one country (so ordinary a matter it is in Popery to raise the dead.) Nay wee must beleeue (or else wee are Infidels) that when a Faulkner should haue beene hanged for loosing his Lords Faulkon, and had the rope about his neck, An excellent & new found way for faulkners to find their lost Hawkes, neuer before heard of Proue this Lip­sius, and thou wilt haue many Faulkners turn Papists. [Page 22] and did but call to mind the Lady of Hall, forthwith the Hawke came flying home againe, and lighted vpon the Faulconers shoulder, and so saued his life: for this is not Lipsius ashamed to report. Which if it be true, then we shall lesse wonder heereafter at that in the Legend, where it is reported how a Parrat hauing got abroad out of her Cage, and sporting her selfe in the aire, was by and by espyed by a Hawke, who being ready to See the old English legend in folio, of the life of S. Tho­mas of Can­terbury. seaze vpon her, instantly the Parrat seeing her selfe in danger to be surprized, cryed out S. Thomas a Becket saue me, and presently the Hawke fell downe dead, and the Parrat was deliuered.

As also those miracles of S. Francis so far beyond Christs or his Apostles, that he tamed wild beasts, that See the booke called, liber con­formitatum, S. Francisci, of a­ny impression. he preacht vnto a Wolfe, and conuerted him from his cruelty, and calling him by the name of his brother Wolfe, made the towne of Engubium & him friends, who of long time had beene at contention, and for the assu­rance of the peace, he made his brother Wolfe to giue him his faith in the Market place, before the Magi­strates, and afterward the Wolfe went vp and downe the City, and tooke his meate from dore to dore. Loe here you Heretikes, here is a Miracle worth some­thing; and if they will not beleeue me, looke in the holy Booke of Conformities, and there you shall find all See the con­formity of the old impression and his life in English. this and much more: as namely, how the Birds would come flying, and the Beasts flocking about him to heare him preach, and how the Nightingales and other Birds would come and helpe him to say Masse, and sing his office, and would answere him Verse for Verse. [Page 23] Come out ye Heretikes (Caluinists and Lutherans) Saint Francis and his followers challenge you all to bring Sedulius a Po­pish writer hath this last yeare defended all these. out one miracle like these, to approue your Religion: surely they may, and for ought I see Christ and his Apo­stles also, for they neuer wrought such a Miracle to con­firme the Gospell. Is it not then apparant that S. Fran­cis hath done more then Christ did?

Oh my deare country-men (you that name your selues the Catholikes of England) if you would but o­pen your eyes and consider of this, I durst make your selues Iudges, what diuinity this is: if you suspect mee, beleeue me not, looke into the bookes them­selues, and beleeue your owne eyes: If you say vnto me that some such impieties and follies might creepe into the old Bookes, 100. or 200. yeares agoe when the times were not so wary nor suspicious; but the Church hath since reformed such abuses, I answere, I alledge most of this out of the Booke of confor­mities, lately corrected and printed in Italy within these 20. yeares: but if you looke into the old one, printed 100. yeares agoe, (wherewith your forefathers were abused) you shall there find such matter, as for reuerence of the Reader I shame, and for the honour of God I feare to write.

And as for these miracles at our Ladies Picture at Hall they were neuer offred to the worlds view nor e­uer came to light till within these 3. yeares that Lipsius (a man who durst doe any thing but honour Christ) presumed to publish them, and with foule impiety to write that in these dayes Christ and his doctrine, ser­uice [Page 24] and Religion needes no miracles but the Saints and their seruice and worship do stand in neede there­of: and as in the infancy of the Church Christ had his, so in the perfect state of it, Saints and their Images must haue their miracles: but obserue withall that (if See the conformity of the old impression, or his life in Eng­lish. they say true) more strange and as I may so say, more Miraculous Miracles are done by the honour of Saints, and approouing the worshipping of them and their I­mages, then were for the establishing of the Gospell, the abrogating of the Ceremoniall Law, and for pro­uing Christ to be the Sonne of God.

If Lipsius were liuing I would not spare to tell him: Lipsius dyed a relapsed papist at Louoin. Ano that this his Doctrine smels strongly of that whereof he hath beene, (it seemes not without cause) suspected, which because he is dead I will forbeare to name.

But some of our English Papists (which are not learned) may doubt whether there bee such a Booke or no, or if it be not deuised by vs, and fathered on them, (for so do their Priests often suggest vnto them of such Bookes as they feare the people will mislike) but if any of their misleaders doe so mis-informe them, let them know the Booke hath beene twice printed at Antwerpe, and once at Paris, with allowance of authority in both places, not onely of the Cen­sors of Books, and the Archbishop of the place, but the matter and miracles in the Booke are confirmed These bulls of 2. Popes are in the end of the booke. with the Bulls of a Popes, one of Pope Nicholas, in the yeare 1451. the other of Pope Clement the 8. within these 8. yeares: and if any should bee so vn­reesonable as to thinke that wee haue forged all this, [Page 25] Posseuine, the Iesuite may giue him full satisfaction: who in his Apparatus sacer hath published to the world that Iust [...] Lipsius vir vere Catho­licus inter com­plures eruditis­simos l [...]bro [...] anno 604. edidit li­brum h [...]c prae­netati [...]ne. Iusti Liptij diua vir­go H [...]stens [...]s e­iusque beneficia & miracula bo­na fide atque or­dine descripta. Antuerpia apud moret [...]m. Posse. Appa [...]sa. To. 2. in litera. I page 318. Iusti Lipsij diua Aspric [...]llis. Lipsius in the yeare and at the place aforenamed, did put out such a worke, and giues him speciall commen­dation for his labours, in that and the like for the Catho­like cause.

But hath not Lipsius recanted, or the Romish Church reformed this since then? Alas, Lipsius was so farre from that, that the yeare after, very neere vnto his death, as though he intended nothing but to heape vp wrath a­gainst the day of wrath, he added drunkennesse to thirst, as the Prophet saith, for heaping sin vpon sin, instead of re­uoking & recanting his former collusion, he published another pamphlet, a more ridiculous Legend, and fraught with more improbabilities and impossibilities then the former. It beares this Title: Iustus Lipsius his History of our Lady of Sichem, or of our Ladies Picture of the craggy-rocke or sharpe hill, and of her new miracles and be­nefits: at Antwerpe. 1605.

At this Image saith he, are wrought miracles of al sorts Apoplexis, Epilepsies, gouts and all kind of diseases are healed, lame are restored to limbes, blinde to sight, deafe to their hearing: and all by these heapes, not sil­dome or extraordinarily, but yearely monthly, dayly: almost 60. are registred by Lipsius besides many more omitted, and all to be done in 2. or 3. yeares, insomuch as if his report be true, God makes miracles farre more ordinary for the honour of Saints and their Images, then he did for confirming the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles: But what credit hath the Story of our [Page 26] Lady of Sichem? euen as good as hath our Lady of Hall, else let the Reader iudge. The tale of the [...]age of craggy Hill,

Neere to the little poore (but old) towne of Sichem saith Lipsius, there is a mount, barren, rough, and craggy, on oue side thereof there is a little Hillocke: on it growes an Oake, and in it or fastned to it, is a little I­mage of our Lady, which hath done great miracles in time past, and was therefore worshipped of the peo­ple there: but how is that proued? thus; about 100 yeares agoe, a Shepheard found that Image, and put it in his bo­some, thinking to carry it home to worship it, but as he was in these thoughts, he was sodainely strucken and a­stonisht in his sences, & benummed in his whole body, insomuch as he could not stirre one foote but stood stil like a dead trunke, not knowing what to thinke of it, nor how to helpe himselfe: his M ^r. wanting both his shep­heard and his sheepe, sought them, and found him so standing, who told him the whole matter: his M ^r. ta­king the Image, went with great deuotion and set it vp in the Oake againe, and forthwith the shepheard had his limbs restored, & went & worshipped it, and so by their reports, all the country heard of it, who came by heaps & were healed of all diseases, but agues especially: and so it continued (saith he) til within these 20. yeares, about which time the blessed Image was stolne or lost no man can tell how. (But is it not strange that if it could doe these Miracles, they would let it be lost so carelesly?) well, lost it was: But what tho? people went as fast then as afore, and still as great cures were there done as when the Image was there: and in [Page 25] want of the Image, the people worshipped the Oake, & why might they not say Lipsius, the holy Image had hallowed the Tree? so that it might lawfully bee wor­shipped: (be hold Popish deuotion!) yet, saith he, wee worshipped not the Tree, but in it the Image, and in it our Lady & in her God. Marke good Reader, God gets his worship at last, though it be at the fourth hand: they tender it to the tree, the tree yeelds it to the Image, the Image conueyes to our Lady, and she presents it to God: so then by Popish doctrine and deuotion God is serued and honoured after his creatures, and so at last gets his own. If they say that the worship is intended to God, & is not ended but in him: I answere; but were it not bet­ter that the worship were offred immediately from the heart and hands of the worshipper to God him­selfe, and to passe through no hands, but of his Sonne the Mediator? but this is Heresie let it passe, or else it must passe the fire.

To returne to the story: our Lady of Sichem is lost; but what then must the poore towne loose her traffick and liuing? (Nay rather wee will make another, for that is no hard nor vnlawfull thing in that Religion:) and so saith he 7. yeares after: an honest and deuout Alder­man of Sichem (perceiuing well how his and his neigh­boures gaines came in, and how the poore towne liued) like a good townesman, made another Image, put it in a boxe of wood, and fastened the Boxe to the Oake that so their Lady might not bee lost so carelesly as a­fore.

This new Image thus made, did as many miracles [Page 28] as the other, and why should it not for was it not as good as the other? nay it may be it was more curiously carued and Alwayes re­membred that I meane not in a­ny of these syee­ches the blessed virgin whom as I hol [...] a blessed Saint in heauen, so I present her with all the ho­nour that may be giuen to a cre­ature: But I meane Lipsius his Lady of Si­chem, or our La­dy of Hall. better wrought.

Thus it continued certaine yeares till at last the Pa­rish Priest perceiuing they began to be well customed, bestowed some cost on their Lady which got them so much, that they built her a little Chappell of boords, & there placed her. But still their custome growing grea­ter, they shewed themselues thankefull to their patro­nesse, & as she fild their purses they sought her honour and built her a faire chappell of stone, some 2. yeeres a­goe, and in that resteth the Image, working miracles e­uery day. But what become of the holy Oake? it was cut a­way by pieces by deuout persons, and carried away, that it was in danger of falling, and a counsell was called in the towne what were to be done with it (as in so great a matter it is requisite) and there, after serious consi­deration, it was grauely concluded, that it should bee cut vp by the rootes, & with much solemnity brought into the towne of Sichem, where when it came, forth­with happy was he that could get a piece of the holy Wood, whereof (saith Lipsius, and blusheth not to write it) diuers made them little Images, and with much piety do worship them: others that were sicke of grieueous dieases, shaued it into their drinke and drunke, and so were healed. See what an excellent Religion this is: one Image hath begot many, and the first Image being but fastned to the Tree, so sanctified the whole Oake, that euery Image made of the whole Tree, should be as good as it selfe, and euery crumme [Page 29] of the Wood should worke Miracles as fast as the I­mage did.

Loe here the History of our Lady of Sichem, or of the sharp hill: & this legend is not Lipsius ashamed to thrust vpon the world, for a true & vndoubted story: such are the times we be fallen into, that to set fast the crowne vpon the Popes head, truth must stand aside, and lyes must passe for currant without controule: and such a cause is Popery as cannot continue in credit before the people, but by forging a continuall succession of lying wonders, for now we are made beleeue, that the Virgin Mary hath 2. Images within few miles together which haue done more miracles in a few yeares by-past, then God himselfe did in the old, or Christ and his Apostles in the new Testament: Such Idols of indig­nation doth the Romish harlot aduance against the soueraigne maiesty of God, to prouoke him withall: for what is it but an Idoll of indignation, that not a creature only, but the very Image of a creature should be made pertaker of the diuine power and Maiesty of God?

The time was when Isaiah the Prophet durst say of Esay 42. 28, God, I am the Lord, this is my name, and my glory I will not giue vnto another, nor my praise to grauen Images: but how soeuer that might be tollerable doctrine in those dayes had he liued in these, he must haue beene taught that a part of the glory and praise of God, may dayly be gi­uen to grauen Images, and yet the glory of God not at all thereby impeached, but rather augmented: Loe what Idols of indignations and abhominations lye hid [Page 30] vnder the mistery of iniquity.

And yet good Reader (as God saith vnto the pro­phet (turne thee a little and thou shalt see greater abhomina­tions Ezeth. then these.

It is yet scarce 3. yeares agoe since the tale of our Lady of Hall, was forged by some Iesuit, and published by Lipsius, when withall a faire Picture grauen in brasse was prefixed vpon the first Page before the booke of our Lady holding her Sonne in her armes.

And behold, the Iesuits as though the Mother were a woman, and the Sonne but an Infant: or as though they had gained enough by Christ a ready, and would now see what they could get by the Mother, be­gan to call in question his merits and mediation, and the dignity of his wounds and suffrings, and at last pro­nounce that his wounds and her paps his bloud and her milke, are either all one, or else that the milke is better.

And yet before we enter into the particular, let the Reader obserue that though the Image be both of our Lady (as they call her) and of her Sonne Iesus our Lord, yet notwithstanding the miracles are all ascri­bed to her and her Picture, and none to Iesus Christ: for the colouring of which impiety, what they can say I see not, vnlesse they dare affirme that the sonne will doe no miracles in the presence of his Mother, to which end, it may well be noted, and generally in all places where the Mother and the sonne, the Virgin Mary, and our Lord Iesus be pictured together in their Churches, shee is alwayes set forth as a woman and a Mother, and hee as a Child and Infant, either in her [Page 31] armes or in her hand, that so the common people might haue occasion to imagine, that looke what power of o­uerruling and commanding the Mother hath ouer her little child, the same hath she ouer her son Iesus: and that seeing the sonne is but an infant in his mothers armes, therefore they might not wonder why her picture doth all the miracles, and his none; for its like, Christ did no miracles whilst he was a child: into these superstious and euen blasphemous concelts do they indeauour to driue their people, not caring what they derogate from Christ, so they giue it to their Saints.

Is it not admirable that still they will make him an Infant, still in his mothers armes, still vnder her pow­er, and still all miracles must be wrought by her, and at her picture, as though either he could not, or in his mo­thers presence would not, or (at the least) as though she had many enemies, and therefore needed miracles, and Christ none?

But alas who seeth not that the Athisme & prophan­nesse of the world causeth euen the name and religion of Christ to be blasphemed, that if miracles might law­fully be expected, wee should thinke them as needefull as euer since the first planting of the Gospell: it is therefore a strange piece of Popish doctrine, that there is more cause that the Virgin Mary, and her Picture should haue miracles for them, then Christ and his Religion.

But yet this, and all other their suspitious and im­pious speeches and practises against the honour of Christ & his Religion, are in my iudgement inferiour, [Page 32] and may all stoupe to this new impiety of the Iesuits, whereby the Mother is compared to the Sonne, not as being a child, or a man, but as the Sauiour and media­tor: & the pappes of a Woman equalled with the wounds of our Lord, and her milke with his bloud.

If this were written by Protestants, some might say we might report partially, or if it were a matter of old, the age might yeeld suspition that it were made worse in the carriage: But when it is a matter of yesterday and comes from themselues, partiallity it selfe cannot cauill against it.

And the particular is this, Clarus Bonarscius, a Iesuit or the Iesuits Patron, published this present yeare to the world, a volume large enough, in defence of the whole order of Iesuits, the booke beares this title.

This volume he erected, as a Theater, yea an Amphi­theater of Honour, in defence of the Iesuits wherein af­ter he had assaied with much sleight of wit, and in a strange stile, to wipe away many foule blots, with which that Atheisticall broode hath stained the holy name of Iesus, and adorned it selfe (for generally that [Page 33] which dishonors God adornes them) and after he had ranged ouer all the former Churches, and raked vp all rotten slaunders, and reuiued the callumniations that were answered, dead and buried, 40. 50. and 60. yeares agoe, and rayled vpon the liuing and dead, Cal­uin, Beza, Pareus, Stenius, Tossanus, Faius, and many o­ther holy and learned men, with that bitternesse and virulency as neuer was before him: yea, moreouer after that hee had laid high and horrible imputations vpon this whole state of England, and (like a true Iesuits Impe) slandred the whole gouernment, with foule in­iustice, and monstrous cruelty in many perticulars, and See for these per­ticulars of our Queen & state lib. had in Iesuiticall pride, dared to defile the name and honour of renowned Queene Elizabeth, (whose me­mory for euer will bee blessed) with words vnworthy the mouth of man (if hee were not a Iesuite) at last from the defence of Iesuits, hee falls to defend Lypsius, (a good friend of theirs) and his two stories of our Lady of Hall, and our Lady of the craggie Rock, and not only labours to to make good all his fancies and fables, but further (to shew that a Iesuit hath one trick of im­piety beyond all, and is anointed by the Diuell with the oyle of mischiefe aboue all his fellowes) addeth a num­ber of verses directed to that Picture, which he calleth our Lady of Hall, fraught with so many blasphemies a­gainst the bloud and merits of the Mediator, as no Chri­stian eares to this day did euer heare, and doubtlesse no Christian heart can patiently endure: and certainely if the blessed Virgin Mary, to whose picture he hath cō ­secrated them, may be his Iudge, without doubt both [Page 34] hee and his blasphemy will bee condemned to hell: and she whose soule reioyced in God her Sonne and Sauior, Luke [...]. 47. her soule I say will reioyce in the iust damnation of him who shall match the milk of her a creature, with the bloud of him her Sauiour: But shall we heare them? no will some say, let blasphemy rather bee buried in the depth of obliuion, darken not the Sunne, defile not the heauens, poyson not the ayre, burden not the earth with it, amaze not the minds, and terrifie not the consciences of weake Christians: and assuredly could I bury it so that it might neuer liue, and quench it so as it might ne­uer flame againe, and if my Booke were the onely Co­pie in the world, I would rather choose to couer this shame of the shamelesse whore of Babilon, then by disco­uering it to cause good mens eares to tingle, and their hearts to tremble: But seeing the strumpet hath the whores forhead, and glorieth in her owne shame, and sounded out this blasphemy (as with a trumpet) in the eares of all Christendome by publishing it in a booke which he calls the great theater of the Iesuits honour, euen bringing so fearefull blasphemy vpon the stage, & dare diu [...]lge it in a second impression, least the world should want it:

Let vs therefore craue leaue of our Lord Iesus, to dis­couer her shame wherein shee glorieth, and that wee may without impeachment of his honour, repeate so foule blasphemy, that so the world may both per­ceiue what a Religion Popery is, and that we for our parts haue no fellowship with such abhominable workes of Ephes. [...]. darkenesse

The Title he giues them is this:

See first the impiety lurking in this Title. She is a Queene or Lady, Iesus a Child or Infant: compare this with holy Scriptures, they indeede speake both of him and her, but of him as God and a Sauiour, of her as a creature; the Mother only of his humanity (although the Mother of him that was God) and exercising pow­er onely ouer his humanity, and that onely during his infancy and priuatenesse, but not after hee tooke vpon him the Propheticall Office of the Mediator, for then he said (in a certaine case) woman, what haue I to do with thee? and againe, being told▪ shee was without to speake Iohn [...]. 4▪ with him, hee answered that hee had more Mothers, tho not in the same, yet in a better sence: for whosoe­uer did the will of his father, the same saith he is my mother: Mat 12. vlt. thus the scripture proceedes to describe him in his pro­pheticall, and afterward in his Priestly Office, and leaues him not till at last hee be ascended into heauen, and haue taken possession of his kingdome, and then the Scripture leaues him in his glory.

Is all this true? and yet must he now after 1606 years be an Infant in his Mothers armes? And for her the ho­ly scriptures speake no more of her, but as of a creature, a woman, a beleeuing Iewe, a holy Saint, saued by faith in her sauiour Iesus Christ, and so leaues her, with lit­tle mention (after Christ was baptized, and entred his propheticall Office) her body to goe the way of all flesh, and her soule to enter into that great glory which Christ had purchased for her, and all that spirituall kindred of his, whom with his owne mouth hee had pronounced more blessed for hearing his word & keeping it, then they could haue beene by being the mother of Luke 12. his flesh.

And yet now after 1600. yeeres, she must still bee a commanding Mother, and must shew her authority o­uer him, and he must receiue our prayers by her meanes, and Monstra te esse Matrem sumat per te preces. So are the mis­sals, Breuiaries, & Offices that are reformed. still she must beare him in her armes, or lead him in her hand, and her Picture must worke all the miracles, but his none: and she must be salured as a Lady, a Queene, a Goddesse, and he as a Child: If this be not so, let this Title iudge: Ad Diuam Hallensem, & puerum Iesum. But let vs leaue the Title, and not stand long at the gates, but enter this Citty of confusion.

And now all good Christians hearken with griefe of heart to that which I rather wish you might neuer haue heard; but if your eares tingle, your haire stand vp, and your hearts tremble at the blasphemy follow­ing, blame the heart that indighted it, the hand that wrote it, the Religion that allowes it, and not the pen that discouers it.

That is:

HEarken thou blessed Apostle Paul, (if thou in heauen canst heare the blasphemy on earth) thou that didst preach and 2. Cor. [...]. 2 write, that thou desiredst to know nothing but Iesus Christ, and him cruci­sied: thou that didst teach the Chur­ches onely to know and beleeue in Christ for saluation: and almost 20. times in thy Epistles hast magnified his Bloud, without once mentioning the Virgin or her Milke.

Heare and be astonisht at this, that some who pro­fesse [Page 38] to be thy Disciples or thy fellowes rather, cannot tell whether to choose that bloud of the Mediatour, or the milke of a woman: At least harken thou blessed spirit of truth, thou that canst and wilt heare, thou that didst inspire those holy truths into that holy Apostle: behold a Religion risen vp in the world that dare compare the bloud of that God who was by thee conceiued, with the milke of that W [...]man, who was the Mother of his hu­manity and was saued from hell and damnation by that bloud, and that dare allow her professors to make doubt whether to esteeme the greater delight of their soules her milke or his bloud: and we for repro­uing this, must bee accounted Heretikes: heare from heauen we beseech thee and Iudge betwixt vs.

The blasphemer proceedeth.

That is:

What before hee deliuered more darkely, now hee maketh plainer: if any doubt what milke what bloud [Page 39] he meant, he answereth our Ladyes Milke, and Iesus Christ his bloud: but what, doth popery make question whether of these two is better? Is this their holy Ca­tholike Romaine faith? If no [...], let their words be Iudge, I stand musing saith he and cannot tell whether to take milke or bloud: If I looke at her paps, then I long for milke, If to his sides, then I would haue bloud.

Marke how indifferent a Papist is, whether he receiue the one or the other: is not this euill enough? a man would thinke so, yet hearken what followeth, and wee shall heare worse: but let vs do it with feare and reue­rence of that glorious name, and precious bloud which are blasphemed.

In English thus:

Hetherto he doubted, now he is resolued: but such a doubt, and such a resolution, Christian eares neuer heard of: he doubted whether were bet [...]er, the bloud of God, or the Milke of a creature (the diuell himselfe neuer doubted hereof) but now what is his resolution, doth it make amends? yes doubtlesse as the Pope vseth to make Christ amends, when he hath dishonored him: [Page 40] I was at a stand (saith he) whether to take, and now I resolue I will haue both: both are so good I will re­fuse neither, her milke his bloud both so precious, both so powerfull, both so vertuous, as I will haue both. Both are good, and so good as hardly can I finde diffe­rence but if there be any, it is that the Milke is more excellent, and therefore with my right hand, I will make it sure mine, if I may bee so bold as to touch it, or if it be lawfull for a sinners soule to taste so glorious, so vnualuable and diuine a liquor as is the Milke of the Mother: and as for the child it is well for him if hee may follow his Mother, and haue the next place to her: therefore if hee please to giue me leaue I will lay hold with my left hand on his wounds.

O glorious God, the eternall sonne of the eternall Father, thou blessed Iesus Christ the stay and comfort of all Christian soules, heare in heauen thine only habita­tion this hainous blasphemy, and iudge thy own cause: And if it fall out that any contagion of sinne catch hold on me the writer or any the readers here of, by not trem­bling or not sufficiently detesting such feareful impiety as this that is past, or that that is to come; vouchsafe in mercy to forgiue it, and to wash it away with that most precious bloud of thine, whereto all the creatures in the world are not worthy to be compared.

And though this that's past, be abhominable, yet with reuerence to thy holy name and precious bloud, giue vs leaue to discouer the height of their iniquity, which still goeth forward in more horrible and feare­full manner: for thus sings the Iesuit.

That is:

So now Christ Iesus shall haue satisfaction, (if there were a fault afore) for if he complaine that the Mother of his flesh, a woman and a creature, haue the right hand when himselfe and his merits must take the left or none, heere they will make him amends, for that he may haue no cause to complaine, for want of place or precedence, her milke and his bloud will hee mingle both together, and so make a soueraigne compound cordiall for his soule. But what? a mixture of milke and bloud, of the Bloud of God with the Milke of a crea­ture? and is now the bloud of the Lambe of God but one of the simples in that cordiall Antidote, that must both restore and preserue the life of mans soule? ye hea­uens be astonied at this, so may we well say, for so said the Prophet at a matter of fa [...]re lesse wonder, hearken O Christendome, and all ye people, nations, & languages to whom the blessed name of Iesus Christ hath soun­ded: that poore paschal Lambe of the Iewes that was but a shadow of our Sauiour, the Signe and Sacra­ment, and in some sort the meanes and instrument of the Israelites temporall preseruation, might not, nay [Page 42] needed not to haue any thing mingled with the bloud Exod. 12. 5. &c thereof, but the bloud alone being sprinckled on their dores, deliuered them from the stroke of the destroying Angel: this was their Passeouer, and saith the Apostle, Christ our Passeouer is sacrificed for vs: shall this then be 1. Cor. 5. 7 true, of their Passeouer, a Lambe taken out of the fold & flock, & only dedicated by Gods instirution, & shal not the bloud of our Passeouer the Lambe of God, God & man Iesus Christ (whose Godhead is consubstantiall and coequall with the father, and his humanity perso­nally and indiuisibly vnited to the deity) being sprinck­led on our hearts & soules, suffice to preserue them from the infernall stroake of hell and damnation, vnlesse it be mingled with the milke of a creature? pardon this blasphemy O blessed Iesus Christ, if it bee not a blas­phemy against the holy Ghost, and a despighting of the spirit of grace: pardon it in as many of them as do not sinne vnpardonably, for thy mercies sake. Amen.

But say (I pray thee) tell vs in good earnest, (If so we may presume to call a Iesuites Proctor to his an­swere) is there not a more soueraigne Antidote for a sinfull soule, then a mixture & cōpound of Maries milk & Christ his bloud? chen tell vs who can make this mix­ture? who hath the skill sufficient for this confection who giues the true dosse? who appoints the quantities, Mithridates and triacles for the body are not composi­tions for euery conceit, nor matters for euery hand to make, but rather beseeming the skilfullest, and require the ouerviewing eye of the whole Colledge of Physi­tions, shall then the heauenly Antidote of the soule be [Page 43] compounded without a heauenly Physition? say then (Man) if thou dare stand to thy deedes, who was the Physition that prescribed and gaue thee this receipt, was it God the Father, the foundation of holinesse and happinesse? himselfe saith no, for thus proclaimed hee twise from Heauen of Iesus Christ, This is my welbelo­ued Mat. 3. At his baptisme Mat. 17. At his transfi­guration sonne in whom I am well pleased: In none as in him, nay in none, no not in his Mother, but in, for, and by him. Thus the Father of Heauen hath testified that the bloud of the sonne is one sufficient & soueraigne sim­ple, for a Heauenly Methridate. Now show thou, (and take the Pope to helpe thee) where euer hee testified so much of her milke: but if no such thing, nay nothing at all, then he was not the Physition that prescribed this mixture.

Who then, was it Christ himselfe the Sonne of God and the Sonne of this woman? No, for of himselfe hee saith, My flesh is (spirituall) meate indeed, and my bloud is (heauenly) drinke indeede: but of her he saith that euery Iohn 6. true beleeuing Christian, is his mother (as well as shee) Mat. 12 46 in the best sence, and much more then shee, had shee beene no more but the mother of his flesh: surely then if this bee a lawfull mixture, which this Papist makes, the sonne was much to blame to say so much of his owne bloud, that it is drinke indeede, and that it giues the drinkers eternall life, &c. and not one word of his mothers milke: Not a word sayd I? I recall that, for when once a certaine woman hearing him preach, not for any thing shee saw in her, but for the powerfull and gracious words, that came from him, would haue had [Page 44] her wombe blessed that bare him & her Paps that gaue him Luke 11. 27. 28 sucke: (the worst whereof is better then her milke) he instantly answered her, that much more blessed was euery man that heard Gods Word and kept it. If no extraordinary blessednes belong to the wombe that bare him (in that respect onely, because it bare him carnally) If none to the wombe or paps, which shall endure for euer, then how much lesse to the milke that fed him, which is va­nished & shall be no more: If Christ would not match her wombe or paps with a man that feared God, what will he say to them that make her milke a match for his owne bloud, the milke being a matter farre inferiour, ei­ther to wombe or paps. Thus they may see that Christ is not a fit Phisition to make this mixture.

What then was the holy Ghost the Physition that fra­med this receipt?

No, for hee by his diuine power, conceiued Christ in that holy and miraculous manner, that Christ was fully without originall sinne, and therefore his bloud might well be a pure and perfect simple to make the Aqua Caelestis that must quicken dead soules: let them approue as much of her if they can: they speake and write that shee was conceiued without sinne originall, and haue a holy day for it, but they can not prooue it. It is an Article of our faith, and grounded on plaine words of Scripture, that Christ was conceiued with­out Learned Papists hold that the Popes Bulls and the decree of the counsell of Basill do not conclude it as an article of faith. out sinne: and though the Whoore of Babilon, affirme as much of her, yet was she yet neuer so impudent, as to conclude it an Article of the faith. Thus God the fa­ther, the sonne, and the holy Ghost, do all disclaime the [Page 45] composition of this Antidote, as neither prescribed nor allowed by them.

Who then may be imagined to be this Physition? Exodus 12. was it Moses? no, for hee allowed nothing to be ming­led with the bloud of the Pascall Lambe: was it Esaias? no, for hee auoucheth that with his stripes we are healed, Esay 53. and his stripes were not without bloud.

Was it Zacharia? no, for he teacheth that the Church Zacha 9. 11. is saued by the bloud of her couenant, which is grounded only on the Messias.

If any other Prophet, let them shew him: was it Iohn Baptist: no, for he restified that not the Mother of his Lord, but his Lord Iesus Christ was that Lambe of God Io [...]n. 1. 29. that takes away the sinnes of the world.

Was it S ^t. Paul? no, for he teacheth the Romans, that Rom. 3. 24. 25. We are iustified freely by his bloud: (behold yee Romanists, there is no milke) and the Ephesians that we haue redemp­tion Ephes. 2. 13. Coloss. 1. 14. through his bloud: (yet there is no milke) and the Col­lossians, that he set vs at peace tbrough the bloud of his crosse not the milke of her paps: and the Hebrewes that not Hebrewes 9. 12. with any milke, but with his owne bloud he obtained eter­nall redemption for vs: to conclude, 13. times at least in his Epistles doth hee mention the bloud of Christ, to the same purpose, and with the same honour as afore, & not once did he so much as name our Ladies milke: surely either this was an intollerable omission in Saint Paul, not once to name it, else, presumptuous impiety in the Papists to match it with bloud of the son of God.

Then who is it, was it S ^t. Peter whome you bragge to be the founder, nay the foundation of your Church to [Page 46] and head of your Herarchie? No, that blessed Apo­stle renounceth it, for hee proclaimeth to all the world, that wee are elected through the sprinckling of the 1. Pet. 1, 2. bloud of Iesus Christ, heere is no milke: and as wee are 1. Pet. 1. 18. elect and sanctified, so redeemed also not with things cor­puptible (therefore not with milke) but with the precious bloud of Iesus Christ, Behold ye Iesuits and bee asha­med, Peter is all in Bloud, bloud, he knowes no milke.

There remaines but one (for S ^t. Iames and S ^t. Iude if they name not Christs bloud, I am much more sure they name no milke) was it S ^t. Iohn the beloued Disciple, to whom Christ committed her, (as his mother, but not his Sauiour?) no verily, for he is plaine, that not the milke of the Virgin Mary, but the bloud of Iesus Christ his sonne clenseth vs from all our sinnes: and that there are 1. Iohn 1. 7 three which beares witnesse on earth, the spirit & water & bloud: behold three witnesses on earth of our sanctifi­cation 1. John 5. 8. and redemption, and of them bloud is one, but milke is none, yea water is, and yet milke is not: surely if the fathers of the society of the inquisition might bee Iudges, S ^t Iohn were sure to be censured to remember water, and forget milke. But see how S ^t Iohn and the Ie­suites differ, they dare match and mixe her milke with his bloud, hee will neither mixe nor matchit so much as with the water, shewing that the very water issuing out of his precious side, was more of worth and value, then all her milke, euen that which fed the flesh of Christ when he was an Infant: Nay, the Apostle hath Reuel. 1. 5. nor yet done, but tels vs that Christ loued vs and washed vs (not in his mothers milke, but) in his bloud: and that [Page 47] the Robes of the Saints are made white (euen white, & yet not in white milke, but) in the red Bloud of the Lambe: Reuel. 7. 14 See heere, if euer milke had beene apt it had been here, if euer it had beene seasonable to haue named it, here had been the place: for what should make white, milke or bloud? and yet the whitenesse that must cloath the Saints; must be dyed not in the milke of our Lady, but in the bloud of Iesus Christ, if his beloued and blessed Apostle Iohn, nay if his owne holy word may be belee­ued. If none of all these, was it then her selfe that pre­scribed this portion and made this mixture? no assu­redly: They say we dishonor & disgrace her, yet I dare venture euen my soule vpon it, that her heart neuer cō ­sented to such a thought, as to match & mixe her milke with his bloud: for seeing the Angel saith she was belo­ued Luk [...] 1. 2 [...] of God, I am sure that no creature can be beloued of God, that durst offer to match the best thing in him (if it were his very harts bloud) with the bloud of his son; no his soule would hate him, his wrath breake out vpō him & his vengeance pursue him to destruction. Farre ther­fore was she from so vile a thought: nay, her soule re­ioyced L [...]ke 1. 47 in him her Sauiour, so farre was she from making her selfe in any part a Sauiour of her selfe: yea rather, if a Saint in heauen doth heare a blasphemy on earth, then doubtlesse that blessed soule of hers; that magnifi­ed her Sonne and reioyced in him as her Sauior, will neuer cease to cry and call vpon him, to reuenge so high im­piety: which is so much more hainous, in as much as they make the mother the dishonourer of the sonne. And if her prayers bee as powerfull with him as their Doc­trine [Page 48] teacheth, assuredly she will net cease to prouoke, his iustice against them, til she haue laid their tottering kingdome flat on the earth, for erecting vp her as an I­doll against her son, and for mixing the vertue of her milke with the the merits of his precious bloud.

Thus then, if neither God the Father, nor Christ Ie­sus, nor the Holy Ghost, nor Moses, nor the Prophets, nor the Apostles, nor the blessed Virgin her selfe, did any of them prescribe this portion? nor make this mixture: It followeth, that either the Diuell was the deuiser of it, or else that they framed it out of their owne braines and therefore to be iudged Mountebankes, and spi­rituall deceiuers: who make shew to the world, they haue a confection of miraculous vertue, when indeed it is a perfect poyson to all that take it: for if S ^t. Paul say true, that if we ioyne circumcision to Christ, Christ shal profit Galath. 5. 2. vs nothing: then without all controuersie, if we mixe the milke of a creature with the blood of the Mediator, that blood of his hath lost the vertue, and shall profite vs nothing: And thus the Church of Rome hath spunne a faire threed: she will needes haue both the sonne and the mother to be hers, in such a manner, as she hath lost them both, and made them both her enemies, the mother to be her bitter accuser, and the sonne to bee her angry Iudge. But thus hath God in Iustice blin­ded her, that whereas for these 2. or 300. yeares past, she came to this height of blasphemous deuotion, as This is ordinary in many of their books especially Bernar. de Bus. to his mariale: and reuelationes Brige [...] & others to trust more the piety of the Mother, then the mer­rits of the sonne, & often to appeale from him to her: Now ar last by this dealing they haue taken the di­rect [Page 49] course to turne her against them also, and to make her curse and abhor them and their superstition, who dare make her name and her Milke to bee the disho nourers of her Sonne, her Sauiour, and his precious bloud.

Thus we haue heard and seene the strangest peece of Physicke, and most vnequall mixture that yet was euer heard of, The bloud of God, and milke of a woman are mixed to make a cordiall potion, But now what will this potion do, what is the operation of it, hearken to the Mountebancks proclamation, and he will tell you.

Thus he cries.

That is:

Now he tells vs what his Physicke will doe, and that [Page 50] particularly in both his simples, the bloud and the milke: and as for the one of them that is the bloud and wounds of the Mediator, if hee had ascribed much more vnto them, he might haue past with praise (for vs) for hee cannot sufficiently extoll the merit & vertue of them, but as for the other, that is the milke of a woman, (tho it be the blessed virgin) or a confection of both, there he sheweth himselfe both impious in making such a mixture, as also a vaine deceiuer, proclayming great and soueraigne power in that which is nothing worth; for I say againe, if it bee true that to him that ioyneth circumcision to Christ, Christ is no Sauiour: then we dare boldly say: To him that ioyneth a creatures milke in e­quallity Galath. 5 with Christs bloud, that bloud of Christ is of no vertue: for circumcision is of the fathers, nay it was Gods owne ordination. But her milke is meerely apart (and no essentiall part) of her body which is a creature, and G [...]n. 17 as for the mixture of it with his bloud, it is an impious deuice of prophane pollititians, not derogating from the dignity, but euen quite abollishing the glory of the mediator: then if his passion may not bee ioyned with circumcision, may his bloud be mixdd with her milke? But what is that hee proclaymeth vulnera restituent, &c. Christs wounds wil restore & heale the spiritual sores of a sinful Lazar, we beleeue it will, they will do so & much more; yet for not his sake that saith so, for wee know that deuils themselues for a vantage would beare witnes Mat. 8 to Christ. But for his sake that said. He was wounded for our transgressions, He was broken for our iniquities, the cha­ [...]isement Esay 53. of our peace was vpon Him, & with his Stripes are [Page 51] we healed: and for his owne sake especially, who said it and did it, I lay downe my life for my sheepe. Thus he hath said well and truly of the wounds; but the wounds of Iohn 10. Christ will not serue his turne: He therefore addeth.

And will they so? who taught you this Diuinitie? will a creatures Paps quench and satisfie that soule that hungreth and thirsteth after righteousnesse? Say yee chil­dren of iniquity, haue you not read Esay the Prophet, who tels vs He was despised, He was afflicted, Hee was Esay 53. broken, He was plagued, and all for vs: His stripes healed vs, and not a word of her nor her Milke, but all of Him, his stripes and his wounds: what will yee say, wanted he knowledge of her worthinesse? or deuotiō to her deserts? Indeed the Pa­pists hāue taught so informer times as s [...]ith thei [...] mariale. Can yee say the first without blaspemy to God? or the second without iniury to the Prophet? could it bee he knew not her who knew her sonne? could hee foresee him and not her? or could any such mistery be kept frō him who spake and wrote, as hee was inspired by Gods spirit? and to conclude, was it not he that saith, Behold a Virgin shall conceiue and bring forth a sonne, euen Emanu­ell Iesus Christ? so that its plaine as the Prophet knew a Messias should come and should saue his people by di­ing for them; so also he foresaw and knew he should be borne of a virgin: If thē the Prophet had knowledge of her, dareye say he wanted due deuotion? and yet [Page 52] one of these you must say, and for want of one of these you must condemne him, who names none but Christ, or else your selues, who dare mixe her milke with his bloud.

But is this all? No,

One can heale spirituall pestilence, the other spirituall Feuers; see what difference there is by their religion, be­twixt her milke and his [...]loud: are not these men great and deuout honorers of Christ, and his suffering that can finde other helpes to heale their soules besides his bloud? But if it be thus that both can heale so wel, how comes it to passe they haue so many sick soules in Po­pery, euen sick of all spirituall diseases, especially see­ing by their owne doctrine and dayly practise, it is ap­parant they can neither want the one nor the other of these 2. simples: for first they say, they make Christs bloud euery day, then they haue bloud at hand conti­nually: If they say that the Laytie may not haue that, but only their Priests (who indeede drinke it vp all) yet then they may take their Ladies milke whereof (if themselues say true) they haue so much in seuerall pla­ces▪ as some that liued 100. yeares agoe doe write, that Erasinus and others haue spo­ken more plaine­ly and fully then I doe. in those dayes, it was more then a woman vpon one child can giue out, though the child sucked none at all: If that that is kept, and shewed and worshipped in so many Cities of Italy, France, Spaine, Germany, bee not [Page 53] her milke, then where is the truth and honesty of that Religion, so to deceiue the world? if it bee, then why are their soules so full of spirituall diseases? why are they not healed, seeing this Iesuite teacheth that it will heale as well as Christs bloud? as well as Christs bloud wil some say, why do you them that wrong? they are neuer so wicked to speake such blasphemy, No? then iudge by that which followeth.

That is,

Heere iudge and spare not (without all partiallity,) whether that I said be not true, that her milke will heale as well as Christs bloud, and this they affirme, not in ge­nerall tearmes but in plaine particulars: if, saith he, An­ger swell, if Lust inflame me, bloud will quench them & [Page 54] so will milke: are there two stronger passions, two more conquering corruptions, two more raging and raigning sinnes then Anger and Lust? yet euen these two are quenched & conquered by her milke as well as Christs bloud: hearken ye Children of the Romish Sinagogue, hearken I say what instruction your father giues you, heare I pray (but learne it not) a creatures milke will clense your Soules from sin, as well as your Sauiours bloud: O spirit of error and blasphemy, whether wilt thou goe? O Romish impiety, when wilt thou make an end? wilt thou not cease till thou hast puld downe the fire of Gods fury, from heauen vpon thee? O Ba­bilon we would haue healed thee, but thou wilt not be healed, Io: 51. 9. for who can heale him that will needes kill himselfe? so who can heale thee, whose blasphemy hath woun­ded & yet benummed thy heart, gone ouer thy head & is ascended vp to heauen, & in the presence of God crieth vengeance vpon thee; & as for you seduced soules (my deare coūtry-men) you who are deceiued with shewes of holinesse and deuotion, behold heere a peece of Popish holinesse, and of the doctrine of their deuoti­on, that the sinnes of the soule are clensed and taken away as well by a creatures milke as by Christ his bloud! is this the catholike Doctrine they brag so much of? is this the catholike Church that teacheth such diuinity? is this the chaire of S ^t. Peter, & the seate that cannot erre? If it be so, then what didst thou meane thou S ^t. Iohn Euan­gelist, to teach that it was Iesus Christ that faithfull wit­nesse, Reuel. 1. 5 that first begotten from the dead, & that Prince of the Kings of the earth (euen hee, and not any creature) who [Page 55] hath loued vs and washed vs from our sins in his bloud: sure either must you recant this Doctrine, els they that boast themselues to be [...] successors of thy brother Peter may be ashamed of theirs, who tell vs that our sinnes are washt away in her milk as wel as by his bloud: and you that are the dutifull and deuoted children of that Romish seate, be Iudges euen your selues in this case, what can be said heereunto: how can it stand with scripture, or with the tenor of true catholike faith? or how can it any way be defended that a creatures milke can quench the fire of sinne in the soule as well as Christ his bloud?

Can ye say that heere is onely ascribed to her and her milke, a deriued vertue from another, and that the originall and fundamentall power, is onely and wholy in Christ and his bloud? if it were so, it were lesse e­uill (though Christ Iesus may not, nor will not bestow the prerogatiues of his Mediatorship on any creature) but looke and weigh ouer the words again and againe, expound them with any fauour that the words may beare, and you shall not see the least difference.

If Lust burne, and Anger boyle, Enuy fret, vaineglory swell, I can helpe it with bloud, so can I with with milk [...]: I can helpe it with milke, so can I with bloud: there can be no greater equality made betwixt any two things in the world, then heere they make betwixt this Bloud and Milke.

Can it be said that the Author is a Poet, and said thus but to make vp the Verse, which otherwise would not haue falne so fitly? surely no, for a yong versisier can soone shew how the verses might haue run aswell as they doe, if hee had not purposely laboured to sort his verse to his matter, and not the matter to his verse:

For thus he might haue said,

with very little altoration.

And so of the rest: but hee as truly endeuoured to magnifie the milke as the bloud, and therefore with­out any necessity of the Verse, gives the same power, place, & preheminence, in euery respect to the milke as to the bloud: but had he beene as sound and sincere a Christian as he is a good Poet, hee might in as good verses haue giuen all the honour to Christ as he deser­ueth. Therefore (my deare country-men) bee no lon­ger seduced by a Religion so fraught with Atheisme, blasphemie & impiety: doe but looke into the Scrip­tures, Counsels, or Fathers: yea aske the honestest & learnedst of your owne Religion, (or any except Iesuits or such other like them, who frame a religion to their owne purposes.)

If this be tollerable Diuinity that the milke of the Vir­gin doth clense mans soule from sin as well as Christ his bloud.

If it bee not Diuinity but Blasphemy, no Christian Doctrine but impiety, and yet suffered, yet approued [Page 57] in the Romane Church, both by doctrine and practice; then returne to that truth and holy Religion, which out of Gods word, and according to the purest antiqui­ty is established amongst vs: and with heart and voice ioyne with vs to imbrace and say Amen, to that holy doctrine of blessed S ^t. Iohn, who saith it is Iesus Christ Reuel. 1, 56. that loued vs, and washed vs from our sins in his own bloud to him be glory for euer and euer, Amen.

This was his Religion, this is ours: oh that it were yours also! he sucked this diuinity out of that blessed brest of Gods Sonne, whereon he leaned: and if hee had I [...]h. 13. 23. sucked thence this diuinity of the Iesuites, that the vir­gin Mary washed vs from our sinnes by her milke, surely he would neuer haue concealed it from vs, nor haue de­priued her of the honour, nor vs of the comfort that thereby might accrew both to her and vs: for he was her sonne by her owne adoption, yea her Sonne by the gift and nomination of her sonne and Sauiour, yea her Sonne in loue, duty, and all respectiuenesse could hee then, or would he in any sort obscure her due glory? would he giue too much to her sonne, and too little to her? would he giue all that to her sonne, which in part was hers? can this, may this, or dare this be immagi­ned by any Iesuit? If not, then how dare they extend their deuotion beyond his, & ascribe that to her which he neuer did, yea that to her, which he appropriates to Iesus Christ.

If they thinke that Peter had more deuotion then Iohn, hearken then what he saith: Iesus Christ his owne 1. Pet. 2. 24. selfe bare our sinnes in his body on the tree: let the words be [Page 58] Pondered, Iesus Christ saith hee bare our sinnes: true (say they) but so did the Virgin Mary also, No (saith Pe­ter he himselfe▪ his owne selfe bare them▪ yea in his body. he bare them in his body: (say they) that is true, but hee beares them in his mysticall body, in his members, much more therefore in his mother, which is more then ma­ny members of his body: nay, saith S ^t. Peter, hee bare our sinnes his owne selfe in his body: but what body? euen that body that was on the Tree: therefore if S ^t. Peter preach true diuinity, then is this doctrine of your tea­cher hainous blasphemy.

All that may bee imagined for their defence at the best is this, that all this is but poeticall, & hyperbolicall, or proceedes from the passion & height of deuotion: but that in truth and earnest he ascribes all to Christ, & to his bloud, makes his prayers to him, and puts the confidence of his heart in him alone: but least any man should haue the least suspition of him this way, or thinke so good a thought of him, he deales yet more plainely and to preuenr all such thoughts and obiecti­ons, he makes his prayer both to the Moth [...]r and the Sonne, without any difference in the world, to the one for her milke, to the other for his bloud: for thus hee saith.

That is:

Heere is plaine dealing, it is not the Sonne and his bloud that will serue his turne hee must also haue the Mother and her milke, is not this good catholike doc­trine and deuotion? but further is not this strange to see how he marshalls them in the order of his iudgement and affection? he prayeth to the mother and the sonne: but first to the mother, hee will haue both milke and bloud, but first milke: thus Mary hath the precedence of Christ, and her milke of his bloud: But you will say it is not that hee so esteemes them in his iudgement, but only for the necessity of of the verse: the answere is that a grammer scholler, can soone shew how the verse is as good, and giue Christ his precedence, as it is doing him this wrong:

But he still keeping Christ in wardship and vnder age, held it not fit that he should haue the place before his Mother onely, and therefore without all necessity e­uen wittingly and wilfully, he puts Christ in the second place. But now let vs hasten to an end of this (if it be not endlesse and bottomlesse) impiety.

Vpon these fearefull premises thus he proceedes.

That is,

Now from blasphemy he proceedes to plaine Athe­isme, not fearing to expose the greatest mysteries of [Page 61] Christian faith, and euen our blessed Sauiour himselfe, to the rediculous & scornefull contempt of prophane men: Speaking vnto Christ, God c [...]aequall with the father, and whose very humanity raineth now in glory at Gods right hand, as to a seely Infant in his mo­thers armes: and to him whose very humanity is fedde with the glorious presence and contemplation of the deity, as to a poore child sucking his Mother brests: such conceits are common, and such words and wri­tings rise with thm, of our blessed Sauiour, who ne­uer speake of the Virgin Mary, but with the Title of Queene of heauen, Lady of Angels, the gate of Paradise, the fountaine of mercy, or some such other titles, fitting none but him that is God, or at least shee is alwayes a com­maunding Mother, and he an Infant gouerned, and an obedient child: But let vs consider his words a little better. Paruule &c, youngling (saith he) thou pretty babe, thou playest in thy mothers armes, and sometimes suckes her brests till they be emptie, and againe stayest till they bee full, &c. Is this good and sound Diuinity, that Christ our Redeemer is now this present yeare, at Halla in Bra­brant, an Infant playing in his mothers armes, and sucking her brests.

If it bee so, then sure S ^t. Paul was much to blame to teach vs, that euen the man Iesus Christ, after he had Heb. 10. 12 offred one sacrifice for sinnes, sitteth for euer (not in his mothets armes, but) at his Fathers right hand: and what doing? not playing in her armes, nor sucking her brests, but there he euer liueth to make intercession for vs. Heb. 7. 25. Intercession! to whom? not to her in whose armes [Page 62] they will make him play, but to him, at whose right hand he sitteth for euermore.

And much more to blame S ^t. Peter, who (not fore­seeing, it seemes what doctrine his pretended succes­sor would teach after him) teacheth vs that Iesus Christ is at Gods right hand, gone into heauē ▪ to whom Angels, pow­ers 1. Pet. 3. 22. and might are subiect. Are Angels, powers & might subiect to him? & must he be subiect to a mortall & hu­mane creature? Nay, is he now an Infant, playing in his mothers armes, and hanging on her brests? is not this good Catholike Romish doctrine? and is not this good pure Romish deuotion, to pray to him who is God of glory, & whose manhood is now at Gods right hand, Angels and powers subiect to him, in such words as these: Thou pretty Child that playest in thy mothers armes, and hangest at her brests? Is this a salutation fit for the son Heb. 7. 28. Heb. 1. 23 of God, who is the Sonne consecrated for euer? the heire all things. the brightnesse of Gods glory, and the ingrauen forme of his person? or is this a Christian like description of him, who hauing by himselfe purged our sinnes, sitteth at the right hand of the Maiesty in the highest places? But this is naturall to Popish Religion, to disgrace the me­diator they care not how, so that they may aduance some creatures, and magnifie their owne deuises: but though they neuer so much abuse most of Gods ordi­nances, and nullifie the very Offices of the Mediatour: Yet me thinks they should be a little fearefull how they touch the Person it selfe of the Mediator and sonne of God, and should shrinke and shame to expose the person of Iesus Christ, to the base conceit of the vn­godly: [Page 63] for what can the carnall man, much more the Atheist, the Turke, and the Iewe imagine of Christ, when he that is hi [...] pretended Vicar suffers his followers to speake and write of him, and pray to him, as a playing child, and sucking Infant, and to describe him in his be­hauiours as a very child, greeuing and crying that a­ny should touch his mothers Paps but onely himselfe? alas what will this Religon of Rome do at last? the word of God and Sacraments and other his holy ordinances they haue prophaned, the officer of the Mediator haue they nullified, and yet no [...] content: heere they labour to make ridiculous to all irreligious men, the very person of Iesus Christ himselfe: could this bee done by any but those that are the Children of that Mother of for­nication, that sits vpon the beast full of names of blasphemy Reuel. 17, 3. arise Lord, mainetaine thine owne cause, deliuer thy holy Name from that pollution, and thy Religion from that contempt which they bring vpon it. To conclude: it may not be amisse heere to obserue the opposition betwixt God in his holy Scripture, and and the Pope in this his Religion.

Out of all this followeth a conclusion of good vse: It hath beene often obiected to the Romish Church, that they haue not true Christ left amongst them, but an Idoll of their owne rearing, erected in their owne car­nall fancies: now that this is no flaunder, no cauill, no hyperbolicall or figuratiue speech, nor an accusation forced vpon them against their wills, is apparant by their owne doctrine and practise in this place: for the Christ of God and of his Church, is God equall to the father, and can do all things himselfe: the Christ of the Romish Church is a Child inferiour to his mo­ther and may deny her nothing. The true Christ, being man grew in stature and wisedome, and being growne a man, so liued and dyed, rose againe and was glorified, and neuer decreased: but theirs is now become a child againe and a playing Infant: the true Christ sitteth at the right hand of God his Father, theirs is borne in the armes of Mary his mother.

Hence the conclusion is euident, that therefore the Romish christ is not the true Christ of God and of the true christian Church. This conclusion I demonstrate thus: the Title of these verses is this, To our Lady of Hal, and the Child Iesus: this child they speake of, is either Iesus Christ indeed or it is not: if not, then they pro­claime themselues lyers and impostors: if it be, then my conclusion stands good: for this Iesus in all the fore­named respects, and many more, differeth from the true Iesus and Sauiour of Christian men: let them take whether they will, the better is to bad. But now let vs see what is that he saith to this child Iesus.

Quid me respectas, &c.

Why (saith he) doest thou frowne on me (thou prety child) art thou angry with me for desiring thy milke? doest thou ch [...]d me that I dare presume to aske the milke of thy mo­thers teates? this is all the cause hee layeth of Christ his anger, what should a man say to this? what would a Iew say, what will an Atheist thinke of it? surely they will deride and laugh at that Religion that allowes it, if our Christ bee such a one as is angry at such a cause: But say I pray thee thou Romish Iesuite, (thou wantest neither wit nor learning to giue answere) speakest thou in iest or earnest? if in Iest, then, knowest thou with whom thou iestest? considerest thou that it is Iesus of Nazareth, the great one, the holy one of God, of whose kingdome there shall be no end, hee that is the brightnes of Gods glory & the engrauen forme of his person, he at whose remembrance the diuels tremble, and to whom all knees bow in heauen, earth, and hell, and darest thou exercise thy wit, and whet thy stile, & practise thy poeticall vaine vpon him? and vnto him that now hauing conquered sinne, death, and hel? sitteth now at the right hand of Ma­iesty, in the highest places? darest thou present such a Pe­tition as this? O pretty child doe not enuy mee that I should touch thy mothers paps, with which I perceiue thou wilt suffer none to play but thy selfe: oh be not angry that I long for that which is thine, namly for the milk of thy mothers teates; didst thou euer find in Scriptures or sound antiquity, that any holy man did euer conceiue of him, or speake to him on this fashion? no for its rather a sporting speech [...]it to be spoken to a playing child, then a salutation sit [Page 67] to be tendered to the Son of God and Sauiour of the world.

But if thou say thou speakest in earnest according to the truth of Religion, and soundnesse of diuinity, then tell me I pray thee in earnest, is this any part of christi­an faith, or is it catholike deuinity, that Christ Iesus is offended with that man that shall desire to touch the Virgin Maries paps, or to taste of her milke (not in this regard that its a thing not possible, and therefore in­deede not to be wished by a Christian, but) because they be peculiarly & propperly his paps and his milke, still as they were when hee was an Infant? If this bee Romish diuinity, alas for the sheep that are fed in such pastures, and [...]ild with such doctrine: for this is funda­mētally both false & impious, false, for if it be true that the holy scriptures teach, that Iesus Christ is now no more to be knowne nor conceiued of according to the flesh, that is as a meere and mortall man, but as a glori­fied Man, a spirituall conquerour of his enemies, and spirituall head of his Church: If this I say be true, that hee is no longer, to be knowne as a man, as hee was vpon earth, then it is false that he is still to bee concei­ued of and spoken vnto as a playing child: Besides it is impious and irreligious, and a step to Atheisme to imagine that Christ our God & Sauior, is offended for such an imaginary toy as this is, to touch his mothers paps, or to desire her milke: & what enemies of our reli­giō would not loudly laugh at this our Christ whom we so magnifie, that we make him the rest and comfort of our soules, to be [...] such a one as hee is heere described? [Page 68] namely one that chides him that dare touch his mo­thers paps, for so saith the verse:

That is,

Alas, how shall the mouthes of Turkes and Iewes be stopped from blaspheming, and saying: Is this your Christ? is this the glory of Christianity? Is this he whom you make a God? are these the sins he is offended withall? Surely no wayes can such and fowler blasphemies bee preuented, but that the Christian world publikely re­nounce, condemne, and curse, this damned doctrine, as being the priuate and impious blasphemy of the Machiuillian Iesuits, but not the Catholike doctrine of Christianity: For we cannot deny but there is a gene­ration of vipers, bred of the corruption and putrifacti­on of an old and sinfull world; calling themselues Ie­suites, or Priests of the society of Iesus: who as they come neerest to God in their mouthes; so are they in their hearts (if their courses can discouer them) the furthest from him. With these fellowes it may bee it is a doctrine or a peece of deuotion, that its a great sin for a man to desire from Iesus some of his mothers milk: but if they be asked who made this a sin, they must an­swere, themselues: if what law? euen their owne fan­cies: But as for the catholike and christian Church, she doth renounce it.

But to proceede, is it not strange that a witty and learned Iesuite, should frame such a speech as this vnto Iesus Christ, for thus to begin, Oh blessed Child why art thou angry at me, and offended with me? oft hast thou said to me being angry at my sins, &c. would put a man in hope that some great matter followed: for vpon so good a beginning, would not a man presume that some good confession of sinnes should follow? as this, I must con­fesse O Lord I haue sinned in ignorance, in selfe loue in secu­rity, in hardnesse of heart, in incontinency, in mallice, in ha­tred, in couetousnesse in omis [...]ion of my duties in commission of euill, &c. for these O Lord, and for any of these, thou mightest say vnto mee, thou miserable wretch, how darest thou thus pollute my name, and as farre as in thee lyeth, cru­cifie me againe by these thy sins? how darest thou dust and ashes, thus vilifie my eternall Law, the curse whereof thou hast hereby incurred? how darest thou beare my Name, or looke mee in the face, whom thou hast thus pro­uoked? See Watson the Priest his iudge­ment of the Ie­suit often in his Quidlibets. Costerus in Eu­chiridio: cap de [...]aleba [...]u sacerd. Sacerdos si for­n [...]catur aut de­mi concubinam foueat tamet si grau [...] sacriligio se obitringet Grau [...]us tamen peccat si mali [...] monitum con­trahat.

Oh that our eares might haue heard a Iesuite saying thus, and then in reason a man would haue expected some good conclusion from such a beginning. But why should we looke for either reason or religion from a Ie­suit, (if that be true which their brother Watson the priest hath written of them.) To haue supposed Christ to be angry with him for breaking the Morrall Law had beene good diuinity, and no poeticall immagination, but these holy Fathers haue no such faults: nay see how innocent Lambes the Iesuits be, that when Christ is most angry with a Iesuit, and rebukes him for sinne, [Page 70] he hath none to lay to his charge, nor finde any where­of This is also de­sended both by Gretser the Ie­suit in his histo­ria ord. Ies. and by Ignatius ar­mandus the Ie­suit, in his Epi­stles to Cha [...]er: vid. Ep. Iesuiti­cas. for the points af swea­ring & holy dayes, see Tollet in his instructio sacerdotum: & Azorius in his institutiones morales. Sixtus 5. made that a saint at King I hilips re­quest for recom­penc [...] (expresly) of his inuasion [...]f England in 88. he is guilty, but a little holy presumption, or rather height of ardent deuotion, that hee dare touch the Paps, and beg the milke of the virgin Mary: O fearefull pre­sumption, O carnall selfeloue, O hellish pride, and well beseeming the Iesuiticall broode! is not this the generation that praiseth it selfe, and (as Salomon saith) is good in his owne eyes? But say in earnest, is this all the fault that thou thinkest Christ can find with thee? then belike there is either no breaches at all of the morrall Law, amongst Iesuits, or else the breaches of Gods Law, are lesse sinnes amongst them, then are the brea­ches of their owne deuises, and well may it bee so: for he was a Iesuit who taught that a Priest sinneth lesse if he kept a whore, or lye with another mans wife▪ then if hee mar­ry a wife of his owne, I say he was a Iesuite that wrote it, and he was a Iesuit that defended it.

Againe, they teach that its a lesse sinne to sweare in common talke by the holy name of God, then it is to eate an egge in lent: for the latter say they is a mortal sin, the first is but a veniall. Againe, that hee sins no more that workes vpon the holy Saboath day then hee that workes vpon the feast day of S ^t. Didace the Spaniard whom Sixtus made a Saint, not yet 20. yeares agoe: they who [...]e doctrines these & such others bee, no mar­uell tho they hold that the breach of of a duty of their owne deuising, is a greater sinne, then the breach of the morrall Law: for so must hee hold that wrote this, or else that Christ can find no greater fault in him, but that he durst beg his mothers milke: or else that [Page 71] Christ would passe by all other faults in comparison of that, let him chuse which of the three doth please him best, for one he must needs take, or else confesse that all this while he is but in iest.

I would leaue this point, but that my loue to you (my deare country-men, the Papists of England) prouokes me to one word more, to you and for your sakes.

Consider I pray you what these men are, who bee the Fathers and founders, at least the guiders and go­uernors of your faith: A generation that knowes no euill by it selfe, but this that (I dare stand to) is no euill at all, but of their owne making, a generation against whom Christ hath nothing but this ridiculous allega­tion which you haue heard of: which if it bee true, as they are a society of all the world to be honoured, so being false, they are a broode of Hyppocrites, of all the world to bee detested: Then see how, you are dayly be­witched by their inchantments, and carried vp and downe as they please to leade you: but consider I pray you what wil not those men say of themselues to you in priuate, which speake thus insolently of themselues in publike? what meruailous, miraculous, and incredible things wil not these fellowes buz into the eares of their Nouices (whome they indeauour to binde Prenti­ses to their Belzebub?) who offer to publish to the eyes and censure of all the world, that Christ lay­eth nothing to their charge vnlesse it be an extremity of deuotion, to his blessed mother: O beloued coun­trymen, be not seduced by such impostors! let not such vipers eate your hearts; but discouer the Hypocrites and send them home vnmasked to Hell where they [Page 72] were hatched, for they that dare thus dally with our Sa­uiour, no maruell tho they be so bold with your soules and consciences, your children and your estates and all that belongs to you.

Now to goe forward, hee hath told vs the great quarrell that Christ hath to him, and the hideous fault for which he chides him, that hee offers to touch his mothers teates, and will needes haue some of her milke: but now let vs see what he answers and how he defends himselfe.

To a strange accusation, heere is a more strange answer: for now the tide of his blasphemy is euen at at the highest: the quarrell hee supposed, Christ to haue against him, was that hee durst presume to touch his mothers paps, or desire to taste of her milke: a fearefull sinne doubtlesse, yet neither forbid­den in the Law nor the Gospell; but a sinne of the Popes making. But what is his answere hereunto? hee plainely pleads not guilty, alledging for himselfe, that he is not so bold, so rude, so presumptuous, as to dare to entertaine any such thought, or attempt any such thing, as to touch her sacred paps, or to drinke of that [Page 73] glorious milke: no his ambition reacheth not so high, he onely prayeth to haue part of his wounds and bloud, that he desireth as being a thing of an inferiour nature and not comparable to the other.

O miserable times of ours, that we should liue to see that any mans heart should conceiue▪ any mans tongue vtter, especially any mans penne should publish such horrible blasphemy against the bloud and person of our Sauiour! what, must the Virgin Mary bee first compared, afterward equalled, and is not that enough vnles now she be preferred before, and aduanced a­boue Christ? is his bloud inferiour to her milke? and is it lesse presumption to bee bold with Christ then her? whither will Romish religion go at the last, that already comes to this?

But to come to a more particular consideration of the words: the answere that here the Iesuites makes, containes apparantly both absurdity and impiety, and both in the higest degree: The absurdity appeares in his euident contradiction of himselfe; for now, as tho he had either forgotten or cared not what he said afore he denyeth that which before he spake almost in euery verse: dare you not now touch her Paps, nor taste her milke? then who was it that afore said: I am doubtfull whether to take paps or side, milke or bloud: If I looke at the Paps, I long for milke: if at the Wounds, I would haue bloud: seeing therfore both are so good, I will haue both: I will catch the milke with my right hand, the bloud with the left. Didst thou this euen now, and now saist thou dare not touch it? Nay, was it not thou that saidst I will mingle the milke [Page 74] of the mother with the bloud of the Sonne, and so make a souerainge cōpound to heale my soule, and now darest thou not touch the milke nor paps? was it not thy mouth that said, if Anger, Lust, or any sinne vexe my soule, bloud will helpe it, and so will milke: therefore Mother and Sonne heere my request, I must haue milke, I will haue bloud, I will haue both? and dost thou now say, Oh I will haue bloud indeede, but I dare not desire milke? was it then deuo­tion to take it, and taste it, and drinke it, and mingle it with Christs bloud, and apply it to the soule, and is it now presumption to desire it? can one mouth send out such grose contradictions? but let it passe, for no absurdity nor contradiction can bee so vile as should euer haue moued mee to haue set Pen to paper at this time, (for they are sufficiently discouered already in these and other points,) but when dishonor and blas­phemy is offred to the bloud & person of Iesus Christ, how can a christian hold his peace? for if that be true which the learned father saith, that in accusation of he­resie [...]iero [...]im: he would haue no man patient, whereas heresie is but the shame & hurt of the man that holds it? then sure in the case of blasphemy and impiety, touching the very crowne, and striking at the head of Iesus Christ our Lord and redeemer, who can be patient, who can but speak? neither thinke that heerein I challenge ought to my selfe aboue my brethren, but knowe contrarywise, that though I onely write, who first, or with the first discouered it, yet speake I, and write I in the person of many millions more, who all with one heart and voyce detest his Romish impiety.

The impiety that bewrayes it selfe in this answere is such as goeth beyond all wee yet heard, and wherein it seemes the blasphemer thought to exceede himselfe: that we may the better discouer it marke the current of his speech: O Christ (saith he) oft hast thou being prouoked with my sin, rebuked me and said: darest thou sinful wretch presume to touch my teates or medle with the milk that feeds me? he answereth, oh no blessed child I dare not, nor I will not so farre presume, I neuer was so rude, nor so vnci­uill, as to imagine that I might touch those precious Paps, or taste the blessed milk of thy mother: I only beg a litle of thine owne bloud, from thy side, thy hand or foote: that shall con­tent me: what is this we heare? you are content to haue Christs Bloud, but as for the virgin Maries milk thou da­rest not desire it what: is her milk more precious, more dainty, more sacred then the bloud of the Mediatour? Yee heauens be astonied at this, and all yee creatures of God (in your kinds) renounce and detest this hay­nous blasphemy. And you (my poore countrymen) that are the deuoted children of th [...]t Church, behold heere a peece of Popish diuinity a [...]d deuotion, a crea­tures milk is of more esteeme then Christ his bloud: a christiā by the power of his ordinary sauing faith may bee partaker of the benefit of Christs bloud, but not of the blessed milke of our Lady. The bloud he may boldly challenge, the milke he scarce may name: in the bloud, he may diue and wash his soule, the milke he may not presume to touch: Oh new diuinity, fo [...] merly it seemed strange that her milke was but com­pared to his bloud, but when after it was made equall to it, and mingled with it, and held as fit to heale the [Page 76] soule as it that seemed incredible, till wee saw it: then what is this that now wee heare, that her milke is not only comparable nay equall but euen more precious, more sacred, more excellent then the bloud of Iesus Christ: Oh miserable Religion of Popery! whether wilt thou draw thy deceiued children in the end? what will be­come of thee and thy followers? If the diuels confessed that Iesus of Nazareth was the Christ of God, that is the onely Sauiour of the world, and the only annointed of God, to be the mediator, and yet for all this are Diuels still and no better: then what are they and what a reli­gion is that, which makes his bloud no [...] so good, so ver­tuous, so soueraigne, so precious as her milke, and so by consequent will neither let him bee the onely nor the principall Sauiour. Now the same glorious God and Sauiour Iesus Christ, whose merrits are debaced, whose person dishonoured, and whose bloud little bet­ter then troden vnder foote, either conuert in mercy, or in iustice confound all that shall consent, defend or giue countenance to so fearefull a blasphemy: and the same God giue you grace poore seduced English men, to relinquish that Religion, which is the Mother of such monsters as vpon this theater of the Iesuits, are pre­sented vnto you: and especially to detest that Iesuiti­call Sect, whose honour it is to dishonour Iesus Christ, and who bring vpon the great Theater of their honor, the bloud of Iesus, so dishonoured, as it yet neuer was by any sect or profession, Turke or Iewe, Atheist, or Here­tike, diuell or man, since the world began.

But let vs see what remaineth.

After the discourse imagined (as we heard before) to be betwixt Christ and him, containing Christs accusa­tion, and his defence touching the high presumption of being as bold with his mothers milke as his bloud: now sodaainely he turnes himselfe from Christ to Babi­lon and supposeth that Babilon that spirituall strumpet allures him to her vnlawfull lusts and vild Idolatries, and that her temptations haue beene both frequent & forcible. And surely herein we easily beleeue him: for what is spiritual Babilon but the kingdom of sin & Satan, of impiety, Idolatry, blasphemy, superstition, prophanes: and where is that as in Popery, and where to bee found so fully as in the bowels of the Popish state, whom they well know all the world either clearely con­demnes, or at least iustly suspects to be that spirituall [Page 78] Babilon so fearefully accused and condemned in the Re­uelation. For what City is so notoriously knowne to stand vpon the notable & famous hills as Rome is? what City in all the world did raigne ouer all the Kings of the earth, then when S ^t. Iohn wrote, but only Rome? and the Text saith (as plainely as can bee) that the woman, the great Whore of Babilon the mother of fornicatiōs, is the great Reuel. City that raigneth ouer the Kings of the earth: and lastly there is no place, person, state, nor power, in the world, in whom the number of 666. so fully concurreth, in so many languages, in so many respects, so directly, and with so little strayning as in the Popes.

I wil specifie but few for many: the Pope or none but the Pope challengeth to the principall of the Clergy, in the world, and therefore in the former yeares hath called himselfe vniuersall Bishop, and Pastor of Pastors: Now it falls out that this his pride doth proclaime his shame to all the world, for the number of the beast is in this name, without adding, altering, or any strayning, as hee shall find that will reckon.

Againe the Pope glorieth in this Title and honour, that he is Gods generall Vicar on earth: this is the founda­tion of all his pretended power and vsurpation: this he and his imps fight for as for their liues.

This his seduced creatures, English Priests and Ie­suits, do in England dye for (excepting some that dy­ed for horrible treasons) and no maruell, for they know [Page 79] they lose all if they lose this, and yet the Pope can­not hold it, but withall hee must haue the number of the beast ingrauen in his forehead, so as he that runnes may reade it: for put downe this Title in the latine tongue, (which is the tongue by him aduanced aboue Greeke o [...] Hebrew, wherein hee writes his Letters, giues his lawes and his bulls, and workes all his feares) and it containes the number of the beast, and neither more nor lesse.

Thus its cleere, that as the Pope will needs be Gods generall Vicar on earth, so hee cannot haue it, but hee must beare the marke and number of the beast. If a­ny man say hee calls not himselfe Gods Vicar, but Christs Vicar, I answere Christ is both God & man, and he holdes himselfe Christs Vicar, euen as Christ is God, and full little would he thanke him that holds him Christs Vicar, only as he is a man: But I answere further, that who euer reades his owne decrees & pub­like constitutions, shall easily see that hee calls himselfe ordinarily the Vicar of God, and suffers others so to stile him: and that the world may see they haue not reformed it, the Pope that now is, Paul the 5. hath suf­fered [Page 80] one of his owne creatures in a Booke dedicated Tuccij Tuccij patritij luc [...]nsis & protonet A­postol: comment in cant. [...]ug: 606 In titulo libri. to him, to call him the Vicar of God. Thus Thus he will needs be Gods Vicar, but his pride is well paid for, for as hee will be Gods Vicar against Gods will, so God makes him beare the diuels marke, in the number of the beast a­gainst his owne will.

If therefore it be so likely that Rome is Babilon, and her doctrines and deceits, superstitions, and Idolatries, the fornication of that whore of Babilon, then wee easi­ly beleeue this to be true, that oft times did Babilon allure him with her entisements, & wooe him to her spirituall fornications: so hath she done many more, and pre­uailes with too many.

But what, with him? No, he will haue none: it is well sayd. Oh that you would doe as well, that is the worst we wish you Iesuits, though you wish vs nothing but fire and gunpowder.

Oh that you would turne into your selues and see your error in beleeuing her, and in being deceiued with her inchantments, and drunke with her fornications that you would no longer bee the sonnes of her that is the mother of abhominations least you be also children of abhomination:

Oh that you would forsake her and discouer her skirts, and teare her in pieces as she hath deserued, and then re­turne to be the children of the Church, and seruants of the liuing God! this is that we wish you from the Lord, whom we also pray that thou whosoeuer thou art, that wrote this & all other of the faction in the world, may haue grace to perform that which here thou promisest. [Page 81] No no, though heauen and hell should meete Ile none, Ile none vngracious strumpet get thee gone.

Well then, if he will haue none of Babilons dainties what wil he haue? for he saith he thirsteth, and must haue his thirst quenched, but how?

Quench me with bloud sweet sonne, with milk good mother

But alas these are children of Babilon, they will not be healed: for loe he sings his old song againe, he must haue bloud, he must haue milke: loe heere the hunger & thirst of a Papist, it is for milke as well as bloud: out Sa­uiour proclaymeth to the world, blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse. I would heere aske Mat 5. a reasonable Papist, a briefe question, whether this righteousnesse can be attained by any meanes, but by the bloud of the Mediator: If he thinke it may, let him that saith so, take time to consider of it, and he will an­swere otherwise: But if not (as if Christians they must needs answere) then what a kind of thirst is that, that thirsteth for the milke of a creature, as well as for the bloud of the Mediator: but whilst they take time to an­swere this question, let vs go forward, and trace this Ie­suit to his vnhappy iournyes end.

That is,

Now if you please to obserue a little, you shall see a new peece of Popish deuotion: his ground already [...]ayd is, that he must haue milke from the mother: bloud of the sonne.

But how will he come by them? hee hath found a ready way, he will make the Sonne mediator to his mo­ther, and the mother to her Sonne: Christian Religion hath euer taught, that the Sonne is our Mediator to the Father: and Popish Religion hath long taught that the Mother is a Mediator to her Son: But now they begin to reach that the son is also a mediator to his mother: what will it come to in the end?

And heere obserue, that as euer heeretofore when there was any honour in precedence, the mother had the first place: so now when it is a burden and a duty, the sonne must haue it, but not till then, for so now hee saith.

First indeed hee intreates the Son and then the Mo­ther: but what intreates he him? to be a meanes: to whom? to his Mother▪ for what? for her milke: so that vpon the matter, her Milke is it that is first in his thoughts, its that hee longs for principally, and Christ Iesus shall be preferred to goe a message to his mother and to intreate for him, [...]hat hee may haue it: as tho he had said, O Iesus my soule so thirsts for milke, that I cannot be without it: now because thou hast re­buked me for my presumption, in offering to take it as boldly as thy bloud: I haue therefore no other way but to intreate thee to bee a meanes to thy mother, that so by thy mediation and her mercy I may ob­taine it, therefore I beseech thee Iesus say to thy mo­ther, &c.

Is not Christ honoured and well aduanced by Popery that makes him mediator to a woman for her milke, and for the benefits and merits of it, and that for such a one as will not be content with the benefits and me­rits of his owne bloud shedding: But behold good Rea­der seriously what diuinity heere is! A Christian man in his deuotion may (saith this Iesuite) desire Iesus Christ to go intreate his mother for him, & to compaline that his poore brothers soule thirsteth, desiring her to quench and comfort him with her milke: what is this we heare? Is Christ a mediator to a creature? and for something in that crea­ture to quench the spirituall thirst of the soule? If this be true, then what meant Christ to say, Come vnto mee all that bee weary, and I will ease you: for if hee send Mat 11 [Page 84] them that be thirsty and weary to his mother to bee ea­sed, surely in that word, Christ either spake too much of himselfe, or too little of his Mother.

If Christ held that they might come onely to him­selfe, then it appeares the Iesuits Religion and his bee contrary: if he knew that they might come to her, as well as him, or to her by him, then what meant hee to say Come vnto me, and not rather Come vnto her or vnto me▪ what can they, what dare they say? was hee vndu­tifull to his mother? or enuied hee her dignity, or for­got he her when he thus spake? or was hee swayed with too much selfe-loue? If none of these without blasphe­my may be imagined, then what may be said, that there were any such thing due to her, and hee knew it not? If this also be impossible, then there remaines but one, that he named himselfe, but excluded not his mother, he bids come to him, and forbids not to come to her: I answere, first heere he bids vs come to himselfe, let them shew where he bids vs goe to her, if he no where bid it, it is as good as forbidden: aga [...]ne, hee that in one case of truth said, I and my Father are one, would not Iohn 10. 30. haue spared in this case if it had been true, to haue sayd I and my mother are one, and he who out of his holy hu­mility, and knowing the difference of the fathers dei­ty of his owne humanity, freely confessed my father is Iohn. 14. greater then I, would neuer haue scorned (if it had been true) to haue acknowledged, my mother is as great as I: whereas contrariwise, leauing ou [...] her and all crea­tures in the world, he saith directly, Come vnto me: And whereas he came to fulfill all righteousnes: and the fift Mat. 3. 15. [Page 85] commaundement wee know commands as well reue­rence to Parents, as obedience: therefore doubtlesse he who went home saith the text and was obedient to them, Luk. 2. [...]. would also most readily haue yeelded her this reuerēce if it had bene due vnto her, or if it might lawfully haue beene giuen her: But he knowing the contrary, doth in this case passe by her, and commands Come vnto mee: If yet they will reply and say, he saith indeede come to him, but meaning to send vs from himselfe to her for ease and comfort, who is the Mother of mercy and grace: I answere so indeede, is she called in their seruice book, Maria mater grati [...]: mater miserecordiae: tunos ab hoste Pro­ [...]ege, & hora mortis, suscipe. Officium beatae mariae. but God in this booke takes that name to himsele only, and giues it to no creature, therefore let them an­swere it that giue it to her: Againe, the ground of this re-plication is false, for as hee saith Come to mee, and names no other, so neither sends he vs to her for ease, but saith plainely and directly, and I will ease you. Further, they not onely make Christ a Mediator to his Mother, and that for spirituall ease and comfort, but they do it in such a fashion, as they make Christ one that either is not able or not willing to helpe vs him­selfe: for it he were, then why doe they say, that he complaines to his mother, that we thirst & for the ease of our soules desires her to yeeld her milke? If heere they were asked this question, I wonder how they would an­swere it? If Christ be not willing or nor able to ease the thirsty soule, then how is he a perfect Sauiour? If hee bee, then how is it likely that hee would send him that humbleth his soule to him for helpe, to another to be eased, seeing hee asketh of him, who said, Come [Page 86] vnto me all that are weary, doth he aske that that Christ hath to giue, and is it likely that hee will deny it? doth he aske that that Christ hath no [...] to giue, and is it pro­bable that his mother hath it? then they may as well say that she hath more grace and mercy, or more power & ability then Christ himself hath: let thē answer these questions, how they will, heere will bee found strange diuinity, which we see is currāt in the Romish Church.

But whilst they prepare their answere, let it please the reader to obserue how contrary the Romish doct­rine is to the doctrine of Christ, and of the holy scrip­ture.

These and such like oppositions are common be­twixt Christs Gospell and Romish diuinity, may not this giue strong suspicion that their Religion is Anti­christian, which in the foundations of it are so repug­nant to Christs, as these and others which stand con­firmed with more authority then yet these doe? well, thus Christ is made a Mediator to his Mother, now the Iesuite proceedeth, and to make him amends, hee maketh the mother a mediator to him.

That Christ Iesus hath the ransome of sinfull soules in his hands is good diuinity, and we heartily imbrace it, wishing it were as heartily and truly (without Equi­uocation) intended by this Papist: if he and all other Papists do so hold it, wee heartily reioyce, but then wee desire them to answere to a few questions.

Who payeth this ransome? is it not Christ? who ac­cepts it? is it not God the father? is it not mercy, grace & loue, that either the one will accept it, or the other pay it? can any pay it but the one? can any take it but the other? are not thē they the foūtains & fathers of mercy, which haue done so? if all these be true, then what a Religion haue they, who in their liturgies & dayly prayers, call a [Page 88] creature the mother of mercy, and mother of grace, oftner then either God the Father, or Christ the Redeemer, or both put together, we desire some conscionable papist to answere vs seriously: was the Virgin Mary a Creator or a creature? If a creature, was she any more then an excellent creature, set apart for the most excellent vse in the world? & was it not in Gods election to haue chosen any other woman, at his owne good pleasure to haue beene the mother of Christ? and was it not his owne free mercy, that he regarded the low estate of her his handmaid? if this bee so, then did shee any thing in our saluation, which any woman had not done, if God had taken her to be his mother, was there any thing in her to moue God to chuse her, which was not Gods owne gift in her and to her? she may be then a vessell of grace, but she can be no way a fountaine of grace: for what had she but she receiued it: but if (as they say) she bee the fountaine of mercy and mother of grace, then shee giues but receiues not, as the fountaine receiues from no other, but hath of it selfe, and sends out to others: & the mother takes not of her children, but layeth vp for them, Now if it bee as their Liturgie saith; it is, that she is the mother of mercy and grace, &c. Then sure she hath the ransome in her hands: but if it be in Christs hands, as heere they say it is, then how is she the mother of mercy? hardly would these bee reconciled, but that they haue equiuocations, reseruations, or distinctions, that will make any thing seeme good enough to serue their turnes.

Thus then they haue not only made Mary Mediator [Page 89] to Christ, which is common in their Religion, but (which was scarce euer heard of before) they make Christ their mediator to her, her to him for his bloud, but first him to her for her milke: Now to leaue this point, obserue (in one word) how in these two messages of mediation, heere is no difference, but she that is a crea­ture and saued by her sonne, is made to speake to him in the same tearmes as he to her, and with no other words or signes of reuerence: and her sonne and sa­uiour, yea God himselfe made to speake to her with the same reuerence as she doth to him: as though there were no difference betwixt him and her, and as though he being God and her sauiour, was as much beholding to her for her milke, as shee being a creature is to him for his bloud: Loe what popish deuotion is heere? now if they be ashamed of this, then why are they not asha­med of the other? But they are farre from that, for where are the intreatings, the cryes, the humble re­quests and submissiue beseechings to him for his bloud? heere be none such: but contrariwise as though there were no difference in the world, betwixt either the persons intreating, which are Christ and Mary, or the things desired which be his bloud and her milke, he saith to Christ.

And to her he saith:

Thus Popery makes of Christ and Mary, one no grea­ter [Page 90] a person then the other, & of his bloud and her milk, one no greater a matter then the other: Christ with no more reuerence to bee implored then Mary, his bloud with no more vehemency to bee desired, with no more difficulty to be obtained then her milke: If this doct­rine may be defended vnder pretence of deuotion, then will not there want a colour for any blasphemy: But the Iesuit goeth forward and saith to Christ.

It may be doubted in whose name he speaketh these words, whether in his owne, to both Christ and his mo­ther, Hora [...]ius. Tur­sellinus Iesuita in hist. laureta­na in pr [...]fat. or in Christs name to his mother, and in hers to him: if in the first, they containe blasphemy, if in the se­cond absurdity: for if he suppose the virgin Mary saith thus to Christ.

It is fouly absurd to imagine that she being so dignifi­ed as she is (yea rather as they hold almost deified) should make an if, or a question whether Christs bloud excell the rest or no: and much more absurd is it to make Christ seeme to be ignorāt of of his mothers power and state how great it is: be it more or lesse. But if so be he speak these words himselfe to thē both, then [Page 91] behold the hainous iniury done to the precious bloud of the mediator. Concerning which this wicked papist makes as much & equall doubt, whether it excell the bloud of other creatures, as he doth: whether the milke of the Virgin Mary excel the milke of all other women: let all christian men shrinke and tremble at so great a blasphemy, for all the learned Papists in the world may be chalenged to proue (if they can) out of Gods word and the grounds of religion, that she was any more thē another holy woman, (sauing this prerogatiue, that she was his mother according to the flesh) or any more then a Saint of God sanctified by the spirit, and saued by the bloud of Iesus Christ, whose mother shee was in regard of his flesh: or that her milke had any vertue in the world, but to nourish the body as doth the milke of other women, their children: for was not hee a man like vnto vs in all things (sin excepted) and if Christ take it no preiudice to himselfe, to be like vnto men, shall it be a wrong to her to be like to other women? Nay we dare goe further and aske them, if God haue vouchsa­fed once in the whole new Testament so much as to name the milke of the Virgin Mary? whereas almost in euery Chapter hee extolleth the bloud of Christ, and is euer magnifying the vertue, merits, and e­fficacy of the same: if this bee so, then what shall we say to that Religion and to those men, who make it as questionable, whether Christ Iesus his bloud excell the bloud of other men, as whether the Virgin Maries milke exceede the milke of other women? is this Romish religion? is this popish diuinity? then see what follow­eth: [Page 92] But it cannot be proued either to reason or to faith that her milke excelleth other womens: in any spiritu­all or corporall vertue or operation: therefore it is not to be prou [...]ed that Christs bloud is more precious then other mens: See here my deare countrymen, how you are mis-led, see what doctrine you are fed withall by your teachers! open your eyes and bee no longer deceiued; offer not this iniury to him that gaue his life for you, to make this vnequall comparison: if they will not teach you holy and sound diuinity, then hate them, and learne from vs, or rather with vs, from the holy scriptures, that his bloud is the price of our redemptiō: but as for her milke wee know no such thing, since shee liued on earth: acknowledge with vs that it is a fundamentall ground of Christian faith that his bloud is more worth then ten worlds: but that her milke is now of any vallue, can nether bee perswaded to reason nor beleeued by saith: and yet dare this malignant si­nagoue make that as likely as probable, as certaine as the other: If enemies of Religion take hold heere, and say, that therefore the ground, of our Christia­nity are vncertaine, and so blaspheme the blessed bloud of our Sauiour, we can say no more but our Church is innocent, our hearts are free, our hands are cleere of it: woe be to them by whom the offence commeth. But now let us see how the Iesuite concludes, and whether his end be any beter then his beginnning.

That is:

Now comes he to his conclusion, but alas his iniqui­ty is as much at the last as at the first: for still hee per­sists in his impiety, without repentance, without re­morce, without sorrow or sence of the euill hee hath done, for still he sings his old song:

His soule thirsteth, but for what? for milke and for [Page 94] bloud: but first for milke and then for bloud: If this be tol­lerable diuinity, nay if this bee holy deuotion, then what did our blessed Sauiour meane to cry out to all weary and thirsty soules, If any man thirst let him come vnto me and drinke: I wish the Iesuits would tell vs what they thinke, whether he did well or no, to leaue out the Virgin Mary: for if this diuinity of theirs bee good, then he ought to haue said, If any man thirst let him come to my mother or to me to drinke: and surely if her milke be thus equall in vallue, price and merrit to his bloud, then wee doe no longer maruell that they teach how the Virgin Mary did rise from the dead, and was assumed into heauen corporally, that as Christ rose & ascended to apply & make good the merrit of his death so did she also to make effectuall the merrit of her milk. But then good Paul how farre art thou to blame, that esteemest all things in the world dunge and drosse, and on­ly that thou mightest know the vertue of the resurrection! for then it seemes, thou wilt giue little [...]or nothing to know the vertue of her assumption: But it may bee thou art halfe an Heretike, and beleeuest not any such assumption: but if thou couldest bee taken within the reach of the holy inquisitiō, thou shouldst pay well for such thy hereticall incredulity: If now thou wert aliue thy better and more holy brethren the Iesuites, could reprooue thee for many indiscreete passages, and teach thee better diuinity then thou seemest to know, for whereas thou durst say, thou esteemedst to know nothing Phil. 3. 8, 9, 10 but Iesus Christ and him crucified, they can tell thee thou art farre short in thy duty, and but cold in zeale in re­spect [Page 95] of them, for they stand in doubt whether to e­steeme now the bloud of his wounds, or the milke of her Paps: and whereas thou wilt giue all to know the vertue of his resurrection, they can but wonder at thy ig­norance, who carest not to know the vertue of her re­surrection & ascention also: Be thou content to know the one, they for their parts will know both: and if thou be so precise for thy Master, that thou canst not be cōtēt to say, that he purgeth our sins, but must exclude all other, and say, that he by himselfe purgeth our sins: know thou that they dare be so bold as to put out that word by himselfe out of the text: and when they reade Heb. 1. 3 thy Epistles they are halfe ashamed to see what a blou­dy man thou art, for thou art all in bloud, bloud, inso­much as twenty times at least thou art still vpon bloud as though there were no saluation but by bloud, and as though blessed Maries milke had no merit at all. It seemes that as thou wert a persecutor, and deligh­ted in bloud afore thy conuersion, so thou beares still a bloudy mind: but now behold these meeke, & milde and mercifull men (the Iesuits) a generation that loues no cruelty, nor seekes to shed no bloud (as most nati­ons Witnesse in Eng­land the Powder treasō: In France the last Kings death, the pre­sent wars in Sweden and broyles in Po­land. &c. of the world can well beare witnesse) these sweete and gracious fathers being possessed with a better spi­rit, are weary of bloud and do rather choose and desire milke to quench the spirituall thirst of their soules.

If they would vtter what their prophane harts think, or discouer openly what they mutter amongst them­selues, we should here them publish euen such diuinity as this is: (a taste whereof, besides the present poems, you shall read anon.)

But now for his conclusion, this blaspheming Ie­suite dare proceede and turne his speech to God and not fearing the commaundement that forbids him to take Gods Name in vaine, vnder paine of standing guilty, at the barre of Gods iustice, hee dare offer to abuse the name of God, with such a prayer as this.

O Lord thou must pardon mee though I cry aloud, for it is not bloud will serue my soule, I long for milke, and am so a thirst, that I may not keepe silence: and why Lord shouldest thou so long keepe me a Pe­ [...]ioner in this case? I am better then the nayles, yet they had bloud inough: I am not so vile as clouts, yet they wanted neither milke nor bloud.

What kind of men are these Iesuits, or what a God is their God, to whom they dare present such a prayer as this? surely they thinke as basely of him as they doe highly of themselues, or else they neuer durst thus insult ouer him, & thus abuse him, as after he hath told them plainely, that his bloud is drinke indeed, and commanded them that are a thirst to come and drinke of that well of wa­ter Iohn. 6. 55 Iohn 7. of life, to come and tell him to his face that their soules thirst for milke, & they must haue it? belike these crawling frogs thinke that they haue such a God as they may leape and play vpon at pleasure: But O thou that dwellest in heauen langh them to scorne, haue them and their wickednesse in derision: and either worke them to repentance and visible conuersion, or bring them to vengeance and iust confusion.

The Iesuite concludes with a comparison of himselfe to [Page 97] body, and the cloaths that toucht him in his infancy and death: & indeed the first comparison is not much vnequall, for the Iesuits are most like to nayles & laun­ces in Christs body; for seeing the holy Ghost tells vs that wicked men by their sinnes did and doe pierce Christ: then the Iesuites who by their Atheismes, cru­elties, periuries, equiuocations, treasons and manifold impieties, haue beene sharper nayles and launces in Christs body, and greater dishonorers of his Religion, then any other sort of men (if the voyce of all Christen­dome, & the testimony of their owne brethren be true) thē the Iesuits I say are not vnfitly resembled to nayles & launces: and indeed they are thornes in the eyes, and pricks in the side of all princes and states where they come: lesse maruell though they be like the nailes and speare in Christs body! therefore let the Iesuit please himselfe in this comparison, as long as he will, we enuy it not.

But for the second, that hee is better then the clothes that were about these two blessed bodies, I say but this: that either the Iesuits are farre more holy then the Prophet Esay, or els he farre more humble in his owne eyes then they: for he professeth in his owne & the churches name, that they were no better then the filthiest clout that euer was, euen a menstruous cloth, But saith the Iesuit, I am better then the best cloth that euer was: for though wee hold that God hath gi­uen lasting vertue to his Word and Sacraments but none that we know to rags, or clouts: yet we acknow­ledge [Page 98] that as farre as clothes may one excell mother those that touched the bodies of our Loid and his mo­ther, are the most precious, and if we could be sure wee had them, we would esteeme them aboue cloth of gold: we therefore wonder how a man comming before the Lord his God, dare in his prayer make himselfe better then those clothes, especially hearing the Prophet cry before him, O Lord all our righteousnesse is like a men­struous clout. If our best be so filthy, what is our nature, what is our sin? if he answer that this is but a cauill, for he meanes that he being a man he is therefore capable of grace and saluation, which the cloathes are not, I thinke so also: But why then doth hee enuy that milke and bloud should touch them? If he meane the mate­riall and reall milke and bloud that were in the bodies of Christ and his mother, then he is more then mad, to enuy the nayles, the launce, the clouts, for that they did touch them, and yet he cannot, and if he complaine that he may not, we aske him why then did not the A­postles take more carefull order to gather vp and pre­serue that milke and bloud, or if they did not, at least why did they not complaine of the want of them, as he doth heere? surely either they had too little deuotion, or the Icluirs too much superstition.

But if he meane the vertue, merit and efficacy of the bloud and milke, then let him answere vs two short questions. First, what spirituall vertue and power had that milke, what did it worke in our saluation, (more then the milke of another woman could) what did it merrit for vs? what the bloud did we know and most [Page 99] willingly do acknowledge: but what the milk did or can do, if the Iesuites can tell and teach vs, wee will not refuse to learne: But supposing that it had as much ver­tue as the bloud (as the Iesuite affirmes, but farre be it from vs once so to thinke) then secondly wee aske him whether he thinke the Nayles, Launce, and Clouts, were partakers of the vertue and merrit of that bloud, if he do, let him shew where he receiued such diuinity: if not, then to what end complaines he to God in such a fashion.

Lord I am better then the Nayles and Clouts, and yet they had Bloud and Milke inough, but I dye for thirst.

If this be not to take Gods name in vaine, and that in a high measure, we appeale to all Christian men of reasonable iudgement.

And thus at last are we come to an end of this Iesui­ticall Gospell, the impiety whereof I now remit to the censure of the Christian world.

And for my conclusion, least any should say that this is but one priuate Iesuits deede, and therefore may not preindice the whole society of Iesuits, and much lesse the Religion of Popery.

To these I answere, 1. the booke is allowed and hath beene twise printed, and stands approued by Posseuine, Posseu. in appar. see lit, C amongst good and catholike authors. 2. Let them shew what Iesuite or other popish doctor hath reprooued, or what Inquisitor or other popish Magistrate hath censu­red this wickednesse. 3. Which is worst of all, it is no more in effect then others of them haue taught or ap­proued, [Page 100] though not in so open, apparant, and foule a fashion, for let any Christian man iudge what diuinity is laid downe in these points that follow.

1 The papists haue a book called the Mariale, It hath beene obiected vnto them that in this booke it is thus This hath beene long agoe laid to their charge in Catalogo, testi­um veritatis editionis 1609. said: Salomon saith the name of the Lord is a strong tower Pro. 18. 10. But Salomon knew little of the Virgin Mary, let vs therefore say, the name of our Lady is a strong tower, let the sinner flye vnto her, and he shall be saued: and againe: thou art a sinner, flye then to the name of Mary, that alone shall serue to heale thee: and againe:

The Lord was with Mary, and Mary with the Lord, in the same labour and same worke of our redemption for the Mother of mercy helped the Father of mercy, in the worke of our saluation: and thereupon was it spoken of the first woman, It is not good for man to be a­lone, let vs make him a helper: But why then saith God, Esay 63. I haue troden the wine presse alone, and of all peo­ple, there was no man with me: the booke answereth, it is true Lord that thou sayest, there was no man with thee but there was a woman with thee, which bore all the wounds in her heart, that thou didst beare in thy body.

Loe heere a peece of rare diuinitie! Salomon is blamed for ignorance, that he knew but little of the Virgin, & in a sort is rebuked for saying the name of our Lord, and not rather the name of our Lady is a strong tower: and though no man did, yet a woman (namely Mary) did helpe Christ to treade the winepresse of Gods wrath, and was fellow worker with God, in the worke of our redemption.

This booke stands vnconfuted, vncondemned, vn­reproued by the Iesuits or the Romish Church, till this day for ought that I can yet find, yet hath it beene many yeeres laid to their charge▪

2 Againe the Papists haue a booke, they call it the La­dies Psalter, printed at Paris in the yeere 1520. or ther­abouts, Vide Psalterium beate Virgini [...] Maria [...] impres­sum cum Psal­terio Cisterciensi Par. circa anno 1520. Extat e­tiam idem. Psal. ad verbum, a­pud Chem▪ in examine concil Trident: in parte 3. P. 149 editi­onis franco furt. 1996. wherein euery one of the 150. Psalmes are in whole or in part turned from dominus to domina, that is, from God our Christ to our Lady, as

Thus I might go ouer all the Psalmes, but as he began he ends in the last words of the last Psalme.

Let euery thing that hath breath prayse our Lady.

Now this booke stands not onely vncontrolled, but Greg. de val in vol. de rebus [...]i­dei controuersis, sect. 5. lib de Ido­latria 5. cap. 10. Bernar. de Bustis in Mariali parte 3. ser. 3 rather euen defended by the Iesuits, and those of the principall.

3 Againe, a famous Fryer & well approued amongst them, preacht this doctrine in the pulpit (amongst ma­ny other, little better.)

A man may appeale from God himselfe to the Vitgin Mary, if any man feele himselfe grieued at the iustice of God, seeing God hath deuided his kingdome with her, for whereas God hath iustice and mercy, he hath reserued iustice to himselfe, to bee exercised in this world as it pleased him: but mercy hee hath commit­ted to his mother: If therefore any man find himselfe agrieued in the court of Gods iustice, let him appeale to the court of mercy, of his mother.

This Diuinity was so well relisht in the Romish Church, that after hee had preacht it, he publisht it vnder the Popes owne Patronage: and the booke was Alexan. the 6. againe printed within these three yeeres: but what say the Iesuits to it, they testifie that this booke, is a learned and godly book, full of goodnesse and piety.

Fourthly, Horatius Turcellinus, himselfe a Iesuit of Horatius Tur­sellinus: in Hist. virg. lauretan [...] in pr [...]fat. good esteeme among them, writes thus.

Almighty God hath made the Virgin his mother, as far as he may lawfully, partaker of his diuine power and Maiesty.

Now surely if God haue made her fellow with him of his diuine maiesty, lesse maruell if Christ haue made her fellow in the worke of redemption. And this booke Posseu. in lit. 11. written by a Iesuit, hath publike allowance, and is dedi­cated to Cardinall Aldobrandino.

Fiftly, a great Spanish Doctor, and professor of di­uinity of his order, writes thus.

We haue often seene and heard of very many who in Iohn Chrysost. a visitatione, de verbis dominae to 2. lib. 2. cap. 2 their extreame dangers haue called vpon Mary and presently were deliuered: for oft times safety is soo­ner obtained by calling vpon the name of Mary, then by calling vpon the name of Iesus Christ the sonne of God.

And this booke is both dedicated to Pope Clement the Posseu. in apperatu sacro lit. l. 8. & receiues publike allowāce by the Iesuits: his name is Chrysostome, as tho hee were a golden mouthed speaker: but if thi [...] [...]e his doctrine, that her mediation is as powerfull, or rather more then is her sonnes, it is pitty but he should be call'd and accounted a leaden [Page 104] mouthed wretch:

By all these & many more that (as the learned know) might easily be produced, it may appeare that this blas­pheming Iesuit Bonarscius, in this his detestable compa­rison, of her milke with Christs bloud, saith no more in effect then others both of this Religion and perticular sect, and therefore it may be iustly concluded, this is the doctrine and diuinity not of him alone, but of the Ie­suits, and of the popish Church it selfe, as long as it stands approued or not condemned by them: Now then if this be the diuinity of the Romish Church.

• 1 That a Creatures milke may bee mingled with Christs bloud in the matter & merit of our saluation.
• 2 That it helps and heales spirituall sores of the soule as well as the bloud.
• 3 That though no man did, yet a woman did help Christ in the worke of our saluation.
• 4 That the Psalmes may bee turned from Lord to Lady.
• 5 That a man may appeale from God to the Virgin Mary.
• 6 That God hath deuided his kingdome with her, keeping Iustice to himselfe, and surrendring Mercy to her.
• [Page 105]7. That God hath made her pertaker with himselfe of his diuine power and Maiesty.
• 8. That a mans prayers are often heard, rather by and through her, then Christ Iesus.

If these I say be the doctrines of the present Church of Rome, then let the Christian world be pleased to ob­serue,

• 1. How far the present Romish Church, is degenerate from the ancient.
• 2. How great cause we and all Churches of God haue to seperate from such a sinagogue.
• 3. How iustly they may be pronounced Antichristian. who thus hainously disparage the Person and office of the Mediator.
• 4. How vntrue is it that by any suggestion, that the pre­sent Religion of Rome is much reformed and refi­ned at this day: for it is most certaine in the former times these would haue beene condemned as blas­phemies euen in the Romish Church it selfe.
• And lastly you of this most honorable City, especially you the Lord Maior, and your brethren, being one most worthy renowned Benches of the world, one of the greatest glories of this land, may here see what [Page 106] cause there is to hold the true Papists Hereticks, con­sidering the present Church holds not only these but many other fundamentall errors, both for matter of faith, and of gouernment: which shewes them not only enemies to all true religion, but the subuerters, or at least the vnderminers of all ciuill states in the world, wherein they were euer suffered.

And considering that all meanes hath beene vsed, to reclaime and reforme her, but all is in vaine, (for she is that Babilon that will not be healed) wherefore it is our duty to forsake her & leaue her to the iust hand of God.

Thus shall wee follow the counsell of the Prophet in like case who saith: We would haue healed Babilon, but she would not be healed: let vs forsake her and goe e­uery man to his owne Country, for he [...] Iudgement is come vp to Heauen and lifted vp to the Clouds.