¶ Of three Maximes, groundes or rules, whereby a man may iudge of the poyntes of religion which are in queſtiō. The firſt Chapter.

FOraſmuch as the whot Catholickes accuſe the Religion of the proteſtantes, to be wicked, new, and heretical, and therfore cannot brooke the ſociety of ſuch as profeſſe the ſame: we hope to ſhew them euidently, that it is not ſo, when we come to the ſcanning of euery poynt particularly that is in queſtion. And for proofe and demonſtration of our ſayinges, we will take for our grounde, three Maximes, or generall rules, which are very certayne and true, whereby euery man ſhall eaſely be able to iudge whether ye ſame religion, is to be reckned, wicked new, and hereticall or no.

The three Maximes are theſe, The firſt is that that doctrine of Religion whereby God is moſt honored, is the beſt. The ſecond is, that that Doctrine which is beſt builded vpon the worde of God is the moſte auncient and true. The third is, that the Romiſh Catholickes cannot well accuſe that doctrine, of hereſie, which is approued by their own Canones.

Which three rules or maximes, be ſo cleere & euident of them ſelues, that (in mine opinion) the day, or the Sun is not clearer. For, ſeeing that Religiō is no other thing, than the duty which we owe vnto God. It doth folow, that that doctrine which teacheth vs to yeld vnto him all dutye and honour, and to rob him of no part thereof, is a good, and true doctrine, and that there can be no better.

Likewiſe it is certayn, that the doctrine which is builded vpon the only word of God, ought not to be called new, but that we may rather ſay, that it is as olde as the world it ſelfe. In ſo much, that they which doe call it new, may not nor cannot ſo call it, in reſpect of it ſelfe, but onely in reſpect of their own ignorance, for to the ignorāt, euery thing that they vnderſtand not, is new. Neither is it to be douted, but that it is moſt true, becauſe that God (who is the author therof) is the truth it ſelfe, and the fountayn of light, and wiſdome.

In like maner, I thinke that al mē will eaſily graunt, that euen the earneſteſt Catholickes of Rome, can not diſpence ſo much with them ſelues, as to accuſe that Religiō of hereſie, which is approued by their own Canones, becauſe the Canones be authoryſed by the Popes themſelues. For, the decrees of Gracian (from whence I intend to draw the moſt partes of the Canōs which ſhalbe alleaged) were ratifyed & authoriſed by PopeThe decrees of Gratian authoriſed by the pope Euginie the third, who commaunded that they ſhould be red in the Vniuerſytyes,Annal. ſur l. an. 1168. and vſed in iudgemēt as they haue bene euer ſince. So that to reiect and condemn the Canons, were as much in effect, as to deny the Pope, and all the Romane Religion.

But full well I know, that hereafter when I ſhall alleadge the Canons, thoſe paſſionate Catholickes will riſe vp, and ſay that there be other canons contrary to theſe, and truly I will not deny but that the bookes of the Canon law, are ful of cōtraryeties. Yet dare I boldly ſay, and aſſuredly auow that thoſe Canons which I will alleadge in this booke, are of the beſt and moſt auncient of al the Canon law,The old canons are better thē the nevv. & which haue proceeded from the beſt ſprings & fountaynes, and from ſuch authors, as were moſt principall in ſkill and holynes, as may eaſely bee iudged by thoſe that will compare them with their bookes.

Hauing thus ſet downe theſe three Maximes (the truth whereof is eaſelie to be perceaued, by euery man of common capacitie, (yea euen of the groſſeſt ſort) I am now to apply them orderlye to euery particular poynt. And firſt of all we will treate of Prayer.

❧ OF PRAYER. The ſecond Chapter.

THe doctrine of the profeſſors of the Goſpell touching prayer, is verye playne. Their opinion is in effect, that we ought to offer our prayers vnto God our maker, who is able inough to geue vs whatſoeuer we aſke, & gratious in harckening gentlye to our requeſtes: Who alſo hath manifeſted his great goodnes, in giuing his euerlaſting Sonne, to the end that by him, our manhoode might haue acceſſe to his Godhead.

And therefore they ſay, that in praying to God our creator, wee muſte alwayes vſe the credite and interceſſion of his Sonne our mediator, who may boldly goe to the Father becauſe he is God as he is, in the ſelfſame Godhead and being: and diſdayneth not alſo to apply himſelfe to men, and to be an interceſſor for them, becauſe he is man as they be.

Nether is this manner of praying vnto God altogether diſalowed of the Romain Catholicks: but they wil needes adde thereunto, that we muſt haue alſo other Mediators and Interceſſors to God the Father, and to Ieſus Chriſt himſelf: That is to wit, the heſaints and the ſheſaintes, which are many in number, & in their times haue done many a faire miracle. For (ſay they) if a man would be a ſuiter to a king, in any cauſe, or to his eldeſt ſonne, he would not at the firſt daſh preace to their preſence, but goe to ſome of their ſeruants, or Lordes of their Court. And ſo it ſeemeth a thing very reaſonable and meete, that when a man is minded to pray to god for any thing, he go firſt to ſome of the Celeſtial court, to purchaſe acces to god, & to Ieſus Chriſt his Sonne by their meanes: and that to doe otherwiſe, were a kinde of diſpiſing of the ſaints who haue the charge from God, to pray continually for the Millitante Church, and euery particular perſon of the ſame.

Truely, it is not to be denied, but that theſe reaſons haue ſome colour and ſhew of truth, if we ſhall iudge of God as of man.We muſt not iudge of God as of man. But hereunto the Proteſtants reply, that we may not iudge of God, as of a king, or as of another mortall mā, for there is great difference. God is altogether good, and inclyned to doe good: But men, (be they kinges or other) are naturally euill, and diſpoſed to doe euill, both againſt God & their neighbors. God vnderſtandeth our Prayers aſſoone as they be conceiued in our harts, and before our mouthes doe vtter them: But to cauſe a king to vnderſtande our ſuites, we muſt put them in wryting, or tell them by word of mouth: and therfore we haue neede of Aduocates to lay forth our caſes, & of Maiſters of requeſtes to preferre our petitions to the Prince or to his councell, and of the fauor of great Lordes and councellours, to get vs audience and diſpatch. All which thinges haue no place with God. So that to compare the maner of praying vnto God, with the preferring of ſuits vnto Princes, is a token that we ſlenderly conſider the greatnes of God. And here wee haue to note a proper ſaying of S. Ambroſe, Amb. in epist. ad Ro. c. 1. which he vttereth in theſe expreſſe wordes.

Thoſe which in ſteede of reſorting vnto God, repayre vnto creatures, are wont to colour their contempt of God, with this miſerable excuſe. That by the menes of thoſe to whō they haue recourſe they may attayne to the preſence of God, as men attayne to the preſence of a king, by meanes of his officers. But I pray you, is there any man ſo mad, or ſo careles of his owne life, that he dareth yeald the honor to any of the kings ſeruantes or officers, which belongeth to the king himſelfe, ſpecially ſeeing we finde that ſuch as dare but ſpeake of the like matters, are by the law, gilty of high treſō? No. And yet theſe that yeld to the Creature, the honor that is due to the name of god, & which letting god alone do worſhip their fellow ſeruaunts, think not themſelues blame worthy at all: as who ſhould ſay, they could reſerue any greater honor vnto God.

Now the reaſon why men make their ſuites to Princes, by the meane and fauor of Noble men, Captaines, and Officers, is, becauſe the king is borne a man, and knoweth not in whom to repoſe his truſt and confidence for the ordering of his publick affaires. But as for GOD, from whom nothing is hidden (for he knoweth euery mans deſertes) vnto him we haue no need of an Aduocate, but of a deuout hart. For whereſoeuer ſuch a harte ſpeaketh vnto him, he wil anſwere him.

By which ſayings this good doctor S. Ambroſe, by good and apparant reaſons confoūdeth the doctrine of ye Romiſh Catholicks touching the interceſſion of Saints: So as, to vſe any other mediator to Godward, than our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, is a diſtruſting of his fauor, and of the goodwill he beareth vs, as though he were like vnto ſome rough and vncurteous prince, yt wold take diſpleaſure if a mā preaced to his preſence, not being preſented by ſome officer of his court. For (ſay the Proteſtants) are not we certayn and well aſſured of the clemency & goodnes of our Sauior that doth inuite vs to come directly vnto him? Is not he our good Shepheard, our Redeemer, our attonementmaker, our reconciler and our brother? Wherfore hath he taken vpon him our fleſh? borne our iniquities? fulfilled the law wherby we were condemned? ſhed his moſt precious bloud? and ſuffered death and paſſion vpon the croſſe? Is it not for vs that he hath done all theſe thinges to purchaſe our ſaluation and reconciliation with God his Father? For neither for himſelfe, nor to increaſe his own glory, needed he to humble and imbaſe himſelfe ſo much. And therefore it is not to be douted, but that he doth diſcharge his office of Mediatorſhip, much better than all the ſaintes can doe: ſpecially, ſeeing that he is the only meanes that they be ſaints, and without him they could not ſo be.

Now, as it is not to be douted, but he hath great good will to do the office of a Mediator for vs: ſo muſt we beleeue, that he will not conſent that any other ſhould take vpon him to doe it, but is and will be the onely obtayner of our ſaluation, and of the heauenly bleſſinges which God ſhall geue vs.

Theſe be the reaſons which the Proteſtants do alleadge for the maintenaunce of their doctrine touching prayer. Whereby it doth plainly appeare, that their doctrine is the beſt, according to our firſt maxime, becauſe that the honor which belongeth to Ieſus Chriſt our Lord, is therby better, and more ſoundly and wholly without diminiſhing rendered vnto him, then by the doctrine of the Romiſh catholicks, who would haue ſo great a number of Mediators, as they ſeem to leaue to Ieſus Chriſt nothing els but onely the name of mediator, & doe attribute to the ſaints, both the name and the effect.

Secondlye, this doctrine of the Proteſtants, is perfectly groūded vpon the word of God, as all men may know, by conſidering as well the precepts, as the examples which are in the bible, concerning prayer. For, firſt of all, the holy Scripture teacheth vs, to put all our truſt in the goodnes of God, and to pray onely vnto him, aſſuring vs that he will geue care vnto our prayers, Math. 7.18 ſaying: If you being euill, can ſkill to geue good thinges to your children, how much rather will your Father which is in heauē, geue good things to thoſe that aſke of him? And agayne, it exhorteth vs to vſe the credit of Ieſus Chriſt our Mediator to God the Father, ſaying: If any man haue ſinned we haue an aduocate with God the Father, euen Ieſus Chriſt the righteous. 1. Iohn. 2.1. And to the end we ſhould not doubt of the power and good will of our Mediator towards vs, it doth aſſure vs of two thinges: The one, that he ſitteth in his Maieſtye and might on ye right hand of the throne of his Father: And the other that he doth pray and make interceſſiō for vs. Rom. 8.32. He is ſaith S. Paul vpon the right hand of God, and maketh interceſſion for vs.

And for yt we ſhould not abuſe our ſelues in ſeking many mediators vnto god: ye holy ſcripture doth alſo teach vs, that as we haue but one God to whom we ought to pray: No more haue we but onely one Mediator ſaiing, For there is but one God, and one Mediator betwixt God and man, the mā Ieſus Chriſt. 1. Tim. 2.5.

And becauſe we ſhould not doubt that God is our Father, and that we may vſe him as a Father: we are taught that thoſe which beleeue in the Mediator, are made the children of god, by the ſame faith & belief, ſaying: to all thoſe that haue receued him, Ioh. 1.12. he hath geuen priuiledge to become the Children of God, that is to ſay: To thoſe which beleue in his name. So as Ieſus Chriſt himſelf teaching vs how we ſhould pray to God, Math. 6.9. hath willed vs to call him our Father.

Moreouer, in the Pſalmes of Dauid, and in the other bookes of the Bible, there are infinite numbers of examples, which proue that all holy mē haue alwaies made their prayers vnto God, and neuer vnto dead mē, nor called vpon them to be their meanes and Interceſſors vnto God.

Wherupon it followeth apparantly, that the doctrine of the Proteſtāts touching prayer, is the moſt auncient and true, according to our ſeconde Maxime.

Finally, the ſayd Romiſh Catholicks ought not to charge the Religion of the Proteſtants with hereſie, by the which they ſay, there ought to be no praying to the Saintes which are out of this world: for there is no man of ſo ſimple iudgement, but he will confeſſe it to be meere madnes, to pray to them which cannot heare him, as queſtionles thoſe which be dead cannot vnderſtand the prayers which we make vnto thē in this world,Sayntes can not heare the prayers that are made to them. becauſe (as witneſſeth the Canon) they know nothing of the things which are done in this world, except (ſayth the ſame Canon) that thoſe which die, doe cary them newes of the things which they haue ſeene and vnderſtoode before their death. Theſe are the very words of the Canon. c. fatendum 13. 4, 2. We muſt needes confes (according to the trueth) that thoſe which are dead doe know nothing of that which is done here vpon earth: but they may well be aduertyſed of them by ſuch as die and goe vnto them, and yet not of all thinges, but onely of ſuch thinges as are lawfull for thoſe that be heare to beare in memory, and expediēt for the others to know.

Thus by this Canon, it is moſt euident that we ought not to pray vnto Saintes, ſeeing they be dead and cā neither heare nor ſee nor know any thing that we doe here vpon earth, but by meſſēgers. And who ſo ſhould ſay, that this doctrine is hereticall, muſt ſay alſo that the Canones and Popes be heretickes, which (as I take it) the Romiſh Catholickes will be loth to confes. This Canon is alſo confirmed by ye holy ſcripture, which beareth witneſſe to vs that there is none but god onely, that knoweth the ſecrets of mens hartes, and ſo conſequently that it is he onely that can vnderſtand our prayers, which come rather from the hart than from the mouth.

The proteſtantes ſay furthermore, that there are ſo greate numbers of Sayntes regeſtred in the Letany, of whoſe Canonyſing men doe doubte, (for as ſayth a good auncient Doctor, the bodies of diuers are honoured on earth, whoſe ſoules are buried in hel) that in reaſon we ought to refuſe the number of interceſſors, and contente our ſelues only wt Ieſus chriſt, which is the true and pure doctrine that we ought to hold, and the Catholicks cā not iuſtly accuſe it of heriſy, according to our third maxime.

And hereupon I adde this more, that as the proteſtantes doe hold opinion that we ought not to attribute the title nor the office of mediator to any other thā to Ieſus chriſt: no more ought we to do in his other titles and offices, as of his prieſthood, his mediatorſhip, his ſpirituall reigning, & his chiefe ſhepheardſhip. For theſe be the titles of honor which belong vnto Ieſus Chriſt, and are not to be cōmunicated to others, how great or excellēt perſonages ſo euer they be. And truely herein all the world muſt needs cō feſſe, that the proteſtants do ſhew thē ſelues to bee beſt Chriſtians, in that they attribute onely to our Lord Ieſus Chriſt the titles of honor that are his, and will not communicate them to any other creators, what ſo euer they bee, for if they would diſpence wt their conſciences in this behalfe, they know right well they might ſoone be at a poynt with the Romiſhe Catholicks, and ſhunne many miſeries and perſecutions which they now indure. For there wanteth no more, but that they would allow the Sayntes to be partners of the title of mediator, & the maſprieſtes to be parteners of the tytle of Sacrificers, the doers of good workes of Supererogation to bee parteners of the title of a propitiator, And the Pope himſelf, to be partaker of the title of Spyrytuall Kinge and ſoueraigne Sheaheard: And then by and by there would be a peace cōcluded determined and eſtabliſhed, betwixt the proteſtants and the romyſh Cacholicks. But the proteſtants will by no meanes, nor for any cauſe, diminiſh any part of the titles of honor which belong vnto the ſonne of God, nor attribute them to any other creatures. Whereby it appeareth euidently, that men do them great wrong, in defaming their doctrine to the King, as though his permitting of them to excerciſe the ſame, were a mean to diſpoſſes him of the title of moſte Chryſtian king.

For in aſmuch as the name of chriſtian commeth of Chriſt, out of doubt they be worthieſt of that name, which yeld Chriſt his due honor and glory.

¶ Of fayth and good workes. The third chapter.

THe doctrine of the Romiſhe Catholickes concerning faythe and good workes, differeth greatly from that of the Proteſtantes. For the Catholicks hold opinion, that only faith without good workes doth not iuſtifie a man: but that it is needful ye faith be ayded by good works. Contrarywiſe the Proteſtants hold, that onely faith doth iuſtify a man without good workes.

That is to ſay, ye faith is the onelye inſtrumēt wherby Ieſus Chriſt (who is the true and efficient cauſe of our iuſtification) applieth his righteouſnes vnto vs, and maketh vs to be accounted iuſt before God his Father, through his owne merit, without the helpe of our good works. Neuertheleſſe they confeſſe that good workes are acceptable vnto God: but yet they affirme that good workes are not of ſuch power, as to iuſtify vs before the face of god, or to make vs capeable, either in part or in al, of euerlaſting life And they ſay alſo that they be not all good works, which the catholicks do take for good works.

For as touching the firſte poynte, you muſt conſider that the doctrine of the proteſtants doth tend, to attribute the honor of our ſaluation all wholly vnto our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, as vnto him, who is the true and onely cauſe thereof. For although we haue neede of fayth, whereby to receiue the benefit of Chriſt, who imputeth and applieth his owne righteouſnes to all ſuch as beleue in him: yet neuertheles, he doth remain the onely and altogether true cauſe of our ſaluation, foraſmuch as it is he himſelfe, which doth alſo geue vs fayth.

So as he doth not onely geue vs ye drinke of immortallity, that is to ſay, his owne righteouſnes which he alloweth vs, but alſo the cup to receyue it in: yea, and he geueth vs both of thē freely and for nothing, but onely of his owne liberalitye and grace, with out aſking or receiuing of vs, any recompence for the ſame.

And truely if we would goe about to recompence ſo great and excellent a benefit, as is euerlaſting life, thorowe our good workes: it were as much as if a man would purchaſe a great and rich inheritaunce, with a ſmale ſumme of bace mony, ſuch as in reaſon ſhould rather be cried downe, than allowed. For our good workes of themſelues, bee ſo vnpure and vnperfect, mingled with Ipocriſy and other ill affections, that they are not worthy to be preſented before the face of God, who doth not eſteeme ſuch vntoward payments, in recōpence of eternall life. Notwithſtanding, when they be done through fayth, hee doth accept them, in fauour and for good will to his ſonne our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, vpon whoſe only deſertes our fayth reſteth, becauſe in that reſpect, they proceeded from the good tree, which is Ieſus Chriſt, who worketh all our good workes in vs.

So as the workes of fayth be good and acceptable vnto god, for that they proceed from Chriſt, as from the efficient cauſe which worketh them in vs; but they are full of vncleanes, & worthy to be reiected, in reſpect that they proceed from vs, who ſerue but as inſtruments (howbeit yet vncleane inſtrumentes) to do them. And therfore are they alwayes defyled & ſpotted in ſome ſort: for Ieſus Chriſt who worketh them in vs, doth make thē good and pleaſing to God his Father: but yet they doe gather ſomwhat of the filthy and naturall infection of vs, who are the veſſels wherin they be made.

Neuertheles, God is ſo good and gratious, that he not only admitteth them as done by Ieſus Chriſt his ſonne, but alſo for his ſake, doth wipe away the ſpots and vncleanes which are in them, and crowneth them with many bleſſinges: as with proſperitie of children, temporall wellfare, help of frēds in aduerſitie, moderation in proſperitie, diſcretion, happy ſucces in affairs, & with many other his benefits, wherin he doth more and more ſhew his great bounty & gratious goodnes by heaping vpon vs his bleſſings, as it were in recompence of ye good works which he himſelf hath wrought in vs, and in making vs to reap the fruit of his own labor, and to receyue the reward which he himſelf hath deſerued.

But touching the great and incō prehenſible benefit of the gifte of eternall life, and of knitting vs vnto him ſelfe in euerlaſting happines, he doth not geue it vs in any other reſpect, or conſideration, thā only for the loue of his welbeloued ſōne Ieſus Chriſt. That was the cauſe why he wold haue him to come down into this baſe world, and to take our nature vpon him, and to fulfill the law for vs, and to beare our iniquities and greefes, and (at a word) to be our Mediator, our redeemer, our high prieſt, our Shepheard, and our ſpirituall king.

All which titles he hath taken vpon him, to ſaue vs and to be the onely cauſe of our euerlaſting felicitie, and to knit and incorporate vs vnto himſelfe, and to make vs partners for euer of his heauenly glory.

Yet may we not hereupon conclude, that we ſhould not doe good workes, as though they ſtoode vs in no ſtead to ſaluatiō: for they be fruits of faith: and whoſoeuer hath the true faith, doth incontinently ſhew it by the good fruites and effectes which it bringeth forth in him.

And he that doth no good workes, cannot ſaye that hee hath true fayth. Beſides that, we alſo are ſufficiently led to doe good workes, by the great number of other benefites and bleſſinges wherwith God crowneth thē, as we haue ſayd before. This is the ſūme of the doctrine which the Proteſtants do hold concerning faith and good workes.

Whereby they yelde wholly vnto God, and to our Sauiour Ieſus Chriſt, the honour which belongeth to hym, as to the true & onely cauſe of our ſaluatiō, & of all the good things which we haue and receiue, aſwell Spirituall as Temporal whatſoeuer they be.

We are ſaued only by God without any help of our ſelues.It followeth then acording to our firſt Maxime, that this doctrine is better thā the doctrine of the Romiſh catholicks, who affirme that by theyr good works, they deſerue Paradiſe, & all the other good things which God geueth them: & that theſe good works do partly proceed of themſelues, and of their owne free will, and partlye of Gods grace: as if God alone coulde not ſaue them, if they helped not the matter by their owne good workes, which they hold to be part of the cauſe of their ſaluation: which doctrine all men may eaſely perceiue to be repugnant to the nature of God. For ſeing that he is altogether and perfectlye mercifull: it muſt needes follow, that thoſe that be ſaued, be ſaued wholly (and not in part) by his onely mercy: which ſhould not be perfect, if ye effect thereof were not perfecte and entyre. Notwithſtanding, the Catholickes holde opinion ſtill, that their good workes are part of the cauſe of theyr ſaluation, and that they be not ſaued by the onely mercy of God.

Yea there are monkes which take themſelues to haue ſuch aboundance of good workes in ſtore, that they not onelye haue ynow wherewith to merite their owne ſaluation, but alſo a great maſſe of ouerplus (which they cal works of ſupererogationWorkes ſuperaboundant or of ſupererogation.) to purchaſe the ſaluation of other men, but chiefly of ſuch as do them good, and geue them liberally of their temporall goods: which doctrine (in very truth) all ſuch as loue ye name of God ought to reiect. For it is an vtter defacing of the benefit of our lord Ieſus Chriſt, & an attributing of the honor of our ſaluation, to the vncleane works of ſinners, whereas in deed, we ought to attribute the ſame to the death and paſſiō of the ſon of god who is without ſinne.

Alſo it is to be diſcerned by Gods word, which of the two doctrines is the trueſt and moſt auncient. For the Scripture doth playnelye teache vs, that we be iuſtified by fayth, without the workes of ye law, & ſo conſequently by fayth onely, when it ſayth, Ro 3.20.23. Wherfore no fleſh ſhall be iuſtified before him by the workes of the law. And it ſayeth in an other place, for you are ſaued by grace through fayth, and not of your ſelues: it is the gifte of God: Not for workes, Eph. 1.8.9. leaſte any man ſhould boaſt of himſelfe. And in an other place it is ſayd: Tit. 3.4.5. He hath ſaued vs, not by the works of righteouſnes which wee our ſelues haue done, but of his owne mercy. And Saynt Paule ſayeth in an other place: I eſteme all things as doong, ſo I may gain Chriſt, Phil. 3.8.9 and be found in him, not hauing mine owne righteouſneſſe which is of the law, but the righteouſnes which cō meth by beliefe in Chriſt.

Now, as there is no compariſon betwixt the deſertes of Ieſus Chriſt our ſauiour, and the deſert of mens good workes, no more than is betwixt the brightnes of ye Sun, & a litle ſparke of fire: ſo muſt we needes confeſſe, that our conſciences do finde without all compariſon, far greater and excellenter quietneſſe in the righteouſneſſe of fayth, thā in the righteouſnes of good workes. And in that reſpect doth S, Paule ſay:Ro. 5.1.2. Beeing then iuſtified by fayth, we haue peace with God, through our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, By whom we haue alſo acceſſe through fayth, to this grace wherin we ſtand, and reioyce vnder the hope of the glory of God.

But yet this fayth which doth iuſtifye vs, may not be void of good workes, for then it were like the fayth of deuils: who beleue that God hath commaunded the contentes of the tenne commaundementes, but doe quite contrary. For ſuch a faith wyll not iuſtify vs as S. Iames Iam. 1.12. doth teache vs. And wheras the Catholicks hold opinion, that we are iuſtified by the grace of Chriſt and our good workes both together: Rom. 11.6. S. Paule doth anſwere them thus: If it be of grace, then is it no more of workes, for then grace were no more grace. And if it be of workes: It is no more of grace, for thē were works no more workes.

And whereas the Monkes beare men in hād, that by their good works of Supererogation, they deſerue Paradiſe for themſelues and for theyr benefactors: Ieſus Chriſt doth aunſwere them himſelfe, and vtterly caſt down their pride and ouerwéening, in that he ſayth, Luk. 17.10. Pſalm. 143 when you haue done all the things that are commaunded you, ſay vnto your ſelues, we are vnprofitable ſeruauntes, we haue done no more than we ought to do. Neither may we ſay, that Ieſus Chriſt doth commaūd vs to ſay ſo, to make ſhew of humility: for he who is ye truth it ſelfe, doth not cōmaūd vs to lye for any intent, good or euil. And therfore it followeth, that ſeing he commaundeth vs to ſay, that though we haue done al the cōmaundements (which neuer any man did but onely Ieſus Chriſt:) yet were we but vnprofitable ſeruauntes and god were nothing in our dette for it, becauſe we haue done nothing but that whereunto our duety bindeth vs: I ſay it followeth that the ſame is certayne and true.

Dauid alſo doth witnes that no mā liuing can be iuſtified before God. And therefore it may bee rightly ſayd to theſe iolly doers of works of ſuper erogation, as Chriſt ſayd to the Phariſies.

It is you that iuſtify your ſelues before men, Luk. 16.15. but God knoweth your hartes. For that which is highly eſteemed amonge men, is abhominable before God.

I knowe right well, there are many textes in the holy Scripture to proue, that who ſo will enter into euerlaſting life, muſt keep the cōmandements of god, and that thoſe which haue kepte the commaundementes, ſhal poſſeſſe the kingdome of heauen: and yt thoſe which haue not kept them ſhall goe into euerlaſting damnation. But it is not to be inferred vpō theſe textes, that a man may be inſtified by his good workes, for no man at any tyme doth performe Gods commandements to the full: But euen the beſt of all doe breake them euery day many times. For what man is ſo arrogant as to challenge to himſelf ſuch ſincerity of life, that he loueth, and hath alwayes loued God with all his hart: and his neighbour as himſelfe, or hath not wiſhed ſomewhat that was an other mans?

To be ſhort, there needeth no great diſputation vpon this poynt: for our conſcience doth here accuſe vs, and of it ſelfe condemne vs.

Now then, if no man can fulfill the commaundements, It followeth that no man can haue euerlaſting life by his owne workes, but muſt ſeek ſome other iuſtification than by workes, if hee will be iuſtified before the face of God. And in ſeeking an other iuſtification, he commeth to the righteouſnes of fayth, which is by imputation, through the free beſtowed benefite of Chriſt. For, like as if a poore detter that were vnable to pay, were kept in priſō for a det of ten thouſād crowns, and his creditor ſhould tell him, that if he paid the debt, he would ſet him at liberty, or els he ſhould rot in priſon: he had no redier remedy, than to get ſuch a ſurety, as would be ſo fauourable and frendly to him, as to pay the det for him, without truſting to his own ſubſtance, which is vtterly vnable to diſcharge ſuch a dette. In like ſort, man, knowing on the one ſide, that without performing the Law throughout, he is in danger of damnation: and on the other ſide, that he is not able to perform it, hath no other ſhifte, but to repaire to Ieſus Chriſt, to take holde of his righteouſneſſe by faith, to the end that the ſame may be imputed vnto him, and that by this meanes, his ſinnes may be wyped out, and himſelfe made capable of eternall life.

And as it may truely be ſayd, that that detter hath well payd his dette, when his ſurety hath payd it for him: euen ſo may a Chriſtian ſay, that he hath kept and fulfilled the commaundements of God, when he doth aſſure himſelfe through faith, that Chriſt hath fulfilled them for him. Thus ſhould be vnderſtoode thoſe textes of Scripture, which inioyne vs to obſerue the commaundements, to haue therby euerlaſting life. And after that ſort we ſhould make them to agree with the textes before alleadged, which ſay that we cannot be iuſtified but by faith only. By which ſaying, euery man of ſound iudgement may eaſely know, that the doctrine of the Proteſtants is builded vpon the pure word of God: and conſequently, that (according to our ſecōd Maxime) it is the moſt true and auncient, and not to bee called new, but of ſuch as do not vnderſtād it. Neither may the Catholicks call this doctrine hereticall, according to our third Maxime, becauſe it is ratified, euen by their owne Canons.c. Aduocaeuit &c. vbi ſaua. 24. q. 1. For thus ſayth one of the Canons. Ciprian did call vnto him the Byſhoppe Satyrus, and did thinke that there was not any true grace, ſauing that which commeth by fayth. &c.

And an other Canon ſayth thus: Looke where is no fayth, there can be no righteouſnes, for the righteous liueth by faith. &c.

There is another taken out of S. Auguſtine, which ſpeaketh yet more plainly, ſaying thus:c. Vt euiden ter. 1. q. c. The Lord purpoſing to declare playnly, that mens ſinnes are forgeuen by the holy Spirite, which he hath geuen to the faithful, and not by their own merites, ſayth thus in a certayne place: Receiue the holy Ghoſt. And immediatly he addeth, whoſe ſins ye remit, their ſinnes ſhall be forgeuen. As if he ſhould ſay it is ye holy Ghoſt that forgeueth ſinne, and not you,

Which Canon doth ſhew playnly, that the merites of good workes, do no whit iuſtify vs: and ſo conſequētly, that it is fayth onely wtout works which is yt inſtrumentall cauſe of our iuſtification, & the very efficient cauſe therof is Ieſus Chriſt, working by ye holy ghoſt. And if the Romiſh catholicks themſelues did wel vnderſtand what they ment when they ſay & cō fes yt they be ſaued by the grace of our redeemer: they would neuer depend any more vpon their good workes & merits.c. Gratia. 1. q. 1. For, (as ſayth an other Cannon) Grace is not grace, if it be not freely geuen and receiued.

Baſil. lib. 1, de humilitate. And hereunto accordeth the ſaying of Saynt Baſile: A man (ſayth he) doth then glory whollye and throughlye in God, when hee doth not vaunt of hys owne righteouſneſſe, but acknowledgeth himſelfe deſtitute of the true righteouſneſſe, and that hee is iuſtified thorough his onely fayth in Chriſt. After the ſame manner ſpeaketh Saynt Ambroſe, Ambroſe. in Pſal. 32. & ad Ro. c. 3.14. ſaying: Dauid calleth them right happy, whome God hath determined to iuſtify by fayth onely, without any paynes taking, or without their keeping of the law.

And in an other place, in expounding theſe words of the Apoſtle, freely iuſtified by his grace, he ſayth thus: They be iuſtified freely, becauſe that hauing not done any thing, nor requited like for like, they be iuſtifyed by faith onely, which is the gift of God.

I coulde to this purpoſe alleadge many other canōs & aūcient doctors, but theſe may ſuffice. For my purpoſe is not to build the doctrine of our reformed Religion, neither vpon Doctors, nor vpon Canons: but onelye to rehearce and alleadge ſome of them, to ſhew vnto the Romiſh catholicks, that in condemning the ſame ſo boldly of hereſy, by the ſame meanes they vnaduiſedly condemne their own canons and doctors. And becauſe they doe ſo greatly brag, that they hold the fayth of the Romiſh Church: I mean to proue that they do not ſo,The aūcient church taught no other doctrine than that of the Apoſtles. c. Rogamus. 24. q. 1. euen by their owne Canons. Harken now, what a Canon ſayth, in an Epiſtle written by Pope Marcell to the biſhop of Antioch. We beſeech you deere beloued brethren (ſayth he) that you neither teach nor allow any other doctrine, than that which you haue receiued of S. Peter, and of the other Apoſtles and Fathers. For hee is the head of the whole Church, to whom the Lord ſayd: Thou art Peter, and vpon this ſtone will I build my church, the ſeate whereof was firſt eſtabliſhed in your Countrey, and afterward remoued to Rome by the commaundement of the Lord. &c.

Hereby it appeareth, that the fayth of the Romiſh Church ought to bee grounded vpon the pure and onely doctrine of the Apoſtles our true Fathers: And that as many as intend to follow that fayth, muſt neither teach nor beleue any other doctrine. The Catholicks then of theſe daies, which ſtill imbrace ſo many doctrines inuēted by the Popes of our times, and by other ſuperſtitious men long time after the Apoſtles and after Pope Marcell, (as Purgatory, & the Mas, & an infinite nūber of other traditions) doe no whit followe the fayth of the Romiſh thurch: which thing is moſte certayne and true if ye haue an eye to the church of Rome that was in olde time. For as for the church which is now a dayes, wherin the Popes haue patched vp ſo many decretals and canons, and brought in ſuch an infinite number of new doctrines, not onely differing, but quite contrary to the word of God: I will not deny, but that the Romiſh Catholickes of theſe dayes, doe follow the fayth of that Church.

¶ Of the things which the Romiſh Catholicks do recken and eſteeme to bee good workes and are not. The fourth chapter.

I Haue could you here before, that the Romiſhe Catholickes and the Proteſtantes, doe diſagree about the defining of good works. For the proteſtants accoūt thoſe onely to be good workes, whch concerne the obaying of Gods commaundements. But the Catholicks do not onely recken thoſe to be good works, which concern the obaying of the commaundementes of God, but alſo thoſe that concerne the obaying of the traditions & commandements of mē. Of which traditions (ſay they,) ſome haue bene inſtituted by Ieſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles.

And becauſe there is no mention made of them in the holy ſcriptures, they haue recourſe to a diſtinction inuented by the Sophiſters, ſaying yt there are two ſortes of the worde of God, the one written, and the other vnwritten.The ſophiſters make a double worde of God, the one written and the other not written.

And vnder this kind of the vnwritten word of god, they would comprehēd the moſt part of their traditions. But this diſtinctiō is very eaſely anſwered: Namely, that thoſe traditions which they call the vnwritten word of God, (as holy water, Lent, the worſhiping of the croſſe, the hallowing of altars, and ſuch other like) be repugnant to the written word of God: And that if there be any vnwritten word of God, the ſame cannot bee repugnant to that whych is written, as theſe traditions be.

Alſo, it is to bee found by the wrytings of Hiſtoriographers and other Authors, who they were that firſt did ſet forth ſuch traditions: and therfore they are not to be fathered vpon the vnwritten word of God.

Thirdly, it is not to be denied, but that the written word of God is perfect, and ſufficient to ſaluation: And therfore that no article of fayth ought to be fathered vpon ye vnwrittē word, but only (at ye moſt) ſome ſuch points as concerne the order and gouernmēt of the Church. But yet vnder pretēce of the ſame diſtinction, the Papiſtes thinke that to ſay and heare Mas, to ſing and ſay Suffrages for the dead, to geue legacies and Offerings vnto Prieſtes, to goe on Pilgrimage to Saints, to offer Candles vnto them, and to fall flat before the Images of them, to abſtaine at certayn times in the yeare from eating of fleſh, to liue ſolitarily within a Cloyſter, and to weare their Garmentes after ſome ſtraunge faſhion, and other ſuch like things, be good workes, and meritorious to gayne Paradiſe. And the reaſon why they doe recken all theſe thinges to be good works: is partlye becauſe they do pretend that god hath commaunded them by his vnwritten word, (as before is ſayd:) And partly, for that (ſay they) it is a work of perfection, when one doth not onely all that which God commaundeth, but alſo more than he doth commaund. For, by this meanes they do ſo aboūd in good works that many of them do more than are needfull to ſaluation, & may therfore ſpare ſome part of them to other good Chriſtians, which do to few, in recompence of their temporall gooddes which they receyue of them. But hereunto the proteſtants do anſwere, that it is ſufficient for a man to do the commaundements of God wt out charging himſelf farther, ſith ther yet was neuer man, that could performe them throughly, much leſſe doe more. Notwithſtanding, the Proteſtants graunt it to be true, that commonly men doe more than they are commaunded: but their ſo doing is but ſinne, and in the mean while they leaue the commaundementes of God vndone. And therefore, this doing of more than God commaundes, is not ſo great a vertue, as the Romain Catholickes eſteeme it to be.

For, ſeeing it is not to be denyed, but that the commaūdements of God are perfect, as the Author of them is perfect: ſo it muſt needes follow, that they comprehend al good works, and ſo conſequently that all ſuch workes, as are repugnaunt to the worde of god and hys commaundementes, are not good.

Agayne, it is good reaſon, that we ſhould eſteeme all things to be good, whiche God commaundeth, and account thoſe thinges for ill, which hee forbiddeth, wtout going any farther. For it is he that hath ſet the difference betwixt good and ill, and betwixt vice and vertue, and which hath imprinted the knowledge thereof in mans vnderſtanding, euen from hys creation. By reaſon whereof, whereas we deeme it good, to honour one God, to loue our neighbor, & not to do otherwiſe then we woulde be done vnto: theſe & ſuch lyke do proceed & depend vpon the ordinaunces of God,The deſtinction of good works dependeth vpon Gods ordinaunce. which hath ſet that order, and diſtinction in the things of the world.

So as by conſequēt, vertue is good, and vyce is yll, becauſe that God hath ſo ordained, & ſtabliſhed that order in the nature of men. And therefore we cannot call thoſe good works which appeare not to be good works by his word and ordinaunce: neither may mans iudgement ſo much preſume of it ſelf, as to terme that a good thing, which he is not ſure to be ſo, by the ordinaunce of God. For, to be deſirous that God ſhould allowe thoſe things for good, which our fancy dremeth to be good, without hauing any warrant thereof by the ordinaunce of God: were an imbaſing of the Creator beneath the Creature.

By the doctrine of the Pope, the richmen may better gayne Paradiſe then the pore ſort.Moreouer the proteſtants do ſay, that if a man might win heauen by theſe pretended good workes (as the Romiſh Catholickes hold opinion:) it would then be much more eaſy for the rich men to attayne to it, than for for the poore. For the rich haue better wherewith to cauſe Maſſes to be ſayd, and to be liberall in giuing to prieſtes, and to mayntayne long iorneys on pilgrimage, and to buy good fiſh that they may the better forbeare fleſh in the lent tyme, and to doe ſuch other like workes.

So as by this reckning the gates of heauen ſhould be open to the riche, and ſhut againſt the poore: by reaſon whereof, the wealthy men ſhould bee happy both in this worlde and in the world to come: and on the contrarye part, the poore ſhould bee vnhappy, but that were agaynſt reaſon. For cleane contrariwiſe, it is certaine that heauen is open rather to the poore than to the rich, and that it is a harde thing for a rich man to enter into heauen.

And therfore the inuention of theſe pretended good workes (whereof doe follow ſo many & greate abſurdities) is in no wiſe to be allowed: But wee muſt holde our ſelues to the onely ordinancee of God, to whom we ought to yeld ſuch honor, as to beleue that onely thoſe be good works, which he alloweth for good by his commaundements, and that thoſe are not good works, which he alloweth not. For in ſo doing we ſhall follow the beſt doctrine, which yeldeth God his honour due vnto him.

As concerning the other ſort, It is eaſy to be proued by one onely argument which cannot be gaynſayd, that thoſe workes which are not agreable to the commaundements of god, and to his word, are ſin: & then muchleſſe are they good workes. For al workes that are done without faith are ſinne, ſaith ſaynt Paule becauſe it is impoſſible to pleaſe God without fayth. Rom. 14.15 Hebru 1 • .6 Rom. 10.17. Now it is certayn that fayth muſt be grounded vpon the worde of God. Whereupon it followeth playnly that thoſe workes which haue not theyr foundation in the worde of God, are ſinne, and ſo by conſequence are nothing worth.

And therefore it ſtandeth the Romayne Catholickes in hand, to ſhewe that their pretended good workes are allowed by the word of God, if they intend to proue thē to be good works in deed: Which thing they cannot doe. Nay rather clean contrariwiſe, a man may well proue that the ſcripture cō demneth them As touching the mas, purgatory, and praying for the dead, we will ſpeak of them els where, and ſhew that the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholickes in thoſe pointes, is contrary to the word of God.

As for pilgrimages, ſeeing the end of them is to pray vnto Saints, it followeth that they alſo are condemned by the worde of God, which teacheth vs to call onely vpon God, by the meanes of Chriſt our Mediator, as we haue ſhewed before. Likewiſe, to knele down before Images of ſaints, and to make offeringes vnto them, is condemned by the ſecond commaundement, which forbiddeth all kinde of Images, or to do vnto thē any kinde of honor or ſeruice.

As touching monaſticall vowes,Vowes of pouerty. which cōſiſt in purenes, chaſtity, and obedience. It is alſo very eaſy to bee proued, that they bee ſuch workes as are diſalowed by the word of God, at the leaſt, in ſuch ſort as the cloyſterers do vſe them. For, as for pouertye the moſt part of them haue but the viſor therof: for euery body knoweth, that the fayreſt, and richeſt poſſeſſions belong vnto their Monaſteries. And the prouerb which ſayth, (he is as fatte as a Monke,) doth wel ſhew, that pouerty hath no harbor among them. But admit that ſome of them (as the begging friers, called alſo Limiters) make profeſſion of wilful pouerty in good earneſt, and that they liue altogether by begging, yet is not that vow of theirs allowed of God For, firſt of all,Deut. 15.4. God forbiddeth men to beg, and therfore in begging, they breake his commaundement. I know they will hereunto reply, that they be forced to make neceſſitie a vertue to liue by, becauſe that otherwiſe, they ſhould ſtarue for hunger, and ſo be murtherers of themſelues, wherin they ſhould breake the commmaundement of God, which forbiddeth to murther.

But ye anſwere hereunto is, yt their vow of pouerty hath brought them to both thoſe two extremities, that is, either to beg, or to ſuffer themſelues to die for hunger. And becauſe in both theſe caſes, there is a working againſt the commaundement of God, it followeth, that that vow is nothinge worth, foraſmuch as it leadeth them to the offending of God.

And, to ſpeake of their vow of chaſtitie,The vow of chaſtity. which conſiſteth in not being marryed: the ſame is alſo repugnant to the word of God. For, God hath deliuered vs this generall rule, from the creation of the world, that it is not good for a man to be alone. Gen. 2.18. Mat. 19.11. I will make him a help fellow to be with him, (ſaith God.) And Ieſus Chriſt his ſonne hath taught vs, that fewe folke can liue vnmarryed, becauſe all men haue not the gift of chaſtitie, but only thoſe to whom it is geuen of God.

And therefore Saynte Paule commaundeth all thoſe which haue not the ſpeciall gift of this chaſtitie,1. Cor. 7. to take wiues. The Monkes then, and all the Romayn clergie (of whom, amongſt a thouſand, there is not one that hath this gift of chaſtitie) doe openly tranſgres Gods commaundement, through this vow of chaſtitie, wherby they haue infected the whole world with all maner of whoredome, and villany. But herof we wil ſpeake more heareafter, in intreating of Mariage.

And touching the vow of obedyenceThe vow of obedience. it were very good, if they mente it of obediēce to the cōmandments of God. But they do not ſo vnderſtand it, (for to obſerue that vow, ye neded not to ſeparate them ſelues from other Chriſtians, nor to ſhutte vp themſelues in Cloyſtars.) But they refer this vow of obedience, to they precepts contayned in their own orders. The moſt part of which precepts, conſiſt in theſe poynts following. That is to ſay, In wearing of ſtrange faſhioned Garments, much differing from the common ſort: In abſtayning from certayn kindes of meates: In occupying themſelues in contemplations: And in chaunting of mattinnes, and euenſong. All which things haue no foundation in the word of God.

For, as touching the Monkiſhe weede, we finde not, that Ieſus Chriſt or his Apoſtles, were apparrayled after any other faſhion, than other mē. It is therfore playn, that the diuerſity of the faſhions of Monkes garments was the deuice and inuention of thoſe who were the firſt founders of their orders, and therfore is not allowed of God. Math. 15.9. For, Ieſus Chriſt doth teach vs, that it is a vayn ſeruing of God, by obſeruing the commaundementes of men.

Coloſſ. 2.20.S. Paule alſo, doth openly condemne all thoſe traditions, which be of mannes own growing, and namely, thoſe that concerne abſtinēce from certain meates, notwithſtanding that they haue ſome outward ſhew of wiſdome, deuotion, humilitie, and ſtraitnes of life: For thus he ſaith, If then you be dead with Chriſt, as in reſpect of the trainments of this world, why doe they burden you with ſuch obſeruatiōs as though you liued to the world, ſaying vnto you: Eat not, taſt not, nor touch not All which things being ordayned by the commaundements and doctrine of men do go away with the vſe of them, notwithſtanding that they haue a kinde of outward pretence of wiſedome and of willing deuotion, and a certayne humility of mind for that they puniſh the body, & haue no regard to the cockering thereof.

As concerning the contemplations of the religious ſort: they are cōdemned by the fourth of the ten commandementes, which enioyneth euery mā to labor and to get his liuing with the ſwet of his browes. And if the Monkes reply, that by their contemplatiue life,Moonkiſh contemplation. they gayne the knowledge of holy ſcripture: S. Paule anſwereth them,1. Cor. 13.2. that it is to no purpoſe, to haue the vnderſtanding of all ſecretes and all knowledge, vnles it be matched with charity.

And as for charitye they can haue no peece thereof by doing nothing els but ſtudy, wtout making their neighbors partakers of the giftes that god hath beſtowed vpō them. And if they reply yet again and ſay, that there are many moonkes which geue themſelues to preaching and teaching of the people: I anſwere therunto, firſt that not one among a hundred of thē doth ſo: and ſecondly that ſuch of them as preache, doe agaynſt the profeſſion of moonkes:Moonks are forbidden to preach. for by the Canōs, a moonk ought to bee alwayes ſhut vp in his cloyſter, and not in any wiſe meddle with preaching or teaching. Theſe are the very wordes of the Canon.C. Monachus. C. Iuxta. 16. q. 1. The office of a Monke is to weep and not to teach: for he ought to look for the comming of the Lord with feare, mourning for himfelfe and for all the world. And in an other place it is ſayd thus: According to the tenor of the good counſel of Calcedon, we geue cōmādement as well to the Moonkes of S. Benets order, as to other religious perſones, to keepe themſelues within their cloyſters, that they ſtray not abroad in Cities, Caſtles, and Townes: and we charge them to forbeare preaching to the people in any wiſe, ſauing onely to ſuch as are willyng to take their habit vpon them for the remedying of their ſoules health.

Seeing then that it is agaynſt the profeſſion of Moonkes to preache, it followeth, that they cannot iuſtifie their contemplations to be good, vnder pretence that ſome of them doe deale with preaching, for as much as in ſo doing, they doe againſt their generall profeſſion. And, as for their watchinges, Mattines, Euenſong, and ſuch other Seruices, wherto they binde themſelues by their vow of obeoience: we will ſpeak of them hereafter. It is inough for me at this preſēt, to haue ſhewed in few wordes, that the works wherunto the Monks do binde themſelues, as well by their vow of obedience, as by their other vowes, cannot be called good works, becauſe they be to farre of from the word of God.

It is alſo to be prooued by the Canons, yt theſe pretended good works, be neither good, nor merytorious. And firſt, as touching their garmēts, the Canons doe curſſe and ban all ſuch as repoze any holynes in them.The habit of Moonkes hath no holines in it. So that by the ſayinges of thoſe Canons, we ought to abhorre all kind of Moonkes: For all of them accompt themſelues to deſerue ſomewhat at Gods handes, by theyr wearing of yt kind of apparell, and of thoſe ſhirtes of heare next their ſkinne: and that they ſhould do ill, if they ſhould wear ſuch garmentes as other men doe. Theſe wordes here following be the very wordes of the Canon, which is a chapter of the counſell Grangrene. If any man thinke him ſelfe to be the better furthered to chaſtity, by his wearing of the Moonkes cowle, or take himſelfe to be the more righteous for it, and ther upon holde ſcorne of ſuch as modeſtlye weare hoods and other attyres after the common faſhion, Curſed be they.

And touching their vow of abſtinence from meates, the auncient Canons ſpeake thereof in ſuch ſort, as generally they alow of ſobriety, without preſcribing of any abſtinēce, more from fleſhe then from fiſhe, Theſe be the expreſſe words of the Cannon.

For there is nothing ſo delectable, as meates well dreſt and digeſted, Nor any thinge better for our health, or for the ſharpning of our wits, or for the preſeruing of our bodyes frō ſicknes, than ſober and moderate feeding: for as ſuffizance nurriſheth vs, ſo doth it alſo maintayne vs, in good plight and pleaſures:

By this Canon it appeareth, that moderate dyet is ſo commended, as that wee muſt haue a regard to our health, and not appayre it eyther by to much pyning of our ſelues, or the eating of meates that are cōtrary to our health. And in good ſooth, the ſame Canons do lykewiſe witnes with vs that, to abſtayne from iniquitie, is the true manner of keeping and obſeruing the Lent, and that therein conſiſteth the perfection of faſting. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canon.

It is a great and generall faſt to abſtayne from iniquitie and vnlawfull pleaſures of the worlde, C. Ieiunium de Conſec. diſt. 5. and that is the moſt perfect kinde of faſting in this world. For we obſerue the Lenton faſt, when wee liue honeſtly, keeping our ſelues from iniquitie and vnlawful delights. And truely (as ſayth an other Canon) mens prayers and faſtinges are nothing worth, C. nihil prodeſt de panit, diſt. 3. if the ill lyfe be not amended.

Vppon this poynt of abſtynence from meates this hiſtory which Euſebius reciteth is worthy to be noted. In the tyme of the Emperour Marke Antonius, ther was a great perſecution of the Chriſtians in Vienna nigh vnto Lyons. Emong others two noble perſonages named Alcibiades and Attalus were put in priſon. Alcibiades did puniſh himſelf greatly in priſon through hys to great abſtinence, eating nothing but bread and ſalt, and drynking nothing but water, forbearing to eate eyther fleſhe, or any kinde of meate. Where upon it was reuealed vnto Attalus that Alcibiades did euill in forbearing to vſe the creatures of God, and miniſtred occaſion of offence to the other chriſtians. Which thing when Attalus, had told to Alcibiades, Alcibiades began to eat of all kinds of meats wtout any kind of ſcrupuloſity, & gaue thāks to God, being perſwaded ſo to doe (ſayth Euſebius) by ye ſame ſpirit which had reuealed it vnto Attalus. It is alſo a very notable thing, whiche we read in the hiſtory Tripartite, Lib. 9. cap. 38. The diuerſity that was in olde tyme, in the length of Lent & in the keeping thereof. concerning ye greate diuerſitye which was vſed in old tyme, in abſtayning from meates, and in keeping of lent.

For in auncient time, the Romayne Churche did make their lent of three weekes and no more. And all Greece Slauonia, and Alexandria made it of ſixe weekes. And neither the one nor the other did make their lent of fortye dayes, as it ought to haue bene in following the ſignifacatiō of the word. Moreouer ſome of them did abſtayne from all thinges that had life: Other ſome did eate onely fyſh: And ſome others (which were not of the groſſeſt diet) did feede onelye on flying ſoules and fiſh, and did eate neyther beefe, Mutton, nor other ſuch gros fleſhe.

There were ſome other ſo ſcrupulous, as they would eate neither egs nor whitemeate. And others, which were not ſcrupulous at all, did eate of all kindes of meates, ſauing that vpon the faſting dayes, they would not eate til late towards night. All which diuerſities (ſayth the hiſtorye) were in thoſe dayes practiſed in ſundrye churches, without finding any faulte, or chalinging one an other for ſo doing. Wherby it appeareth, that the chriſtians which liued in thoſe dayes, were of much greater modeſtye, than thoſe which haue liued in our dayes, in whom we haue ſeene all kind of crueltie, in burning and perſecuting of ſuch as haue not followed the traditions and ſuperſtitions that are obſerued in the Romiſh Church.

As touching Pilgrimages,Pilgrimages They alſo are reproued in their Canō law. For euery body knoweth, that amō geſt the Romayne Catholickes, the pilgrimage to Ieruſalem to viſit the holy Sepulchre, is highlye eſteemed, as moſt holy, denoute, paynefull, and meritorious, And yet for all this, a certayne Canon ſayth,C. Gloria. 12. q. 2. It is nothing worth to haue bene at Ieruſalem, but to haue liued well there. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canon taken out of S. Ierom. It is not a thing worthy praiſe (ſayth he) to haue bene at Ieruſalem, but to haue liued well at Ieruſalem.

And as touching contemplation (whereby the Moonkes woulde cullour and mayntayne their idle life,The Moonkes of olde time did labor for their liuing. C. Nunquā de conſec. diſt. 5.) their owne Canons do openly condemne them, ſaying, that Moonkes ought to exerciſe themſelues in tilling the land, in dreſſing of gardens, in graffing of fruit trees, in making of nettes to catch fiſh, in copying of bookes, and finally in following the example of the Bee, which neuer ceaſeth to be doing of ſomewhat.

And the ſame Canons do alſo witnes, that in the monaſteries of Egipt they neuer receaued any Moonk, but vpon condition that he ſhould labor: Not ſo much for his owne neceſſitye, that he might haue wherof to liue, as to keepe their minds from wandring about euill Imaginations. In ſo much that we reade that in old tyme, there was in Egypte a good Abbot named Serapion, Hist. trip. lib. 8. cap. 1. which had vnder hys charge ten thouſand moonks, (which is 〈2 pages missing〉 ſo little allowed and lyked of pouerty, as that they be very ful of huſbādly ordinances, for the well gouerning of the goods and riches belonging to the Monaſteries: Inſomuch that there is a Canon, which condemneth a certayne kinde of people for heretickes, which tearmed themſelues Apoſtolicall, (as followers of the examples of the Apoſtles) in making profeſſion to haue nothing priuat of their owne. And therfore, by this Canon, a man might ſay that all beggers are heretickes.

And who doth not ſee the infinite number of abuſes, which are crept into the order of Monkes in protes of time, againſt the ordinances of the Canones. For, C. Si cupit. & C. Placuit. 16. q. 1. (ſaith the Canon) if thou deſire to be a Monke, that is to ſay a ſolitary perſon, as thou doeſt name thy ſelfe: What doeſt thou in the Citie, which is no place for ſolitary people, but for ſuch as ſhould haunt company?

And another Canon following, ſaith thus: Let the Monke be contented with his Cloiſter. For like as a fiſh doth die as ſoone as he is out of the water, euen ſo doth a Monke when he is out of his Cloyſter. Therfore, let him be ſolitary, and hold his peace, for he is dead to the world but aliue vnto God.

But yet for all this, doe we not ſee how the Monks are planted in the beſt, and greateſt Cities, and in the faireſt places of them, and in exceding Princely and ſtately houſes, whereas in auncyent time, they were contented to dwell in wild fields, and Forreſtes, and in little Cabonets, builded in the corner of ſome Rock? Shal not a man meet them now, at all houres, in euery ſtreete, in markets, and pleading places, in Innes, in fields, in townes, and in Caſtles, in ſtead of being within their Cloiſters?

Furthermore, the Monkes in olde time, of what ſort ſo euer they were, did eate no fleſhNo Monke ought to eat fleſh. at all, but followed the ordinance of the Canon, which ſayth thus: It is not lawefull for anye Monkes, eyther to eate, or to taſt of fleſh: Not for that we eſteeme the creature of God to be ill, C. Carnem de conſecra. diſt. 5. but for that wee iudge it meete and neceſſary, that Monkes, ſhold abſtayne frō fleſh, excepting onely thoſe which be ſick. Nowe then, if it happen that any Monkes breaking the ordināce of this auncient rule and cuſtome, dare preſume to eate fleſh, let him be ſhut vp and kept as a cloſe priſoner, by the ſpace of ſixe moneths to do his pennance.

See now, how the Monkes were brideled by their own Canons, but the moſt part of them haue ſince that time, broaken their bittes. For, now there are none, but the Monkes of the charterhouſe, the Celeſtines, and theſe new come Capuſmes, and Smoke Monkes, which will obſerue that canon: and yet their obſeruing of it, is (for the moſt part,) but in outward ſhew, and Ipocriſie.

Truely, if there were no more but this to be found fault with, in the order of monkery, the matter were not great. For, chriſtian libertie geueth euery man leaue, to vſe all kinde of meates, which God hath created for mannes vſe, ſo that he take it moderatly, with thankes geuing. But the cauſe, that led me to ſpeake of this point among the reſt, is to ſhew, that the Monkes of theſe dayes, doe not obſerue their auncient Canons.

And by the Canons alſo,C. Sanctim. 20. q. 1 Of Nuns. in auncient time, it was vnlawfull for any Nun to take the vaile, and to profeſſe her ſelfe a Nun, vnles ſhe were aboue forty yeres of age. But in theſe daies, they be forced to take it vpon them, being but thirteene, or fourteen yeres olde, whereof, the world ſeeth what good huſwifery inſueth. And as touching the pouling of their heads whē they cauſe thē to take the black veile: it is not ſo ſmall a fault, as many eſteeme it to be. For, by the word of God,1. Cor. 11.6 women are commanded to preſerue their heire in token of ſubiection. And according hereunto, it is forbidden by a Canon taken out of the Councell of Gangra, that any woman ſhould poule her head vnder pretence of Religion. Theſe are the wordes of the Canon.C. Quecunque. diſt. 30. If any woman cauſe her head to be pouled in reſpect of Religiō, curſed be ſhe as a breaker of the Law of ſubiection, becauſe long heare is geuen vnto women to couer them withal, and to put them in minde of their ſubiectiō.

And whereas in theſe dayes, it is thought ſo ſtrange a thing amongeſt the Romiſh Catholicks, that a monk or a Nun ſhould marry,That Monkes and Nunes may marry. (becauſe it ſeemeth that in their ſo doing, they breake the vow of virginitie which they haue made vnto God:) they declare herein, that they haue not well read their own Canones, by ye which, ſuch mariages are allowed: Namely, by one Canon taken out of S. Auguſtine, as a witneſſe of the Councell,C. Quidem diſt. 27. which ſaith thus. Some ſay, that thoſe which marry after the taking of the vow be adulterers. But I ſay vnto you, that thoſe doe ſinne right greeuouſly, which doe ſeperate ſuch marryed folks.

Yet notwithſtanding, we haue ſeene many Lawes here in Fraunce, which haue diſanulled the maryages of prieſtes, Monks, and Nuns, and conſtrained them to returne to their Cloyſters, a thing quite contrary to this Canon.

The ſelfe ſame doctor S. Auguſtine doth alſo ſhew,De doctrina Chriſtiana. lib. 4. Virginitie is not to be preferred before honeſt mariage, that they haue done greatly amiſſe, which haue ſo highly commended virginitie, as to preferre it before mariage, ſaying that virginitie did fill the heauens, and mariage the earth, which was the cauſe of the ſounding of ſo many Nunries. For, he excuſeth S. Ciprian, and S. Ambr. of their ſo great prayſing, and exalting of virginitie, ſaying thus: Wheras Ciprian the martir hath written of the behauiour which ought to be in virgines, he did it not to intiſe thē to make vowes of virginitie: but Ambroſe the Biſhoppe, (through his great eloquence) ſought to inflame their deſiers thereunto. Truely, both the one, and the other haue ſore rebuked thoſe women, which goe about to grace, or rather to diſgrace themſelues with painting of their faces:The abhominablenes of ſuch as paynt their faces. againſt which ſort, Ciprian (amongſt other things) ſaith thus: If an excellent painter, had well, and liuely counterfayted a mans face and body, & afterwards, another vnſkilfull paynter would needes take vpon him to ouerpainte the ſame agayne, vndoutedly, the former paynter ſhould haue great cauſe to finde himſelfe greeued, and iniuryed. And thinkeſt thou (daughter) to eſcape the puniſhment of God, who hath faſhioned thee, when thy damnable raſhnes dareth preſume to controll Gods paynting, by thy paynting? For, be it that thou art not vnchaſt, & whoriſh to the worldward, yet, notwithſtāding, thou through the whoriſh intiſements of thy paynting art wors than the very ſtrumpet and adulteres, foraſmuch, as thou haſt corrupted, and marred Gods workmanſhip in thy ſelfe. Wheras thou doeſt it to beutefie and to trim thy ſelfe, it is nothing els, but a corrupting of Gods workmanſhip, and a defacing of the truth.

Harken here to the voyce of the Apoſtle who warneth thee thus. Purge your old leauen, that you may be made new dough, without leauen: For, Chriſt our Eaſter Lambe is offered vp for vs: Let vs therfore make good chere, not with old leauen, nor with the leauen of naughtines, and malice: But with vnleauened bred, that is to ſay, with the bread of ſinceritie, and truth. For, what continuance in ſinceritie and truth is there, when the thing that was pure, is defiled, and when the truth is changed into vntruth, by falſe culler, and painting with ſlaberſauces. Thy Lord doth ſay vnto thee, Thou canſt not make one of thy heares, either black or white. And yet thou, to ouermaſter the word of thy Lord, wilt thou needes ſeeke to clime aboue him, by thy trecherous contempt, and ouerbold dealing? Thou painteſt thy heare, and by euil hāſel of the thing that ſhal happē vnto thee, doeſt frizel thy head with fire.

Ambroſe alſo, doth ſpeake thus againſt theſe counterfaite paintings: From thence (ſaith he,) ſpring intiſements to vice, namely, that women doe paint their faces with color made for the nonce: In ſo much, that by the coloring of their countenances, with the filth of their painting, for feare to diſpleaſe men, they purchaſe to themſelues the ſtayning of their chaſtitie. What a folly is it to change a naturall face, for a painted face? For, in fearing the iudgement of their huſbands, they loſe their own iudgement, becauſe that ſuch as will needes change the ſhape and faſhion which God hath geuen them by creation, doe condemne themſelues: and in ſeeking to be well lyked of others, doe firſt of all miſlike of themſelues. What better iudge of thy foulnes (thou woman) can there be, than thy ſelfe, that art ſo loth to be ſeene in thy own naturall likenes?

If thou beeſt fayre, why doeſt thou hide thy ſelfe? If thou beeſt foule, why doeſt thou bely thy ſelfe, in deſiring to ſeeme fayr, and by thine own fault, make thy ſelf worthy of blame, as well in thine own conſcience, as in the opinion of others?

The ſame Ambroſe, ſpeaking of virgines, doth ſet down vnto them, (vnder example of a perfect virgin) of what behauior our virgins ought to be,What the māners and behauiour of virgines or maydens ought to be. ſaying: There was a virgin, which was a virgine not only in body, but alſo in minde: who by no outwarde ſhew, did at any time corrupt the ſinceritie of her affection. She was humble of hart, ſober in ſpeach, wiſe in vnderſtanding, of few words, geuen to reading, not putting her truſt in the vncertainty of riches, but in the prayers of the poore, earneſt in her worke, ſhamefaſt in her talke, ſeeking God and not man to be the iudge of her hart, not doing wrong to any, wiſhing well to euery body, honoring all her elders, not enuying her equals, void of boaſting, folowing reaſon, and louing vertue.

Hath this virgin at any time offended her Parents in word or deede? when hath ſhe beene ſeene to be at any iarre with her neighbors? when deſpiſed ſhe the poore? when mocked ſhe the lame? or when ſhrunke ſhe away from the nedy? Her only care hath beene to haunte the company of ſuch men, as are accompanied with mercy and honeſt ſhamefaſtnes. There hath not paſſed her one ſuſpicious looke, nor dallying word, nor any vnſhamefaſt ieſture. Her pace hath not been vncomely, nor her voice loud, or ouer ſhrill. But, to be ſhort, her outward behauiour hath alwayes beene the repreſenter and Image of the goodneſſe of her minde: for, a good houſe ought to be known by his entry, & make ſhew at the firſt, that there is no darckneſſe in it, but that the Lampe which is within, doth ſhead forth his light to the outer partes.

What ſhall I ſay of her moderate feeding, and of the great aboūdance of her duetifull doings? In the one, ſhe paſſeth Nature, and by the other, ſhe oppreſſeth it. She letteth no time ſlip, without doing ſome good. And her ſobrietie is ſuch, that ſhe doubleth her faſting daies, and when ſhe hath deſire to eate, ſhe maketh her meale of the firſt meat that ſhe meeteth with, which ſhe taketh alonly to keep her ſelfe aliue, and not to pamper her ſelfe for pleaſure. By theſe words the meaning of Ambroſe, is not to incourage maydens to vow virginitie, but to ſhew of what behauiour they ought to be, which haue already vowed it.

Hetherto I haue rehearſed the very words of S. Augustine, who doth alleage the forewritten ſentences of S. Ciprian, and S. Ambroſe to ſhew that they eſteeme not ſo much the vow of virginity, as the good behauior which ought to be in both thoſe, which be vowed, and in the others alſo. And it is to be noted, that in the ſaying of S. Ambroſe, aboue written (which ſpeaketh of the manners, dueties, and behauiors of the virgines which haue vowed virginitie) there is no mention made of any of the hipocritical, and ſuperſtitious Ceremonies, which in theſe dayes, are obſerued by the Nūs. He deſcrybeth them at large, and (as it were by peecemeale,) what they ought to be, & in what ſort they ought to buſie themſelues, and wherein they ought to ſpend their time: and yet in all this, there is not one word ſpoken of their Popeholines. But contrarywiſe, wheras he ſaith, that the vowed virgins, (which now a daies be called profeſſed) ought to be diligent in working, to beware of diſagreeing with their frendes and Neighbors, not to withdraw themſelues from the nedy, to frequent only ſuch men as are mercifull, and ſhamefaſt, and to be of coū tenance and behauiour ſober, and not nice or wanton.

It appeareth therby euidently, that in thoſe dayes, they were not ſhut vp in Monaſteries, but kept their vow of virginitie, in liuing in houſes of their own, or els with their kinſefolk, exerciſing themſelues in all good works, of godlineſſe and vertue. And now that we haue ſpoaken ſufficiently of Nunnes, let vs returne againe to the Monkes.

A prohibition of the inuenting of new orders of Religiō.It is to be noted, that in the year 1273. in the time of Pope Gregory the tenth, there was a Counſell holden at Lyon, whereby was confirmed the prohibition made in the Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Innocent the third in the yeare 1215, which forbad ye deuiſing of any moe new orders of mōks, or habites of new religion, (whereof there had ſprong vp a maruelous ſort ſince that time,) and all new religions which had been inuented after the ſaid Councell of Laterane, were diſanulled and forbidden. What ſhall we then ſay of the ſmokymonkes, the Ieſuits, and the Capuſſins, which are growen ſince that time.

To conclude, neither the Monkes of old time, nor thoſe which haue been deuiſed alate, nor their vowes, nor their works, haue any ground in the word of God, neither doe they behaue themſelues according to their own Canons.

❧ Of the commaundementes of God. The v. chapter.

THe difference betwixt the Romiſh Catholicks and yt proteſtants touching the commaundementes of god,The Pope hath defaced and wyped out the ſecond of the ten commaundements. is not ſmall. For the proteſtantes accuſe them (or els the Pope) to haue wiped out the ſecond commaundement, which forbiddeth Images: and to haue cut the laſt commaundement into twaine, to make vp ſtil the number of tenne.

And truely it is a great trechery, & a preſumption vtterly intollerable, to haue bene ſo bold, as to raſe a whole commaundemēt out of the law of the liuing God. For if ye marke well the commaundements which the prieſts pronounce in the ſaying of their common Maſſe: ye ſhal finde that Immediately after the firſt commandement, (which is, Thou ſhalt honor but the one God, and loue him perfectly) they haue put the third commaundement, which is, Thou ſhalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vayne, and haue wiped out, and ouerſkipped the ſecond commaundement, which doth forbid to haue Images or to honor them.

Whiche thing hath beene done of purpoſe by the Pope and his Adherentes, that they might the more eaſily fill the temples of the Chriſtians vnawares, with Idols and Sayntes of both kindes, to draw vnto themſelues offeringes and obuenſions, and other like thinges, as may be ſeene by the ſequel therof. So as in this point, the doctrine of the Romiſh catholicks is contrary to Gods word and commaundement: for God ſayth, Thou ſhalt make to thy ſelfe no grauen Image, nor the likenes of any thing, nether ſhalt thou doe any honour vnto them.

Contrariwiſe the Romiſh catholicks vphold, that it is lawful to haue Images in Churches, (as they haue) and to knele before them, and to offer vp candles and incēſe to them, and to put of their Cappes vnto them. Is not this I pray you, a direct encountering of Gods ordinaunce, and a trā plinge of it vnder foote, and a robbing of the creator of his due honour, to beſtow the ſame vpon ſtones and ſtocks?A fōd diſtinction beetweene worſhipping & ſeruing For if they ſay that they worſhyp none but onely God, and that ye thinges which they do to the Saints, and to their Images, is but a ſeruing of thē, according to their own diſtinction of worſhiping and ſeruing: The aunſwere herunto is both ready and very eaſy, namely,Venerabiles de conſec. diſt. 3. that firſt their own canons, which alow the honoring and ſeruinge of Images, doe vſe the ſelfe ſame terme of worſhipping, ſayinge that Chriſtians ought to honor and worſhip Images.

And as for their diſtinction of worſhipping and ſeruing, it canne in no wiſe ſerue to excuſe thē. Firſt becauſe it doth not followe by force of that diſtinction, that it is lawfull for them, vnder that pretence, to wipe out one of the commaundements of God.

Secondlye becauſe this diſtinction of worſhipping and ſeruing is fond & fooliſhe, chieflye in the Application, which they make therof. For they ſay that they honor God with the honor that belongeth to worſhipping, and that they honor the Saynts with the honor that belōgeth to ſeruing. Now who is ſo very a foole, that he doth not perceyue, how by this meanes they humble themſelues more in their honoring of Sayntes, than in theyr honoring of god. For he doth more imbaſe himſelfe which ſerueth, than hee which worſhippeth or honoreth. For as we commonly ſee, great lords can find in their hartes to honour meane perſonages, to whome notwithſtanding they will not vouchſafe to ſubmitte themſelues to doe them any ſeruice.

De ciuitate Dei. lib. 5. cap. 15. lib. 6. c. 1. lib 7. c. 32. lib. 10. cap. 1. & 4.But yet moreouer, this diſtinction is falſe: As S. Auguſtine proueth, who ſayth that worſhipping is alwayes taken in the Scriptures for ſeruice: So as by that reckning, worſhipping and ſeruing are all one thing. And in very deed, both in the Scripture and alſo in the books of the auncient doctors, thoſe two wordes are names of one ſelfe ſame thing, and ſignify bothe one thing without difference. And as for the honoring of Images,Au. de doctr chriſt. lib. 3 cap. 7. the ſame doctor, who neuer hard of the diſtinctiō of worſhipping and ſeruing, doth vtterly condemne it, ſaying that thoſe be greater Idolaters which worſhip the Images that are made by the handes of men, Than thoſe which do worſhip the Sonne, the heauen, the ſea, and the other creatures which are made by the hand of God.

Agayne the Proteſtantes ſay alſo, that the Romiſh Catholickes haue corrupted the third commaundemēt.How the Papiſtes deface the 3. commandement. For by the ſame, god doth forbid men to take his name in vayne. But yet doth he not forbidde to ſweare by hys name, when the othe is not in vayne, (as when a mā is brought to affirme a trueth before the Magiſtrate) But doth commaund that in ſuch caſe, Deut. 6.13. a man ſhould ſweare by his name. And truly, when in ſuch an earneſt matter men affirme the trueth: it is an honoring of God, who is the truth it ſelfe, to take him to witnes, and it is a diſhonoring of God and a deſpiſing of him, if they ſweare by any of the creatures. Yet notwithſtanding, the Romiſhe Catholickes permitte men to ſweare in iudgementes vpon the reliques of S. Anthony, and by the heeſayntes and ſheeſayntes and other creatures which thing their own canons doe condemne.C. conſidera. c. Tu malū. c. Siquis. 22. q. 1. Conſider (ſayth a Canon) that our Sauiour hath not forbidden vs to ſweare by God, but forbiddeth vs to ſweare by the heauens, by the earth, by Ieruſalem, or by thy head. An other Canon ſayth thus. Thou dooſt not amiſſe in vſing an othe well: for although, that of it ſelfe it be not good to ſweare: yet neuertheleſſe, it is neceſſary, whē a man is to be perſwaded in a truth There is an other canon which puniſheth thoſe that rēd god in peeces, by their ſtrāge othes (which now a daies are but to much vſed) ſaying thus: If any man ſweare, by the heares or by the head of God, or do vſe any ſuch like blaſphemy: If he be of the cleargy, let him be depoſed: and if he bee a lay man, let him be accurſed.

The Proteſtantes ſay farther that the catholickes haue ſo corrupted the fourth commaundement,The Papiſts haue corrupted the fourth commanodemēt as that (by all likelihood) their meaning was to haue made it quite away, as they dyd the Seconde. For God ſayeth in his Law, ſixe dayes ſhalt thou labor, and do all that thou haſt to doe, but the ſeſeuenth day is the ſabaoth of the Lord thy God. &c.

And the Romiſh Catholicks doe contrarywiſe ſay, that in ſome weeks wee ought not to labour paſt three or foure dayes, or fiue at the moſt, for the reſt (ſay they) of the ſixe ought to bee imployd idlely, in keeping them holy and feaſtfull to the ſayntes.

I pray you tell me, is not this a manifeſt impugning of the ſacred & inuiolable commaundement of God our creator? Is it not a ſetting of thē ſelues directly agaynſt his holy will? I know well it may be ſayd, that in the tyme of the olde law of Moyſes, they did make moe reſting dayes than the ſeuēth, which was called the Sabaoth day: As the feaſt of the Tabernacles, of Trumpettes, of vnleauened bread, of Eaſter, & ſuch others like. But the aunſwere hereunto is, yt ſuch feaſts were commaunded by the expreſſe word of God. And bee not thoſe feaſts which are celebrated in the Romiſh Church. Otherwiſe in al the ſayd feaſtes of the old law, the people did not loyter from their worke. yea, and euen in the Chriſtian primatiue Church men might worke in tillage vpon the Sonday,Men may work vppō the Sūdaies as it appeareth by a law made by the Emperour Conſtantine, Which ſayth thus.L. Omnes. 3 C. de Ferijs. Let all Iudges, Citizens and handicraftes men, forbeare their worke vpon the honorable day of Sonday: But let it be free and lawfull for the huſbandmen to labour in tilling the Earth, (for often tymes it hapneth, that on the other dayes, the weather ſerueth them not ſo well to ſowe their corne and to dres their vines) leaſt by ouerhipping ſo ſmall ſpace of tyme, they might loſe the commoditye geuen them by the heauenly prouidence. Geuen the ſecond daye of Marche in the yeare of the ſecond conſulſhip of Criſpe Constantine

But there is a Canon taken out of S. Gregory, which procedeth yet further and ſayth moreouer, that thoſe which teach to abſtayne from worke vpon the Saterday and Sunday, be teachers of Antichriſt. Theſe are the very wordes of the Canon.C. peruenit. de conſec. dist. 3. It is come to my knowledge, that certayne people of peruerſſe diſpoſition, haue ſowed among you ſome poyntes of doctrine cō trary to the holy faythe, commaunding men to abſtayne from working vppon the Sonday: whom what els may we call than preachers of Antichriſt, who at hys comming will cauſe men to reſt from all labour, both vppon the Saturday and Sonday too.

This Canō doth plainly condemn the doctrine of the Papiſtes, which hold opinion that men ought to do no maner of worke vpon the Sundayes nor on the holidayes throughout the whole yere. The proteſtantes doe, (in deed) confeſſe, that the Sunday ought to be imployed rather in the ſeruice of God, than in any other kinde of trauell. And that it is good to obſerue yt order, to the intent that by reſting on yt day, folke may be the better able to go through with their worke vpon al the other dayes of the weeke: But to binde mens conſciences to that order, were no better than to make them Iewes.

And although the Romiſh Catholickes finde fault with men for labouring vpon the Sundaies and the other feaſtedayes: yet doe they ſuffer vſurers and marchauntes to vſe their trafficke, and to make bondes, bargaines, contractes, paymentes, and receits of money vpon their holidaies So as it is commonly ſeene, that the tymes which are choſen for the making of Obligations and ſuch other bondes and bargaynes, be the Sundayes, and the other feaſtdaies: And that the times appointed for paymēts of money, are generally vppon the feaſtdayes.

And yet if now a dayes, any poore proteſtant ſhould labor ſixe dayes of the week in the fieldes, or in his ſhop to obay God and to mayntayne hys poore family: by and by they will cry out that he is an heretick, and worthy to be burnt or baniſhed. And why ſo? Is it hereſy to obay God? Now whē when men vſe ſuch ſpeeches, is it not all one, as if they called vertue, vice: and white, black? Therefore let them hardily know, that their ſpewing out of ſuch ſpeaches, is agaynſt God himſelfe, who will one day well cauſe them to feele his terrible iudgement, and make them know that hee is ielous of his honor, and a reuenger of the deſpight done to his commaundements. The ninth commaundemēt alſo is corrupted by the Catholick ſophiſters,The Papiſts corrupt the ninth commaundemēt for God doth vtterlye and ſimply forbid to lye: And they are of opinion, that it is lawfull to lye for a good intent: And not onely to tell a lye by reporting ſome vntrueth, but alſo to break both promiſe, and oth to: Which is contrary to naturall reaſon whereby the lawe of all nations hath bene brought in, which willeth that both the publicke and priuate promiſe ſhould be religiouſly obſerued & kept for the maintenance of humaine ſocietye.

And it is alſo contrary to the word of God, which not onely reproueth liing, but alſo threateneth the lyer with damnation, and commaundeth vs to keep our promiſe, euen though it bee to our owne diſaduantage. Alſo it is contrary to the canon law, which ſayth that all kinde of lyes are ſinne, and that we ought to keep our othe & promiſe,Promiſe & fayth ought to be kept inuiolable to all men. euen with our enemies againſt whom we make warre.C. primum. 22. q. 2. C. Noli. 13. q. 1. For as the Canon ſayth expreſly: Men ought not to ſeeke peace to the ende to make war, but to the end to gayne peace. And I would to God yt the Romiſh Catholicks had well obſerued theſe Canons. For then had not we frenchmē falne into the calamities, and ruine which we now bee fallen into.

The other commaundementes likewiſe, haue bene greatly corrupted by theſe Sophiſters,The ſeuenth Commaundement corrupted by the Papiſts. which name thē ſelues catholickes: As namely the ſeuenth commaundement, (which forbiddeth Adultery) hath bene corrupted by the goodly counſell of Tollette, and by Iſodorus which ſayeth thus: A chriſtian may not haue two wiues, C. Chriſt. diſt. 34. c. meretrices. 32. q. 4. nor moe than two: but one onely. But if he haue not a wife, he may haue a Concubine: which doctrine the Pope & hys vpholders haue Canoniſed and confirmed: thereby the better and more eaſily to maintayne their ſhamefull Lechery, notwithſtanding that the ſeuēth commaundement, and alſo the auncient Canons prohibit all dwelling or matching together of mā and woman, ſauing onely in marriage.

Wherefore, (for a concluſion vppon this poynte,) it appeareth openly that the Proteſtauntes retayne Gods Commaundementes in their pureneſſe and ſoundnes, without taking aught from them: whereby it is euidēt to be ſene, that their doctrine is the beſt, the auncienteſt, and the fardeſt from error according to our forſayd maximes

❧ Of the Sacrament of Baptiſme. The vi. chapter.

ALthough the Romiſh Catholickes holde opinion that there are ſeuen ſacramentes: yet not withſtanding to auoyd tediouſnes, wee will ſpeake here but of two: That is to ſay of baptiſme, and of the Lordes Supper.

As touching Baptiſme, the Catholickes and the Proteſtauntes do well agree in the principal poyntes: which is, that it ought to be done in ye name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy ghoſt, wt the ſign of water.

But they doe differ very much in the other poynts and ceremonies: for the Catholicks beleue that if a childe dye before he be baptiſed, he cannot be ſaued: and that in caſe of neceſſity, women may Baptiſe. And they woulde haue Baptiſme miniſtred with coniured water, ſuch as had bene kept all the yere in a veſſell, (which they call a font) within the Churche: affirming that the euil ſprites be coniured to go out of the bodies of the little Infants which are baptiſed: And yt they muſte be held all naked ouer the fonte in the tyme of the chriſtning, and that both ſalte and ſpittle ſhould be put into the mouthes of ye babes: Al which things the Proteſtaunts do vtterly diſallow becauſe as touching the infāts which die vnchriſtened, if they belong to Gods election, (which goeth both before their natiuitye & alſo before theyr conception) they be with him and are partakers of his ſaluation, although they die vnbaptiſed.

For Gods election cannot be diſapoynted. Beſides this it is not their fault if they be not baptiſed, but the negligence of their Parentes, or by chaunce of ſoden death.

And as concerning women, their ſect and nature doth exclude them frō publick charges, which onely belong vnto men. And therfore are they altogether vnmeete, either to preache in Churches, or to Miniſter the Sacramentes. And touching the children of Infidels, it is not reaſonable to receaue them into the church to be members of chriſt, vntil they acknowledge him to bee their heade, and make cnofeſſion of their faythe, and conſequently be of conuenient yeares, becauſe that being borne of vnbeleuing Parents, they haue no warraunt or witnes, that they belong to the couenant of God. Neither doe the proteſtantes allow the forementioned ceremonies: And their reaſō is, for that they beleue that god is the only cauſe whereof and whereby we receiue the benefite of generation, and the remiſſion of originall ſinne in baptim, without the ayd of hallowed water, or of any of the other Ceremonies. Nay, which more is, they take it to be a defiling of the holy baptiſme, to adde thereunto any other ceremonies then the inſtitution of God, & that it ought to be miniſtred purely and ſimply, according to his ordinaunce. For wee ought to doe this honour vnto God, namely to beleue that whatſoeuer hee hath ordeined is perfect, and yt thereto there ought nothing to be added, nor aught taken away. And therefore it doth appeare, that in this poynte of Baptiſme, the Doctrine of the proteſtantes doth much better yeelde God his due honor then doth the doctryne of the Catholickes.

For the Proteſtantes mind not to reſtrayne the election of God to thoſe onely which are Baptiſed, but doe extend it to the children of the faythfull, foraſmuch as it is a thing very reaſonable to be beleued, that if the fathers and moothers bee of the houſehold of God, their children are ſo likewiſe. But the Romiſh Catholicks do hold on the contrary, yt the children whiche die before they be baptiſed, be not of the houſehold of God, although theyr Fathers and moothers were.

Agayne, whereas the Catholickes enable women to baptiſe (which they call chriſteningWomen ought not to baptiſe children.) in doing wherof they committe vnto them one of the chiefe charges in gods houſe, to wit, the miniſtring of the ſacrament wherby we be graffed into the bodye of Chriſtes church, and made the members of his bodye and meyny of his houſeholde:) The Proteſtantes will not graunt to admit women into any of the publick charges in Gods houſehold, ſpecially ſeeing that euen by the ciuill lawes, (which in that poynt agree with the law of nature) women be diſabled to take vpon them the executing of anye publick office, euen in the houſes or dominions of earthly princes. Moreouer wheras ye catholickes, (as much as in them lieth) not onely receyue ſuch into the churche by baptiſme, as are faythles and haue no knowledge of Chriſt, neither they nor their Parentes, but alſo beſtow baptiſme vpon bels after ſuch a maner as they thē ſelues haue inuented for it: The Proteſtantes cannot finde in their hartes to defile Gods houſe ſo much, as to receiue infidels into it, or to avowe thoſe to be the mēbers of Chriſt, who haue no fayth in them, neither themſelues, nor their Parentes, for aſmuch as it were to vnſeemely a thing to avow ſuch a one for a member of a body, as acknowledgeth not the heade there of.

Finally, the Proteſtantes yeeld this honor vnto holy Baptiſme inſtituted by God, that they will in no wiſe adde any thing to it beſids gods ordinaunce, nor defile it with ſpittle, oyle, ſalt, coniured water, and ſuch other Ceremonies, As the Romiſhe Catholickes doe. Beſides this, the word of God doth teach vs, Math. 19.23. & Exo. 20.6. & 1. Cor. 7.14. yt Chriſt receiued little Children whiche were not Baptiſed, and that he pronoūced of them, that the kingdome of heauen doth belong vnto them, and that God doth promiſe his bleſſinges vnto all the faythfull, and to their children, yea euen vnto the thouſandth generation. So as thoſe infantes ſhall neuertheles be ſaued (though they dye vnchriſtened) ſeeing they be compryſed in the couenaunt of God.

Math. 18.9. Hebru. 9.4.The ſame word doth alſo teach vs, that Chriſt gaue commiſſion of baptiſing and preaching, not to the holy virgin his mother, nor to any other of the women that reſorted to his Sermons: but to his Diſciples, and Apoſtles. And therfore women ought not to take vpon them to baptiſe, ſeeing that (as ſaith the Apoſtle) None ought to vſurpe any charge or degree of honor, Act. 8.37.48.50. Gal. 3.27. without lawfull calling therunto. And the ſame word doth declare further vnto vs, that thoſe, which doe not beleeue in Chriſt, nor come of beleuing parents, ought not to receaue Baptiſme, foraſmuch, as baptiſm is no other thing, but the zeale of faith.

And laſtly, the ſame word of God doth teach vs, that in the tyme of the Apoſtles,The maner of baptiſing in the tyme of the Apoſtles. Baptiſme was alwayes miniſtred with common water, That is to ſay, without any charme or particular bleſſing.Mat. 3.6 & Iohn. 3.22 For the Apoſtles and diſciples of Chriſt, did baptiſe men on the banckes of Riuers, or in the firſt water that they found fit for the purpoſe. Alſo it doth teach vs, that God is the God of the faythful and of their Children: Gen. 17.7 Deut. 5.10 So as little Infantes begotten and brought forth of beleuing or faythfull Parentes, doe belong to God & to hys couenaunt, euen from their moothers womb: And ſo by conſequence, their bodyes, (as is aforeſayd) cannat be poſſeſſed with ill ſpirites. And therefore it is needles to dryue them out by coniurations, as the prieſts of the Catholicks do. Likewiſe the Proteſtantes ſay alſo, that to hold the tender babes all naked ouer the font, (ſpecially in winter) is often time a cauſe of their death, and that thoſe which do practiſe that Ceremony, be oftē guilty of murder, which is forbidden by the commaundementes of God. Likewiſe they diſalow ye ſalte the oyle, the ſpittle, and the other ceremonies, aſwell for that they cannot but be hurtful to the little childrē, as alſo becauſe they be filthy and fōde ceremonis, and haue no groūd in the word of God.Saluation dependeth not vpon baptim. Alſo it appeareth by the canons, that the ſaluatiō of men doth doth not depend wholly vpon Baptiſme, but principallye vpon fayth. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canon.

C. Baptiſme &c. cathecum. de conſec. diſt. 4. S. Ciprian, (to proue that the torment of death may ſtād in ſtead of Baptiſme,) hath grounded his argument vpon theſe wordes of Chriſt ſpoken to the vnbaptiſed theefe, This day ſhalt thou bee with me in Paradiſe. In the examining whereof more narrowly, I fynde that not onely the ſuffering of death for the name of Chriſt, but alſo the harty beleuing in him, and the confeſſing of him, may ſupply the want of baptiſme when the party is ſo diſtreſſed by ſome extremity of tyme, as he cannot haue the ſacrament of batiſme miniſtred vnto him. And there followeth an other Canon, which ſayth that if a learner of the Catechiſme, (that is to ſay) ſuch a one as is but newly entred into the doctrine of the faith, and is not yet baptiſed) do ſuffer marterdome for the name of Chriſt, he fayleth not to be ſaued, although hee want Baptiſme.

And the reaſō herof (as ſayth the ſame canons) is, becauſe that in this caſe, ſuch as haue not receiued the ſacrament of Baptiſme, haue not wanted it through pride or diſdayne, but through inforcement of neceſſity.

In likewiſe it is forbidden by the Canons, that women,C. Mulier de conſ. diſt. 4. (how wiſe ſo euer they bee,) ſhall either preach or baptiſe. It is true, that hereunto they do ioyn this one exception, (which is) if it be not in caſe of neceſſity. But if it be graūted, (according to the truth) that the Infants which dye vnbaptiſed, be not therfore excluded from ſaluation: It followeth well, that no neceſſity can be great inough, to diſpēſe with women for intermedling themſelues with the adminiſtration of the Sacramentes.

And truely in old time,C. duo tempora. de cō ſec. diſt. 4. (as the canons do witnes) Baptiſme was not miniſtred ordinarily, but only at two tymes in the yeare, namely at Eaſter, and at Whitteſontyde: which well bewrayeth that they vſed no ſuch haſte, as that women ſhoulde bee fayne to meddle with the matter.C. Baptizados. de conſec. diſt. 4. Likewiſe it doth alſo appeare by the Canōs, that Baptiſme was not miniſtred to the infidels, but only to ſuch as had faith, and did make confeſſion therof when they were of age to do it. And as touching the forementioned Ceremonies in deed there are ſome Canons, (how be it of the worſt ſtamp) which do allow thē. But the beſt and moſt auntient canons, do vtterly diſſallow thē For by the auntient Canons, men are permitted to baptiſe in Riuers, in ye Sea, in fountaynes, and in euery other place commodious for that purpoſe.

C. celebritatem de conſe. diſt. 3Theſe be the wordes of a Canon taken out of ye decrees of Pope Victor: Let the Gentiles that are come to the faith, be baptiſed in all ſeaſons and all places fit for them, be it in Riuer, ſea, or Spring, as being made cleane by confeſſion of the Chriſtian fayth.

And by an other Canon it is well ſhewed, that wee ought rather to reſt vpon the Baptiſme of the couenaunt of fayth, than vpon the Baptiſme of water.C. verus &c Non dubito de conſecra. diſt. 4. For it ſayth thus: The true baptiſme doth not conſiſt ſo much in the waſhing of the bodie, as in the beleife of the hart, as the apoſtolicke doctrine doth teach vs, ſaying: They make cleane their hartes through fayth. And in an other Canon going before, it is ſayed that a catholicke not Baptiſed,A man may be a catholick when he is vnbaptized. (for it preſuppoſeth that one may be a catholick without being baptiſed) whiche hath an ardent zeale of deuine charity, is to be preferred before a wicked man that is baptiſed. As for example, (ſayth the Canon) Cornelius the Centener who was filled with the holy ghoſt before he was baptiſed, is to be preferred before Simon Magus, who was poſſeſſed with an vncleane Spirit after he had bene Baptiſed.

But if Cornelius hauing receiued the holy ghoſt, had not bene willing to be baptiſed, he had bene greuouſly guiltye of the deſpiſing of ſo excellent a ſacrament.

By which canon it is eaſy to iudge that wee ought altogether to depend vpon that which the ſacrament doth ſignifie vnto vs, and vpon the graces which god doth thereby geue vnto vs and not to ſet our mindes vpon a ſort of ſuperſtitious and vayn ceremonies as the Romiſh catholicks do in theſe dayes. For they may eaſely perceiue by the things aforeſayd, that the doctrine of the reformed religion touching the ſacrament of baptiſme, is better, more auncient, & furder from hereſy, than theirs is, according to our three maximes here before ſet downe to proue the points which are in queſtion. Let vs now ſpeak of the ſupper of the Lord.

❧ Of the Sacrament of the holy ſupper. The vii. chapter.

THe difference betwixt the Romiſh Catholickes and the Proteſtantes concerning the Supper of the Lord, doth conſiſt in three points. The one, in the naming therof: for, the Catholickes call that the keeping of Eaſter, which the Proteſtantes doe name the Supper of the Lord. But this diuerſitie of ſpeaking importeth not much, for both of them are ſtill a celebrating of the miſtery of our redemtion. True it is, that the Catholickes vſe the maner of ſpeaking of the old Teſtament: according to the phraſe whereof, the feaſt of Eaſter (that is to ſay the paſſeouer) was celebrated by the eating of a Lambe, which did repreſent Chriſt, in remembrance of the deliuerance of the people of Iſraell, whom God had brought out of the thraldome of Egipt. But the Proteſtantes vſe the manner of ſpeaking of the new Teſtament, whereby the holy inſtitution which our Lord Ieſus Chriſt ordayned to celebrate the remembrance of his death and paſſion, and to make vs partakers of his body and bloud, is called the ſupper of the Lord. But we muſt not ſtriue about words, ſo it be knowen that to keepe the Eaſter, and to celebrate the Lords Supper, are at this day one ſelfe ſame thing.

The ſecond difference (which is much greater) conſiſteth in the ſubſtance of the Sacrament. For, the Catholickes (at leaſtwiſe the ſchoolmen) vphold, that aſſoone as the prieſt hath ſpoaken the words of conſecration ouer one hoaſte, or ouer many, they change their nature preſently, and are tranſubſtantiated into the very body and bloud of Ieſus Christ, in the ſelfeſame greatnes & bignes that it was vpon the croſſe: ſo as the bread of the hoaſt is thē no longer bread, although the color, and the taſt of bread remayn ſtill therin. Their proofe of this doctrine is, that when our Lord Ieſus Chriſt did inſtitute his ſupper, as he gaue the bread to his diſciples, he ſaid vnto them: This is my body. And in geuing them the cup, he ſaid vnto them: This is my bloud. They proue it alſo by a Canon,C. Ego. de conſt. piſe. 2 which beginneth thus. I Beringarius, &c. which Canon ſaith in expreſſe wordes, that after the conſecration, the bread and wine become not only ſacraments, but alſo the very body, and the very blo ud of Chriſt. And that the prieſt doth ſenſibly handle the ſame very bodye, and breake it. And that the faithful in eating the Sacrament with their mouthes, doe craſh, and cruſh betweene their teeth, the very naturall body of our Sauiour.

And vpon this doctrine they conclude, that we ought to worſhippe the bread of the ſupper, which they tearm the holy hoaſt. Becauſe (ſay they) it is the very body of our Lord Ieſus Christ. But the Proteſtants allow not this Tranſubſtantiation of the bread into fleſh, nor of the wine into bloud, nor conſequently, the worſhipping of thē, as though Ieſus Chriſt were perſonally encloſed within the compaſſe of the boaſt. For they ſay, that euery Sacrament is called a Sacrament, becauſe it is a ſigne of a holy thing. In ſo much that the outward ſigne is to be conceiued by the eye: and the thing ſignifyed (which is inward and ſpirituall) is to be conceiued by the mind: And that therfore in the holy ſupper, the bread and the wine are the ſignes which we ſee with our eyes & receue with our mouthes, but the body and the bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt be the thinges ſignifyed, the which we comprehend and receue by the mind, as true ſpirituall foode ordayned to feede the ſoule and not the body.

Now, to receaue and eate this ſpirituall meate, and to cauſe it ſo to diſgeſt in our ſoules, which are ſpirites, as it may geue them ſuch nouriſhmēt as may make them liue euerlaſtingly like as the food it ſelf and our ſoules that receaue it are ſpirituall thinges: ſo muſt the eating therof be ſpirituall alſo. And to make this ſpirituall eating to become effectual: we muſt not imagine that our ſoules are remoued from hence, and conueyed vp to heauen, nor that God leaueth his place in heauen, to come downe to vs heare below: for the minde of man doth wel execute his workes, though the thing that it worketh vpon, be farre diſtant from it. As for example: we ſee how it doth truely and effectually vnderſtand the thinges that are farre from it by diſtance of place, by meanes of the habilitie or power of reaſoning, which ſerueth it as an Inſtrument to ioyne it to the thing that it worketh vpon, how farre of ſo euer it be by diſtance of place. And euen as reaſon ſerueth the minde as an Inſtrument to couple it to the thing that it ameth at in vnderſtanding: euen ſo likewiſe doth faith ſerue the minde for an Inſtrument to receaue and take hold of the body and bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, in the ſpirituall meate & drinke: notwithſtanding that he be in heauē, on the right hand of his father, from whence he will not come vntill the laſt day.

This māner of eating then, which is done ſpiritually by the meanes of faith, is no leſſe reall, than if it were done carnally by the mouth of the fleſhly body, becauſe the ſpirituall actions of the minde bee no leſſe reall and true, than the corporall and fleſhly actions of the body, which are perceyued by the eyes.

The third difference touching the ſupper, doth conſiſt in the manner of receiuing it. For the Catholicques (I alwayes meane ye ſcholedeuines) do hold opinion, that the lay people (that is to ſaye thoſe whiche are no prieſtes) ought not to communicate, but only with the ſacrament of bread, And that the prieſtes (as beyng more worthy) ought to communicate both with bread and wine. And yet leaſt the lay people ſhould be difcontented with this partage, they ſay that the body of Chriſt is not without bloud, but that the bloud doth alwayes accompany the body, and that ſo by conſoquence, the lay people in receiuing the ſacrament of the body, receiue alſo the ſacrament of the bloud. They hold opinion alſo, that the prieſt ought to receiue this holy ſacramēt euery day: And that it is ſufficiēt for the lay people to receiue it once a yeare, and that it is not ſufferable that they ſhoulde touche the ſacrament with their bare handes. But the Proteſtantes do in no wiſe allow ſuch parting of it, nor yet their fond ſhift of conſequency, but hold opinion that the holy ſacrament (as wel of the bloud as of the body of Chriſt) ought to be diſtributed vnto all the faythfull, without any diſtinction of lay people or prieſtes, becauſe that otherwiſe the ſupper of the Lord ſhould not be celebrated whol, but by halfedeales: And therfore yt it is good and neceſſary to receiue it as often as they may, that men may be the oftner put in minde of the excellent miſterye of our redemption, and be made partakers of the heauenly foode whiche geueth euerlaſting lyfe to our ſoules. Likewiſe they ſay that in aſmuch as Chriſt ſayd, Take ye (which is referred to the hand) and Eate ye (which is referred to ye mouth): the faythful ought to receiue the Sacrament into their owne handes, and the cuſtome of the Primitiue Church was to receiue the ſacrament with their owne hands,Eccle. hiſt. lib. 6. cap. 33 as witneſſeth Euſebius.

Thus you ſee in effect what the doctrine, aſwell of the proteſtantes as of the catholiques is, concerning theſe three poyntes of the ſupper of our Lord, whiche are in controuerſie amongeſt them.Abſurdities that follow Tranſubſtatiation. And now may a man eaſely iudge by comparing the one doctrine with the other, which of thē doth beſt yeld god his due honor. For if the bread were changed or tranſubſtantiated (as the Catholickes tearme it) into the very body and bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt: it ſhould follow by their doctrine, that he ſhould come euery day down from heauen, to be handled and eaten of a Million of Prieſtes, and to be bruiſed and cruſhed betwixt their teeth: yea, and that he might alſo be eaten of miſe, and gnawen with wormes, which are thinges to much againſt reaſon, and too too intollerable to be heard. For it were a thing very vnbeſeeming the maieſtie of the ſonne of God, to be ſo cōmonly conueid through the hands, Mouthes, and Bellies of ſo many Prieſtes, full often foule and filthy both in body and ſoule: And that his precious body ſhould be ſubiect to be eaten of mice, and gnawn wt worms. And therfore the Proteſtants doe beſt yeald Chriſt his due honor, for that they vphold that his body is gone vp into heauen, and there ſitteth at the right hand of his father, and that frō thence he neither doth nor will remoue, vntill the laſt day when he ſhal come to iudge both the quick and the dead. And therfore that our worſhiping of him muſt be in heauen, and we muſt lift vp ovr hartes on high, and not worſhip him in the prieſts hands or in the pix. Likewiſe, they much more honor the ſupper of the Lord, than doe the Catholicks, becauſe they doe ſo often celebrate the ſame, & that not by half deales, but wholly, vtterly abhorring the brooſing and cruſhing of the fleſh and bones of our Sauiour betwixt their teeth, as a doctrine more meete for the barbarous people of America and the Canibals, than for Chriſtians. Neither will they (ſay they,) beleeue the contrary of that which naturall ſence doth teach vs, that is to ſay, that the things which we ſee with our eyes, and taſt with our mouthes to be bread and wine, ſhould be fleſh and bloud. No nor that neither which is contrary to the order of Nature, namely, that accidents ſhould haue an abyding without a ſubſtance fitte and conuenient for them to be in: or that a naturall body of a man, may be incloſed in ſo ſmall roome as the bignes or roundnes of an hoaſt, for theſe things are contrary to nature. And if the Catholicks reply that God is almighty, and able to doe theſe things: the Proteſtants doe anſwere, that doutleſſe he is of power to doe whatſoeuer he liſteth, In ſo much that becauſe God will neither ſinne nor lie: we ſay he can neither lie nor ſin. But our Lord meant ſo litle that his body after his glorification ſhould receaue vnnaturall qualities: that cleane contrarywiſe he would haue his Apoſtles to iudge by the ſence of their ſight and feeling, that his body was a true and perfect naturall body, and not an imagined body. And although the effects of the Sacrament be thinges diuine, and ſupernaturall: yet are they not contrary to nature, as thoſe are which depend vpon the doctrine of Tranſubſtantiation. Neither can it be proued by the word of God, that the Sacraments or any other of the ordinances of God, conteine any thing contrary to nature.

This doctrine of the Proteſtantes touching this Sacrament, is alſo euidently grounded vpon the word of God. For firſt of all, we doe ſay and beleue according to the articles of our faith, that Ieſus Chriſt is aſcended into heauen, from whence he ſhall come, not ten thouſand times a dry, but only once at the laſt day, when he ſhall come to iudge both the quick and the dead. Which thing S. Peter declareth very openly, when (in ſpeaking of the laſt comming of our Lord) he ſayth thus: Act. 3.21 Whom the heauens ſhall contein vntill the full ſetting of all things in perfecte ſtate, which God hath foretold by the mouthes of all his holy Prophetes, that haue beene ſince the beginning of the world.

And Ieſus Chriſt himſelfe alſo did wel geue vs to vnderſtand, that we ſhould not beleue that his body after his aſcention ſhould euery day return hither on the earth, nor remayne ſhut vp in boxes, when he ſaid to his diſciples, which found themſelues greeued at the ſhedding of a little ointmēt vpon his body: Mat. 26.11 You ſhall not haue me alwayes with you. And yet notwithſtanding we muſt beleeue, that by the efficacie of his grace, he will alway be with vs, as he declared to his Apoſtles, in ſending them throughout the world to preach the doctrine of his grace, ſaying vnto them: Behold, I am alwayes with you, Mat. 28 euen vnto the end of the world. And we muſt furthermore conſider that the body of Chriſt was made in all points like vnto the bodies of other men (except ſinne) as the ſcriptures do witnes: Hebr. 4.17. In ſo much that it hath euer had, and ſtill hath at this preſent, a certain meaſure of greatnes and thicknes, as the bodies of other men haue. Wherupon it followeth of conſequence, that his body neither is, nor euer hath been, in any mo places than one at one time.

And therefore when he celebrated hys holy ſupper with hys Diſciples, the day before he ſuffered hys death & paſſion, his body which ſate at the table, was not in ye bread which he gaue thē: for the nature of a true body doth not permit it to be in any moe places than one at one tyme. And if they reply that a glorified body may be in many places at one inſtaunt: the aunſwere thereunto is, that the body of Chriſt was not thē glorified but mortall, at the tyme when hee celebrated hys holy ſupper, & was put to death the day after, Math. 17.2. and that the wordes of the holy ſupper cānot as now be true in any other ſort, than they were whē he ſpake them and inſtituted the Sacrament. And therefore this replication is impertinent, and beſides that it is vntrue: Luk. 24.39 for the body of Chriſt, hath not through his glorification, loſt the qualities of a perfect body, whiche is to be felt, to haue fleſh and bones, and to be contayned within the compaſſe of certayne bowndes. And therefore when hee celebrated the holy ſupper, hys body was not in the bread which he gaue to hys Diſciples, and much les was the bread tranſubſtantiated into hys body. Whereof it followeth, that theſe words of Ieſus Christ, This is my body, This is my bloud, ought to be vnderſtood ſacramētally, as if he had ſaid, This is the ſacrament of my body & of my bloud: becauſe that (as is aforeſayd) ye nature of a very true body in deede, permitteth vs not to vnderſtand, that euery morſell of the bread which he gaue to his diſciples was his owne natural body. Alſo ye words which S. Luke and S. Paul vſe in ſpeaking of the Sacrament of his bloud, Luk. 22.20 1. Cor. 11.25. do well declare that it is ſo to bee vnderſtood.

For they ſay not that Chriſt ſayd This is my bloud: but rather this cup is the newe couenaunt in my bloud. Neuertheleſſe wee muſt thinke it all one with the other ſpeach, where it is ſayd this is my bloud, or els ſhould S. Luke and S. Paule be contrary to S. Mathew and S. Marke, which were vngodly to beleue So that if it be graū ted (as truth is) that to ſay this is my bloud, is aſmuch as to ſay this cup is the couenant in my bloud: It followeth playnely that this manner of ſpeaking, ought to be vnderſtoode of the ſacrament of his bloud, or of the ſacrament of the new couenant of his bloud, which is all one, and commeth all to one ſenſe.

For the bread and the wine of the ſupper, are the ſacramentes of the body and bloud of our Sauiour Ieſus Chriſte, and of the newe couenaunt which he maketh with vs: becauſe yt in receiuing this ſacrament with our mouthes, our ſoules do alſo participate and receiue ſpiritually and really, the thing ſignified, which is the body and bloud of Chriſt, in whiche participation conſiſteth the couenant which he maketh with vs.

And in very deed, Io. 6.51.53 Ieſus Chriſt him ſelfe in ſpeaking to his diſciples of the eating of his fleſh and of the drinking of his bloud: (yea and of the ſupper it ſelfe as the Catholickes expound it,) perceiuing them to be offended thereat, tolde them that it ought to be vnderſtood of a ſpirituall feeding, and not of a cruſſhing of his fleſh and hys bones betwixt their teeth, nor of a cā niballike kinde of drinking of mans bloud, as the catholicke ſcholemen of theſe dayes do vnderſtand it. Neither ought it to ſeeme a more ſtraunge interpretation of theſe wordes this is my body, to ſay, this is the ſacrament of my body, thā to make the ſame interpretation of a great ſort of other figuratiue ſpeaches conteined in ye ſcripture.

As for example, where Chriſt ſayth I am the vine, Iohn. 15.1. Iohn. 10.9. 1. Cor. 10.4 Exo. 12.43. Gen. 17. 13. 1. Cor. 12.12 Ephe. 1.23. and my Father is the huſbandman, I am the gate. And agayne it is ſayd the rocke was Chriſt, The Lambe is the paſſeouer, The circumciſion is the couenaunt, The ſacrifice is the clenſing of the law: and Chriſt is the church. For out of queſtion, all theſe textes are to bee interpreted figuratiuely. Thus may you ſee that the doctrine of the Proteſtauntes touching the holy ſacrament of the ſupper, is grounded vpon the pure word of God.

But now as touching the canons. The Catholickes thinke, they make altogether for them, and for the vpholding & maintayning of their tranſubſtantiatiō, as in deed there be of them which do, and chiefly the canon before alleadged, which is an abiuratiō that pope Nicolas cauſed to bee made at Rome, by one Beringariusc. Ego Beringarius de conſec. dist. 2. a deacon of the church of S. Mawrice of Angiers: by which abiuratiō they inforced this poore man of Angiers to ſay and proteſt, that he renounced the doctrine that he had holden aforetime wherby he had maintained that the bread and wine of the ſacramēt remained bread and wine ſtil after the conſecration, & that the body and bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt could not be handled wt the handes of men nor, eaten with their teeth: Declaring that contrariwiſe, he there allowed the doctrine of the Romiſh church and of pope Nicholas, that is to wit, that after the cō ſecration, the bread and the wine doe chaunge and tranſubſtantiate themſelues into the very body and bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, and that the prieſt in putting the ſacramēt into the mouthes of the faythfull, doth ſenſibly handle Chriſtes very body it ſelfe, and that the faythfull doe crowze and craſhe it betwixt their teeth. But agaynſt this goodly abiuration racked by pope Nicholas and a hundred and fourtene biſhops out of this pore Deacon whom they helde amongeſt them in their clawes, there are many other canōs to be oppoſed, which are of a better ſtampe. Thus ſayth one of them which is taken out of S. Auguſtine, wher he interpreteth theſe wordes of the Lord,c. Prima quidem de conſec. diſt. J. The wordes which I haue ſpoken vnto you are ſpirit & life: meaning of the eating of his fleſh and of his bloud. Theſe words (ſayth he) are ſpirit and life to thoſe that vnderſtande them ſpiritually: But to thoſe that vnderſtand them carnally, they are neither ſpirit nor life. You ſhall not eate this bodye that you ſee, neither ſhall you drinke the bloud which they ſhall ſhed that ſhall crucifye me: the thing that I commend vnto you, is a ſacrament: If you vnderſtād it ſpiritually, it will quicken you the fleſhly vnderſtanding thereof auayleth nothing at all. Afterwards he concludeth thus: The Lord ſhall be ſtill aboue vntill the end of the world, but yet in the meane while his truth ſhal remayn here amongeſt vs. For it muſt needes be that the body wherein he is riſen agayne, is in a place certayne, but his truth is ſpred euery where throughout the worlde. And to ſhew that the fleſh of our lord is not cruſhed ſo betwixt the teeth as Beringarius ſayth in his abiuration: here is an other canon taken alſo out of S. Auguſtine, which ſayeth thus.c. Vt quid paras deutē. de conſec. dist. 2. To what purpoſe dooſt thou prepare thy teeth and thy belly? beleue and thou haſt eaten: for to beleue in the Lord, is to eat the bread, and to drinke the wine, who ſo beleueth in him, eateth him. And an other Canon following ſayth thus. That which is ſeene and perceiued with the eies, is the bread and the cuppe: c. Qui man ducant. de conſec. diſt. 2. but as in reſpect of ſayth (which ſeeketh to be taught) the bread is Chriſts body and the cup is his bloud. And becauſe the receiuing of the ſacrament is ſpirituall: It followeth, that at that ſupper the wicked receiue but the ſignes onely, & not the things ſignified, whiche are the ſpirituall meat of Chriſtes body and bloud.

And the ſame is auowed by an other Canon which ſayth:c. Qui diſcordat. ibidem. He that agreeth not with Chriſt, eateth not his fleſh, nor drinketh his bloud, though he receiue the ſacrament to his vtter vndoing and damnation. By theſe Canons it appeareth plainly that tranſubſtantiation is reproued and condemned, and ſo by coſequence the locall worſhipping of the body of chriſt in the ſacrament of the bread and wine. But before I paſſe out of this matter. I will alleadge one text of S. Auguſtines,Au. de doctr Chriſt. lib. 2 cap. 10.16. which is ſo cleare and fitte to confute this tranſubſtantiatiō, as is poſſible. For firſt of all, (that men may learne to know what manner of ſpeaches in the ſcriptures are to be taken figuratiuely and what are to be taken according to the letter) he ſetteth downe this rule which is a very notable one. If there be any thing (ſayth he) ſo ſpokē in Gods word as that it can not properly agree with the comelines of good maners, A rule wherby to know figuratiue ſpeeches from playne ſpeches. nor with the trueth of fayth: you muſt take the ſame to be figuratiuely ſpoken. Afterwardes to make this rule plain by examples, he ſayth theſe very wordes. If then the maner of ſpeaking be a precept, ſo as it forbiddeth any crime and miſbehauiour, or commaundeth the thing that is good, and behoue full: ſuch maner of ſpeaking is not figuratiue. But if it ſeeme to commaund an euill fact, or to forbidde the thing that is good and behouefull: then is it ſpoken figuratiuely. Vnleſſe you eate the fleſhe of the ſonne of man (ſayth our Lord) and drinke his bloud, you ſhall haue no life in you. By this maner of ſpeaking he ſeemeth to commaunde a cruelty and an euill facte, in eating of his fleſhe and drinking of his bloud, therefore it is a figure wherby we be commaunded to become partakers of the paſſion of our Lord, and to imprint gentlye and profitably in our memories, that his fleſh was māgled and crucified for vs. The Scripture ſayeth likewiſe. If thine enemye hunger feede him, if he be a thirſt geue him drink, no doubt but in this caſe he commaundeth a good deede. But wheras it followeth, for in ſo doing thou ſhalt heape coales of fire vpon his head: foraſmuch as thou mayeſt thinke that he commaundeth a malicious deed: doubt not but that this manner of ſpeache is figuratiue, and that thoſe wordes may be taken two manner of waies, the one to do hurt, the other to do good. Thou oughteſt therfore rather to conſtrue them according to charitye than otherwiſe: and by thoſe burninge coales, to vnderſtand the burning ſighes of repentaunce, wherby the pride of the party is healed, in that he repenteth himſelf to haue bene an enemy to ſuch a one as releeueth his miſery and neceſſity. Alſo it is written, who ſo loueth his ſoule ſhal loſe it. Now, It is not to be thought that he forbiddeth ſo requiſite a thing as the ſauing of a mans owne ſoule, but that this ſpeache ought to bee taken figuratiuely. He ſhall loſe his ſoule, that is to ſay, he muſt ſuppreſſe and forſake the froward & vntoward dealing, wherunto his mind is now geuen: by meanes wherof he is ſo greatly wedded to theſe temporall things, that he hath no regard of the euerlaſting things. Agayn it is alſo written, Shew mercy and receiue not the ſinner. The latter part of this ſentēce ſeemeth to forbidde a good deed, for it ſayth, receyue not the ſinner. Vnderſtand therefore that this is ſpoken by a figure, taking the ſinner for the ſin, to the ende that thou admit not any ſinne.

Thus haue you heard the very wordes of S. Auguſtine, which doe very well declare vnto vs (as well by the rule as by the firſt example which he ſetteth downe) that the eating of ye fleſh and bloud of chriſt in his ſupper, ought to be vnderſtoode ſpiritually & ſacramentally, and not after the manner of the cannibals (which is vtterly voyd of all humanity and good manners) as thoſe tranſubſtantiatiers would make vs beleue.

And whereas the catholickes vphold,The ſupper ought to be receiued in both the kindes. that this ſacramēt ought not to be diſtributed vnto the lay people but by halfes (which they doe terme vnder one kinde) the ſame is expreſly cō demned by their owne canons, as hie treaſon towardes God. For you ſhall here what a canon ſayth, which is taken out of the decrees of Pope Gelaſius.

It is done vs to vnderſtand, c. Comperimus. ibidem that ſome hauing receyued the holy ſacrament of the body, do abſtayne from the cup of the holy bloud, which thing they ought not to do: for in aſmuch as it is euident, that in ſo doing they entangle themſelues (in I wot not what a kind of ſuperſtition) they ought to receyue the ſacrament whole togither, or els to abſtayne from it altogither. For the deuiding a ſunder of one ſelfe ſame miſtery, can not be done without great trechery. And furthermore where as the moſt part of the lay catholikes, do content themſelues with the receyuing of the ſacrament onely once a yeare, (which is at Eaſter) they are condemned by the canons, which declare that thoſe are not to be taken for catholikes, which receyue not three times in a yeare. Theſe be the very wordes of a cannon taken out of the councell of Agatha. c. Seculares ibidem. The laye people which receyue not the Lordes ſupper, at Chriſtmas, at Eaſter, and at whitſontide, let them not bee taken ne reputed for Catholikes. Thus may all men perceyue & iudge, with what manner of paſſion theſe catholikes are caried away, which do ſo boldly condemne the Proteſtants as heretiques for their doctrine concerning this poynt of the ſupper of the Lord, and ſo do ſpitefully name them Sacramentaries, as though they denied this ſacramēt. For in ſo doing, they do alſo vnawares condemne their owne cānons, which otherwiſe they eſteme ſo greatly, that many of them do attribute more authority vnto thoſe Cannons, than to the holy ſcripture: ſaying that they be the determinations of the holy mother church, wherunto they ought to ſticke bicauſe the ſcripture is to obſcure, and may be taken both wayes. But indede it is nothing ſo: for the ſcripture hath but one ſence, which is eaſy to be found out of a man that is willing to learne by conferring one text with another. But the cannons are in many caſes quite contrary one to another. I know full well that too ſhift off theſe contrarieties, the ſchole men ſay that we muſt always hold vs to thoſe that were laſt made. But I anſwer them that that is aſmuch to ſay, as we muſt alwayes hold vs to the worſt. For euery man of ſound iudgement may always eaſely perceyue, that the ancient cannons are better than thoſe of latter tyme.

And further, to abate the authority of their canōs by their canōs thēſelues I ſay, that the cannons do will vs to ſerch the vnderſtāding of the obſcure textes of the ſcripture, in the ſcripture it ſelfe, And thoſe which ſeeke it elſewhere, are the very ſcholemaſters of errour. Theſe are the very wordes of a cannon. What is more vngodly, c. Quid autem. 24. q. 3 than to hold an vngodly doctrine, and not to beleue thoſe that are moſt wiſe and learned? But all ſuch do fall into this kind of ignorance, as make not their recourſe to the wordes of the Prophets, to the writing of the Apoſtles, and to the authority of the Euangeliſtes, to learne the knowledge of the truth in any obſcure poynt, but will needes truſt to their own wit And therefore they become ſcholemaiſters of errour, becauſe they liſt not to be diſciples of the truth.

Which cannon in very deede, doth deeply in few wordes condemne the ſcholedeuines that make more accompt of the authority of ye Cannons and doctors of the church, than of the very text of the ſcripture, which they accompt to be to obſcure. And true it is, that ſome textes of the ſcripture, are in ſome places very darke: howbeit there is no text ſo obſcure, but it may be made playne by other textes of the ſame ſcripture, Specially if they reſort (not to the cannons and decretalls, but) to the Hebrue text for the the olde teſtament,Aug de doc. Chriſt. c. 11. and to the Greeke text for the new teſtament, as S. Augustine doth teach vs, who ſayth in this wiſe.C. vt veterū diſt. 9. Such as vnderſtand the latine tongue, muſt for the better vnderſtanding of the whole Scriptures, haue the knowledge of two other languages more: that is to wit, of the Hebrue, and of the Greek, to the end they may haue recourſe to the very fountayne of the originall coppies, when the diuerſitye of the Latin rranſlations doth breede any doubte. And hereto accordeth a Canon which ſayth thus: Like as the trueth of the things that are contayned in the old Teſtament, ought to be examined by the Hebrue books: Euen ſo the truth which is written in the new Teſtament, ought to be made playne and cleere by the Greek bookes.

I beſech you what can be braied aagaynſt this Canon, by the whole herd of theſe Aſſes, which are ſo bold as to ſay, that the Hebrue and Greeke tongues be the Languages of Heritickes, and therefore doe vtterly reiect and condemne them. Do they not by the ſame meanes, condemne the canons and auncient doctors? And if they condemne them: Are they to bee holden for good Catholickes?

Well: let vs come now to ſpeake of the Maſſe.

Of the Maſſe. The viii. Chapter.

THe difference betwixt the Maſſe and the Supper of our Lord is great. For, the Catholick ſchoolemen which vnderſtand what the maſſe is, (for all of them vnderſtand it not) doe ſay, that it is a Sacrifice, whereby the Prieſt offereth vp the body and the bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt vnto God, for the ſoule health, both of the quick and of the dead: Which Sacrifice is accompanied with diuers other parcels as acceſſaries: that is to ſay, with diuers prayers, and diuers texts taken out of the goſpels and epiſtles of the new Teſtament, and with divers verſes taken out of the Pſalmes of Dauid, and other bookes of the olde Teſtament, and interlarded throughout with many and diuers Ceremonies. And this goodly omnigatherū hath bene patched together at many & Sondry tymes, by dyuers Popes. And that is the cauſe why the Catholickes do put the maſſe among the cō maundementes of their holy mother Church. For this commaundement, Thou ſhalt heare maſſe vpō the Sondayes, and vpon other feaſtfull dayes inioyned, is the firſt cōmaundement of the Church of Roome. But aſfor the ſupper of our Lord, It is no ſacrifice, but an holy bancket, which is prepared to put vs in mynde of thonelye and ſoueraigne ſacrifice, whereby our Lord Ieſus Chriſt himſelfe was once for all ſacrificed for our redemption, and to make vs pertakers of his body and bloud, by the ſpirituall and effectuall eating thereof: So that there is noe more lykenes betweene the celebrating of the Lordes ſupper and the celebrating of the maſſe, than is betwixt geuing & taking, which are things far differyng, For, in the ſupper, the faythfull receyue the body and bloud of Chriſt: but in the Maſſe, the Prieſt geueth, or offereth vp Chriſt wholly vnto God the Father, as an hoſt of ſacrifice.

Now it muſt needes be graunted, that in this poynt of the Maſſe, the catholickes and the Proteſtantes doe vtterly diſagree, And that the ſame diſagreement is the principall cauſe, why the Catholicks do ſo extreemely bate the doctrine of the ſayd Proteſtants. For they eſteeme the maſſe to be one of the principall poyntes of the Chriſtian religion, and therfore think it very ſtraunge, that the Proteſtants ſhould be ſo bould as to reiect it, ſyth it hath dured ſo long tyme, and is cō poſed of ſo many good things, drawē out of holy Scripture, the whiche the Proteſtantes ſeeme to reiect, in reiectyng the texts that are taken out of it.

In deede theſe reaſons geue ſome likelyhood wherby to iudge ſo, without hearing the other partye. But if the Catholickes will vſe a little patience, and here the replies of the Proteſtantes: they ſhall not finde them ſo voyde of reaſon as they thinke. For firſt they ſay, that the onely ſacrifice, whereby Chriſt hymſelfe was ſacrificed once for all, is more than ſufficient for the ſaluation of the whole worlde. Yea & though he had ſhed but one only drop of hys precious bloud vpon ye croſſe: It had bene ſufficient to haue ſatiſfyed the Iuſtice of God his father, and to waſhe away the ſinnes of all men, which ſhould be borne into the world in an hundred thouſand yeres, if the world ſhold laſt ſo long, for that inaſmuch as he was the ſonne of god, the dignity of his prieſthoode and the infinite greatnes of hys Sacrifice, are of ſufficiency and worthines inough and more than inough, to doe away the innumerable ſinnes of all men hetherto borne, or hereafter to be borne. And therefore it is great outrage (ſay the Proteſtants) to our Sauiour, to crucifie hym new agayne (as they do in the maſſe) to obtayne remiſſion of ſinnes, and lyfe euerlaſting, for the quick and the dead for it is all one, as to ſay, that hys onely once ſacrificing of himſelfe, is not ſufficient to take away our ſinnes, and to obtayne vs lyfe euerlaſting, becauſe that if they held it for ſufficient and perfect, (as in truth it is) it ſhould follow, that it were in vayne to do it any more.

And is it not a great blaſphemy, to ſay that the oblation and ſacrifice of the death and paſſion of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt is not ſufficient for the ſaluation of the whole world? Truely it is not to be douted, for although it be nether auailable nor appliable to any other, than to ſuch as beleue in him: yet notwithſtanding his ſacrifice is more thā ſufficient to ſaue all the world. And furthermore wheras the Catholickes (at the leaſt wiſe the ſimple common people) imagine that the Proteſtants in reiecting the maſſe, doe reiect the holy Sacrament of the body & bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, they deceyue themſelues greatly: for contrariwiſe, the Proteſtantes hold the ſame ſacrament in his true perfection, as we haue ſhowed in the Chapter going before.

Neither do they reiect the textes that are ſtuffed into the Maſſe, and be taken out of the holy Scripture: But they like much better to read & learn them in the bible it ſelfe, than in the Maſſebooke. Neither do they reiect the good prayers which are mingled in the Maſſe: but they ſay it is much better to pray to God with a contynual prayer, for Princes & Magiſtrates, for the Shepheards of the church, for the neceſſities of all the people, for the remiſſion of ſinnes, for thoſe which are ſick and afflicted, for the conſeruation of the faithfull, for the inlightening of the ignorant, and for the aduancement of the kingdome of Ieſus Chriſt, as they themſelues doe: than to ſay an Oremus or particular prayer for euery of theſe thinges as the Prieſt doth in his maſſe, which ſayth now one Oremus for himſelfe, and by and by another for the Pope, and 〈◊〉 a third for his benefactors, and for thoſe that are departed, and often times for brute beaſtes, as is done in the Maſſe of S. Anthony.

For beſides that the moſt part of the prayers in the maſſe be not allowable by the word of God: It is certaine that men pray more hartely, more aduiſedly, and with greater zeal when the prayer is contynued to the end without interruption, than when it is ſayd by iumps with often interruption.

Beſides this, the people which do harken to the Prieſtes Oremus, cannot ſet their mindes well vpon the prayer which he is ſaying, becauſe they vnderſtand it not, nor often times the Prieſt himſelfe.

To be ſhort therfore, by this doctrine of the Proteſtants, God is better honored, than by the doctrine of the Catholicks. For the Proteſtants in not admitting any other ſacrifice than that which our Lord Ieſus Chriſt himſelfe did make of his own body vpon the croſſe, which ſacrifice they eſteeme to be very ſufficient and perfect for our ſaluation, doe therby yeald the honor and the effect of our felicity, vnto our Lorde Ieſus Chriſt onelye: wheras the Catholiques doe attribute parte of his honor to the Prieſt, and parte to the ſacrifice of the Mas.

Likewiſe the Proteſtantes doe much better honor God, in learning the texts of Scripture in the Bible it ſelfe, which is the very originall Record of his will: than thoſe which wil needes learn them in the Maſſebook, where they be confuſedly packed and vnaptly applyed.The only ſacrifice of Chriſt is our ſaluation. And now to ſhew that the doctrine of the Proteſtantes (which admitte the only Sacrifice of Chriſt, and reiect the Sacrifice of the Maſſe) is euidently grounded vpon the holy Scripture, there needeth no other witnes than the Apoſtle to the Hebrues, For, firſt he doth teſtifie vnto vs, that there is none other Sacrifice for the remiſſion of mennes ſinnes, but Ieſus Chriſt only, and that he himſelfe by his own bloud, hath obtayned for vs an euerlaſting redemtion: For thus he ſayth: Chriſt being become the high Prieſt of the good things that are to come, Heb. 9.11.12 by a greater and more perfect Tabernacle not made with hands. That is to ſay, not of this building, nor by the bloud of Goates and Calues, but by his own bloud, is entered in once into the holy place, and hath found eternall redemtion. And to the end we ſhould not thinke that Chriſt is no more a Prieſt, but that although he was once a Prieſt, yet as now he hath reſigned that office vnto others: The Apoſtle teſtifyeth that he is a Prieſt ſtill, and euer ſhall be, ſaying thus of him: Heb. 6.4.5.6. Thou art a high Prieſt for euer, after the order of Melchizedech. And becauſe we ſhold not thinke that there ſhould be any other prieſt thā he: the Apoſtle teacheth vs yt there may be none other, in that he ſaith that no man may take the honor of high prieſt vnto himſelfe, except he be called of God, as Chriſt was called to that office by his Father. Theſe be his very words: No man may take that honor vpon him, but he ſhall enioy it, which is called of God, as was Aaron. Neyther hath Chriſt preſumed of himſelfe to be made high Preeſt, but he hath beſtowed that dignity vpon him, which fayde vnto him: Thou art my ſonne, this day haue I begotten thee.

Now as we are taught by this text, that neyther there is, nor ought to be any mo then one Sacrifice for the forgeuenes of ſins, that is to wit, Ieſus Christ, which is and ſhalbe the high preeſt for euer: So are we taught alſo by other texts, that there is but one only Sacrifice once offered for all ſinnes, and to obtayn euerlaſting life, which is, the death and paſſion of Ieſus Chriſt our Saviour. And that we need none other Sacrifice for the remiſſion of our ſinnes but only that. This is the very text of the Apoſtle, which is ſo playn and cleere as nothing can be more. By the which will we are made holy, Hebr. 10.10 14.18. euen by the offering of the body of Chriſt once for all. For by that one offering hath he made them perfect for euer, which are to be ſanctified: & where remiſsion of ſinnes is, there needes no more Sacrifice for ſinne.

Which words of the Apoſtle are a very definitiue ſentence pronounced againſt the Maſſe. For if there be no more offering for ſinne, what ſhall become of the maſſe, ſeeing it is no other thing in ſubſtance (as the very words of the conſecration doe declare) but a Sacrifice and an offering for the forgeuenes of the ſinnes of the quick and the dead? And in very deede the Catholick Schoolemē not being able by any meanes to rid themſelues of theſe textes which are ſo playne and cleere, do ſay for their refuge, that the Mas is not a very Sacrifice in deed, but a remembrance of the only and true Sacrifice of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt.

But the anſwere to this ſhift of deſcant is very eaſie. For ſeeing they doe maintayne that the very body of Chriſt is in the mas, and that the bread of the ſingingcake is changed into his very body, and the wine into his very bloud: And that they breake his body in peeces, and offer vp both the body and the bloud in Sacrifice vnto God: It followeth of neceſſitie, that their opinion is, that it is a very Sacrifice and not a remembrance only.

On the other ſide, the proteſtants doe ſay that the remembrance of the true Sacrifice of Ieſus Chriſt, ought to be done by celebrating his holy ſupper after the ſame maner that he hath appointed it. For he hath ordayned that his Supper ſhould be celebrated by many at once, becauſe it is a ſacramentall communion of the body and bloud of our Sauiour, by the which we are made one body, and as it were one loafe in Ieſus Chriſt, & become partakers of one ſelfeſame bread of euerlaſting life.

Theſe are the wordes of S. Paule vpon the ſame matter: 1. Cor. 10.16.17. Is not the cup of bleſsing which we bleſſe, a partaking of the bloud of Chriſt? And is not the bread which we breake a partaking of the body of Chriſt? For we that are many are one loafe and one body, becauſe we be al partakers of one bread. By which text it appeareth euidently that the remembrance of the Sacrifice of our Sauiour ought to be vſed in celebrating the holy Supper by many together, accordingly as when he did inſtitute and celebrate it with his Diſciples, they were many together. And ſo conſequently it followeth, that the Mas neither is, nor can be a true remembrance of the ſacrifice of Chriſt, ſeeing that none taketh part of it but the prieſt him ſelfe. Now let vs come to the Canones.

The Canons which we haue alleaged in the former Chapter, when we ſpake of the Lordes Supper, doe ſufficiently confute this Tranſubſtā tiation (which is the very principall parte and foundation of the Maſſe:) And therfore we will ſpeake no more of that point.Abſurdities riſing of Tranſubſtā tiation. But I will ſpeake of certain difficulties, into the which the Tranſubſtantiatiō hath led the ſchole diuines, as it hapneth commonly (according to the ſaying of the Logicians) that in admitting one abſurditie, there follow many moe. The ſchole doctors hauing once graunted that the bread and wine in the Maſſe, are Tranſubſtantiated into the very body and bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, are greately troubled how to reſolue diuers other queſtions,C. Cum Marthae queſiuiſti. extr. de celebr. Miſſ. which haue growen vpon the ſame matter. Pope Innocent the third reciteth one of them, which he ſayth was greatly debated amongſt ye ſayd Scholedoctors, (howbeit in ſuch ſort, as they knew not how to determine it) That is to witt, whether the water which the preeſt putteth into the chalice with the wine, be tranſubſtātiated into bloud or not, for they imagine, that water muſt nedes be put into the chalice where the wine is, bicauſe it is written that out of the ſide of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, there did iſſue both bloud and water.

Notwithſtanding, their opinion is, that there ought to be more wine than water.C. Pernicioſus. extr. eo For Pope Honorius the third, did ſharply checke a certayne Biſhop, who in ſinging maſſe did put more water in his chalice then wine: wherupon grew a great diſputation amongſt the Scholediuines, as Pope Innocent, reporteth. For ſome of thē held opinion, that the water was not Tranſubſtantiated into wine, but remayned naturall water ſtill, bicauſe (ſay they) there was water in the bloud which iſſued out of the ſide of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, when he was vpon the Croſſe. And therfore, ſeeing that the wine in the Chalice at the maſſe tyme, is Tranſubſtantiated into the very bloud: it muſt needes be, that the water remayneth water ſtill, to the ende that there be an anſwerable reſemblance, aſwell of the water as of the bloud. Others ſayd, that although it were graunted that water, muſt needes remayne ſtill in the Chalice with the bloud, yet notwithſtanding it muſt alwayes be beleeued, that the water which the prieſt putteth into the Challice, is turned into the ſelfe ſame water which iſſued out of the ſide of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt. Which opinion ſeemeth to haue moſt ſhew of wit, and moſt proportionble reſemblance agreeing to the matter, though at the firſt ſight it might ſeeme an abſurde thinge, to ſaye that water is turned into other water. For looke by what reaſon the wine is trā ſubſtantiated into the very bloud, by the ſame reaſon is the water changed into the water.

The third opinion is taken out of Galene, and other Phiſitions, which ſay that mannes body is compounded of fower humors. That is, of bloud, of flewme, of melancholy, and of choller: and therfore (ſay they that are of that opinion) it is very like, that when the Euangeliſt ſayd, that with the bloud there iſſued water out of the ſide of Ieſus Christ, he meant that there iſſued out fleame, which is a watry humor: Wherupon they doe conclude, that in the Maſſe water was changed into fleame.C. in quadā extr. de celeb. Miſſ. But this opiniō was condemned by the ſayd Pope Innocent, in a letter which he ſent to the Biſhop of Ferrara.

The fourth opinion is of ſuch as vphold that the water alſo is changed into bloud, as well as ye wine. Which opinion the ſaid Pope Innocent graunteth to haue in it, not moſt truth, but moſt likelyhode of trueth: Becauſe (ſaith he) water is often times in the Scripture taken for the multitude of the people: ſo as the vnion which is made betwixt the water and the wine by the tranſubſtantiating of the ſame water into wine, doth ſignifie vnto vs the true knitting together of Chriſt with his people, by ſuch a bonde as cannot be broken. Truely, a reaſon drawen out of a quintiſens of the ſubtilties of Scotus, otherwiſe called Duns. Marke here the goodly queſtions, or rather the fonde and heatheniſh dotages, wherin the Schoolemen and the Popes haue wrapped themſelues, by the meane of their Tranſubſtantiation.

Likewiſe alſo they finde themſelues greatly cumbred in anſwering theſe other queſtions: that is to wit, if a mouſe or a rat doe happen to eate the Sacrament of the hoaſt, whether ſhe eat the very body or the accidents only. Again, whether the Accidentes can be without a ſubiect, and whether Accidentes can be eaten or no. Alſo, whether the Accident without the ſubiect may haue the taſt of the wine, and geue nouriſhment to the body: and ſuch other vaine queſtions, whereof they can geue none but very abſurde reſolutions, becauſe the preſuppoſing of tranſubſtantiation, is nothing but abſurditie.

Beſides this the Canons ſay not that our Lord Ieſus Chriſt did ordayne the Mas, but they affirme that it was S. Iames, and S. Baſill. The inuention of the Maſſe fathered vpō S. Iames, & S. Baſill. for theſe be the wordes of the Canon: Iames the brother of our Lord according to the fleſh (who had the firſt charge of the Church of Ieruſalem) and Baſil the Biſhop of Ceſarea (whoſe knowledge in the Scripture hath been renowmed throughout the world) haue brought vnto vs the celebrating of the Maſſe. C. Iacobus de conſec. dist. 1. But yet neither S. Iames, nor the other Apoſtles, nor the Euangeliſtes, haue at any time ſpoken of the maſſe in their wrytings: ſo as there is no likelihood of truth in the report of this Canon, that S. Iames ſhould be the inuenter of the Maſſe. Neither were it to any great purpoſe to ſay that onely Iames of all the other Apoſtles, was the firſt foū der and ſetter vp thereof. For, had it been a good thing, the reſt of the Apoſtles would haue allowed it as well as he: and not being good, he would haue allowed it no more than the reſidue did. Beſides this, S. Iames hath no more ſpoken of it in his Epiſtle, than the other Apoſtles haue ſpoaken of it in theirs. Neither is it to be beleeued that any of them would adde aught to the ordinances of Chriſt their Maiſter.

C • nocte. de Conſ. diſt. 1And as for S. Baſill, the Canon hath vnfitly ioyned him with S. Iames, to haue helped him to make the mas. For he was 350. yeares after S. Iames. Moreouer, there are other Canones, which doe father the inuenting of euery part of the Maſſe vpon other foū ders.C. Eccleſi. diſt. 2 C. Sacra. de conſ. diſt. 2 C. vaſa. eo. diſt. 1. C. Apoſt. eo C. Pacem igitur eo. diſt. 2. Io. Stella venetus de vitis Pontific. As for example, the vſing of vnleauened bread, and the putting of water into the Challice with the wine, they father vpon pope Alexander the firſt. The Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Deus Sabaoth, and the inuention of the Corporace, they attribute to pope Sixtus the firſt. The inuention of Gloria in excelſis, to pope Teleſphorus the firſt. The inuention to vſe chalices of golde and ſiluer (which wer wont to be of wood and glaſſe,) To pope Vrbane the firſt. The ſinging of the great Creed at the Sondaies maſſe, to Pope Marke. The ſaying of Confiteor in the beginninge of the Maſſe, To Pope Damaſus the firſt. The ſtanding vp of the people when the prieſt ſingeth or ſaieth the Goſpell, To Pope Anaſtaſius the firſt. The kiſſing of the paxe, to Pope Innocent ye firſt The inuentiō of anthems. taken out of the pſalmes of Dauid, and the Introites, and Graduels, to Pope Celeſtine the firſt. The inuention of the nine Kirieleyſons, of the Alleluya, and of the offertorye, to pope Gregory the firſt. The Oremus againſt ye Turks Pagans, and Infidels (which in that time did make great warres vpon the Chriſtianes) to Pope Calixte the third. The long prayers which are in the ſecrete words of the conſecration, to Pope Leo the firſt, and to diuers other Authors. So as S Baſill is not found to haue done any thing toward the building of the Maſſe, as may appeere by the Hiſtoriographers which haue written the liues of the Popes, and by the Canones which ſpeake of their particular inuentions.

Now theſe Popes that haue inuented and added euery one ſomthing to the Maſſe, were not al at one time. For betwixt the firſt and the laſt that are here ſpoaken of, there was more than a thouſand yeares: which ſheweth plainly inough, that the Maſſe is but an inuention of men, and therfore deſerueth not to be of ſuch eſtimation as the Romiſh Catholicks doe reken it. For it ought to be ſufficient for vs, to dwell vpon the holy ordinances and inſtitutions of God, and to let goe the inuentions of men, ſeeing that the Scripture forbiddeth either to adde or to diminiſh aught from Gods word.

Inconueniences inſuing to ſuch as heare Maſſe.Yea and there are ſome Canones that ſeeme to diſalow the Mas. For among the reſt, there is one which cō maundeth euery man to receiue immediatly after the conſecration: vpon payne of excommunication, ſo as by that Canon it may be ſayd, that all ſuch as be nowadayes at Maſſe, are excommunicated euery one, ſaue only the Prieſt, becauſe none receiueth but he only. Theſe are the expreſſe words of the ſame Canon:C. peract. de conſec. dist. 2. After the conſecration, let them all communicate, except they will be put out of the church: for the Apoſtles haue ſo ordayned, and the holy Romane Church doth ſo obſerue the ſame.

There is alſo another Canō which forbiddeth vpon the ſame paine of excommunication, that any man ſhould heare the Maſſe of any Prieſt which keepeth a Concubine or any other woman. Theſe are the words of the Canon. We doe commaund moreouer that no man doe heare the Maſſe of any Prieſt, C. Praebet. diſt. 32. whom he knoweth aſſuredly to keepe a Concubine, or any other woman in his houſe: for ſo hath the holy Sinode ordayned vpon payn of excommunication.

By which Canon it appeareth, that a man ſhal in theſe daies hardly heare a Maſſe, without putting himſelfe in danger of excommunication, by reaſon of the notorious whoredome and bawdry which is amongſt the moſt parte of Prieſts. And moreouer, the Canons denounce thoſe perſons to be Idolaters, which heare the Maſſe of any Prieſt or Deacon that is a Fornicator.C Si qui ſ •• diſt. 81. For thus ſaith a Canon taken out of S. Gregory. If any Prieſt, Deacon, or Subdeacon, be ſtayned with the ſinne of fornication: we in the name of the father almighty, & by the authoritie of S. Peter, doe vtterly forbid bim to come into the Church, vntill he haue done penance, and made amendes. And if they continue in their ſinne, let no mā preſume to heare their diuine ſeruice: for their bleſsings ſhall be turned into curſings, & their prayer into ſinne. And this doth the Lord himſelfe witneſſe, where he ſaith by his Prophet, I will curſe your bleſsings. And as many as diſobay this holeſome commaundement, ſhall fall into the ſinne of Idolatry.

Were this Canon wel vnderſtood of the infinite number of pore ignorant ſoules that hold of the Romiſh Religion, and doe ordinarily hear the Maſſes and other Church ſeruices of lecherous prieſtes: I beleeue, they would rather forbeare it vtterly, than defile themſelues ſo wretchedly with Idolatrie. And (as ſaith this Canon) receiue the curſe of God in receiuing the bleſſing of ſuch a prieſt. But ignorance accompanied with error, which hath been long bred and rooted in the Romain Church, doe cauſe the poore people to be content to heare the maſſes of theſe Fornicators. But if a maryed Prieſt ſhould ſing them a Mas, they would ſtone him to death, and not allow his maſſe to be good.

Behold what power long forgrowen error hath ouer poore ignorant people, and how ſtrangely the tirany therof cauſeth their wretched conſciences to goe aſtray. For by the auncient Canons it is a curſed thing to ſhun the offering of a maryed prieſt. or to beleeue that the ſame is to be deſpiſed becauſe he is marryed.

Theſe be the very words of a Canon taken out of the councell of Gangra. C. Si quis. diſt. 28. If any man make difference of a marryed Prieſt, in forbearing to come to his offering, as though he might not doe it becauſe he is marryed: Curſed be he.

And there is yet another Canon which ſaith that no Prieſt hath power to conſecrate ſingingcakes, except he be a man of good life. Which thing ſhould make the Romiſh Catholicks to thinke that they put them ſelues in great danger of Idolatry, when they worſhip the ſinging cake, although it were admitted that their doctrine of Tranſubſtantiation were true, which thing the Proteſtants doe ſtill deny. For queſtionles, by this Canon all be Idolaters which worſhip the ſinging bread that is conſecrated by prieſts of euill life, as the moſt part of them be. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canon:C. Sacerdotes. 1. q. 1 The prieſtes which miniſter the body and bloud of the Lord vnto the people, doe wickedly, in beleeuing that by the law of Chriſt, it is the wordes which the prieſt ſpeaketh, and not his good life which make the conſecration of the Sacrament: And that to doe the ſame, there nedeth but only the ſolemne pronouncing of the prayer, without any merit of the prieſt: for it is written, that the Prieſte which hath any blemiſh in him, may not approch to the Lord to offer any Sacrifice vnto him.

So then by this Canon it may be well ſaid, that in theſe dayes there are very few Prieſtes which haue power to conſecrate.

Moreouer, in theſe dayes they obſerue no parte of the Ceremonies appointed by the Canons, in the ſaying of their Maſſe. For they ought to ſing the Maſſe in ſingle linnen cloth, and not in ſilks of colors. Theſe are the expreſſe words of the Canon. By the opinion of vs all, C. Conſulto de conſecra. dist. 1. we ordain that no man preſume to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Altar in cloth of ſilke, nor in any other cloth of color, but in linnen cloth only, conſecrated by the Biſhop, That is to ſay, made and wouen of flax which groweth vpon the earth, Euen in ſuch like ſorte, as the bodye of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt was buried and wrapped in a ſimple white ſheete made of flax.

There muſt be two at the leaſt to help a prieſt to ſay MaſſeNeither ought they to ſing or ſay Maſſe without two aſſiſtantes, leaſt they ſhould offend in the congruity of Grammer in hauing but one, when they ſaid Dominus vobiſcum, and Orate pro me fratres, ſpeaking in the plurall number. But yet this notwithſtanding, the moſt part of Maſſes are ſaid nowadayes but with one Clarke to accompany the prieſt, yea and often times the Prieſt is conſtrayned to anſwere himſelfe, as it is ſayd by a common prouerbe of a prieſt named Martin. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canō:C. Hoc. quoque. de conſec. diſt. 1. It is alſo ordayned that no prieſt ſhal preſume to ſay maſſe, except he haue two aſsiſtants, ſo as he himſelfe may be the third. For when he ſaith in the plurall number, the Lord be with you, & theſe words of the Memento, Brethren pray for me, it is very conuenient that other folks ſhould anſwere of themſelues to his ſalutation. So as if all theſe Canons be well conſidered, euery man may well perceiue, that the Romiſh Catholicks haue no great reaſon to make ſo great account of their Mas, or to thinke the Proteſtants to be in error, in that they will neither come at it nor allow of it.

Of Maryage. The ix. Chapter.

AS cōcering marriage, ye doctrine of the Proteſtauntes differeth not much from the doctrine of the romiſh catholickes. In deed the Catholickes do terme it a ſacrament, and the proteſtantes ſay it is a holy inſtitution of God, but not a ſacrament: becauſe that in euery ſacramēt, there muſt be an outward ſigne to bee diſcerned wt the eie, and an inward thing ſignified, which is inuiſible, as I haue ſayed of Baptiſme heretofore, ſhewing that in that ſacrament, the water is the outward ſigne, and the waſhing of the ſoule is the inward & inuiſible thing ſignified: And in ye ſupper of our lord, the bread and the wine are the outward ſignes, and the body and the bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt bee the things ſignified, which our ſoules do receiue inwardly and ſpiritually.

But it cannot be ſayd, that in marriage ther is an outward viſible ſigne and an inward & inuiſible thing ſignified: And therfore it is not a Sacrament. Agayne the Proteſtants affirm that marriage is honorable amongſt all ſorts of people, be they lay men or men of the church, noble or vnnoble, rich or poore, becauſe God hath inſtituted it. and hath permitted the vſe thereof to all perſons of what quality ſoeuer they be, and to celebrate the ſame at all ſeaſons: And that to make gloſes and limitations or reſtrayntes of ye which God hath ſet at liberty, is to goe about to be wiſer than God, which in deede is ſtarke fooliſhneſſe, beaſtly preſumption, and heddy trayterouſneſſe.The Papiſts make fornication lawful, and mariage vnlawfull. Contrarywiſe the romiſh Catholickes holde opinion, that it is not lawfull for men of the church to be married at all, nor to celebrate any marriage in Lent, in Aduent, and in the foure ember weeks. And the reaſon whereupon they haue founded this doctrine, is that they haue imagined it to be a ſtayning and defiling of the Churchmen, (which doe handle ſacred thinges) to be married: In ſo much as there hath bene ſome of thē, which haue termed ſecond marriages by the name of honeſt fornicatiō.C. Hac ratione. 11. q. 3 C. Non oportet. & ſeq. 33. q. 4 And yet for all their forbidding of Prieſtes to be married, they haue allowed thē to keep concubines, as we haue ſayd before, in the fourth chap. By meanes whereof they haue geuen them leaue to tranſgreſſe Gods commaundemēt which ſaith, thou ſhalt not commit adultery, by taking from them the liberty of Marriage, which god doth allowe to all perſons. But if it ſhould be aſked them, wherfore prieſtes (whom they eſteme holy and ſacred perſōs) ſhould not vſe marriage, which they call a ſacrament: what would they anſwere? For ſacramentes are meeteſt thinges for ſacred perſons. And if marriage be a ſacrament, (as they holde opiniō it is:) can it defile thoſe which participate the ſame? Truely it is as abſurd a thing to ſay that a Sacrament can defile, as to ſay that whiteneſſe can make blacke. Thus doth it followe that God is better honored, and his ordinances are more ſincerely obſerued by the doctrine of the Proteſtāts, than by che doctrine of the catholicks. The doctrine of the Proteſtantes is clerly founded vpon ye holy ſcripture, whereby Marriage is commaunded to all ſuch as haue not the gift of ſtayednes, as before is ſayd in the fourth chapter. For when God ordayned mariage firſt of all at the creation of world, he gaue this generall rule: It is not good for man to be alone. Gen. 2.18. 1. Cor. 7.2. Alſo S. Paule geuing an other generall rule thereof, ſayth thus: For the auoyding of whoredome, let euery man haue his wife, and euery woman her huſband. And in an other place he ſayth, that to forbidde mariage is a deuiliſh doctrine. 1. Tim. 4.3. And how thē can the followers therof a vow, that their doings in that behalfe are acceptable vnto God? Therfore it is eaſy to iudge, whether of the parties are beſt grounded vpon the word of God, namely whether it bee the Proteſtantes, (who hold opinion that the celebration of Marriage is lawfull to al people, and at al ſeaſōs:) or the Romiſh Catholickes, which mayntayne that it is not lawfull for Prieſtes, Monkes, and Nunnes: nor ought to be celebrated in the lent, aduent, or the foure ember weekes.

There be Canons alſo,That the Mariage of Prieſts is lawfull. which doe flatly cōdemne the doctrine of the romiſh Catholickes in this poynte, and which affirme that marriage ought not to be forbiddē to men of ye church, which thing was alſo maintayned by a good Byſhoppe named Paphnutius, (although himſelfe was neuer married) in the firſt generall counſell holdē at Nice in the countrey of Bithinia, In ye raigne of ye Emperor Constantine ye great: which opinion of his was followed by conſēt of al ye counſel. Theſe are ye words of the Canō:C. Nicena. diſt. 31. The counſel of Nice intending to correct the liues of the Eccleſiaſticall perſons, made certayn lawes called Canons: in conſulting wherupon, it ſeemed to incline to the bringing in of a law, to forbid Biſhops, Prieſts, Deacons, and Subdeacons to lye with theyr wiues which they had taken in marriage before their entring into holy orders. Then Paphnutius ſtanding vppe, ſpake agaynſt it, ſaying that marryage is an honorable thing, and that it is chaſtity for a man to vſe the company of his owne wife. And ſo he perſwaded the Counſell, not to make any ſuch law: alledging this reaſon both right graue and of great importāce, namely that it might be an occaſion of fornication to the eccleſiaſticall perſons thēſelues, or to their wiues. Such matter did Paphnutius alleadge, notwithſtanding that he himſelfe was neuer married: and his aduice was allowed by all the counſell, in ſo much that there was no law made then cōcerning that article, but the matter was left at liberty for euery man to do as he liſted. Loe here a very notable and aū ciēt canon, which hath euerſince bene obſerued and kept in the eaſtern churches, which would neuer ſuffer themſelues to be bound to the vow of ſingle life. And if the weſterne churche of Rome had done the like: Prieſts had neuer filled the world with ſo muche whoredome and wickedneſſe as they haue done. And vnto this Canon of the counſell of Nice, is agreeable the fifteth chap. of the Apoſtolick canōs, (which are allowed, for good & Catholick in the Decrees of Graecian) where it is ſayd thus: If any Byſhop, prieſt, C. Quoniā diſt. 31. C. Placuit. diſt. 26. deacon or Subdeacon, or any other man of the order of Prieſthood, doe abſtayne from marriage, or from eating fleſh, or from drinking of wine, not to make his mind more apt to the exerciſes of godlines, but as in way of miſliking them, forgetting that God hath made bothe male and female, and that all his creatures be good thinges, and ſo thereby blaming and ſlaundering that, which god hath created, let him be corrected, or depoſed and put out of the Church.

By which Canon is condemned not onely the prohibition of mariage vnto prieſtes, but alſo the forbidding of men to eat fleſh vpō certayn daies, whereunto doth well accord, that which S. Athanaſius did write to one Dracontius a Moonke, who refuſed to be a biſhop, becauſe he imagined that the Monkes life had more holines in it, by reaſon that the Moonkes dyd obſerue more ſcrupulouſly the prohybition of marriage, and the eating of certayne meates.Athanaſius in his epiſtle to Dracontius. Well then (ſayth he) let not ſuch things be alleadged to thee by ſuch as counſell thee to ſhunne the charge of a Byſhop. For I haue knowne Byſhops which haue bene great faſters, And Monkes which haue bene great eaters! And Biſhops which haue dronk no wine, & Monks great drinkers of wine: Byſhops which haue bene workers of miracles, & Monks which haue wrought none. Agayne diuerſe Byſhops haue abſtained from marriage, and many monks haue bene maried and had children: And contrariwiſe, there haue bene many Byſhops maried and bene fathers of children: and many Monkes vnmaried. And there haue bene clergie men that haue eaten and drunke, and Moonkes which haue faſted: For both of them be lawfull, and none of them both is forbiden, but euery mā may lawfully choſe which he liſteth.

Whereby this good doctor doth playnly declare, that in his time marriage was not forbidden to menne of the clergye, nor to any monks. And in like manner the auntient Canons accurſe al thoſe, which in exalting virginity do condemne marriage. Theſe be the wordes of the Canon:C. quicūque diſt. 31. Whoſoeuer keepeth virginity or ſingle life, as in derogation of marriage, curſed bee hee, becauſe his folowing of virginity, is not for that it is good and holy. And in very deed, the true virginity is yt which conſiſteth in the mind rather than in the body, as witneſſeth an other Canon, ſaying: It is much better to haue the ſoule a virgin, than the fleſh: C. 2.32. q. 5 yet wer it good to haue them both ſo, if it may be. But if wee cannot bee chaſte to the worldward, let vs yet at the leſt be chaſt towardes God. For a true virgine maye wel be miſuſed, but ſhe cānot be made a whore, becauſe the godly virgine is the church of God, and her chaſtity cannot be defiled by the brothelhouſe. For the chaſtity of the minde aboliſheth the infamy of the place.

For the vnderſtanding of ye which Canon, we muſt haue an eye to the time of the primitiue Church, when diuers among the heathen men did put their bondſlaues (whether they were wiues or maydens) into brothel houſes and common ſtewes, to rayſe gayne of the ſhamefull abuſe of their bodies. And it fel out oftentimes that their poore ſlaues were Chriſtians, and yet full ill againſt their willes, they were faine to ſuffer that ſhamefull abuſe in their bodies, and to become as it were open brothels and harlots, to make gaine to their Maſters. wherof they are excuſed by this Canon, as hauing only their bodies abuſed by a forcible conſtrainte, and not their mindes by conſent of their willes. Now therfore it may wel be diſcerned by theſe Canones, whether this doctrine of the Proteſtants concerning mariage, ought to be reputed erroneous or not, and whether it be not more agreable to Gods word, and the auncient Cannons, than the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholickes. And now let vs proceed on.

¶ Of princes and Magiſtrates. The x, chapter

THe Proteſtants hold opinion that all ſuch as dwel within the lands, Dominions, or Prouinces of any Prince, be they naturall ſubiectes or free Denizens, ought to yeald faithful obedience to him, and alſo to all Magiſtrates vnder him, without any exception of perſons, or of their goods. And that they ought to acknowledge and to honor him as Gods Lieutenant vpon earth, hauing the ſword in his hand, to miniſter iuſtice to al men, and to be the defender and maintayner of Gods commaundements, and to cauſe his Subiectes to obay them. Alſo they hold opinion, that all folke ought to pray to God for the preſeruation and proſperitie of the Prince, and of all other Magiſtrates. And they beleeue that to diſobay ye prince, is a diſobaying of God who hath ſet him vp. And that mē muſt obay him, not only for feare, but alſo for the duety of conſcience, which doth binde vs to obay God, and ſo conſequently the Prince whom God hath commaūded vs to obay.

The clergy exempr thē ſelues from the obedience of princes.But the opinion of the Romiſh Catholicks is, that ſuch as are of the clergie be exempted from this generall rule, and that they be not the ſubiects of temporall Princes, but of the pope: And that ſo by conſequence, the prince neither may, nor ought to leuy any tribute, beneuolēce, loane, or ſubſedy of the Cleargie of his Countreis, nor of their goods:e. Clericis. de immunit ecclie. in 6. Accordingly as Pope Boniface the eight in one of his decrees expreſly forbiddeth all Kings, Princes, Dukes, Earles, Barons, Potentates, Captaines, Officers, Gouerners of Cities and Caſtles, and all other perſons, of what eſtate, degree, or condition ſo euer they be, to doe the like vpon paine of preſent interditing and excommunication, whereof none other but only the Pope himſelfe can geue abſolution.

Alſo they hold opinion, that the Prince (whom they tearme ſecular) hath no authoritie in matters of Tenthes, nor in matters of Matrimony among the lay people, nor in many other ſuch like things.

Thirdly,The Pope chalengeth power to put downe Princes. they hold opinion that the Pope hath power to put down kings and Princes, and to depriue them of their Realmes and Principalities, as Pope Gelaſius vaunteth himſelfe in an epiſtle ſent to the Emperor Anaſtaſius: wherin he alleadgeth the example of Pope Zachary, who depoſed king Chelderike of Fraunce from his kingdome,C. alius. 15. q. 6. not for any wicked doings (ſayth he) but becauſe he was vnfitte to be a king. And did ſet vp king Pipin the father of Charlemaine in his place. Alſo by reaſon of this great authoritie, which the Popes tooke to themſelues ouer kinges, they be puffed vp with ſuch pride,c. Solitae. extra. de Maior. & obed. that they compare themſelues to the Sun, and to Golde, and kinges and Emperors to the Moon, and to leade: tearming themſelues the maſters of them, as the ſame Pope Gelaſius did write to the ſayd Emperor Anaſtaſius. c. Duo. c. quis dubit & diſt. 96.

Euery man therefore may iudge whether doctrine is the better, either that of the romiſh Catholicks, (which doth ſo limmit & cut ſhort the authoritie of kinges and Princes, to augment the greatnes of the Popes and Prelats.) Or that of the Proteſtants, which doe not challenge, but diſalow ſuch limitations, affirming that the Pope hath no ſuch iuriſdiction ouer the Subiects of kings and Princes. And ſeeing that Princes be the Lieutenantes of God here on earth, holding their Scepters and Crowne of him: No doute but the honor which is done to them, is done to God himſelfe. And ſo conſequently, God is better honored by the doctrine of the Proteſtantes, than by the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholicks.

The doctrine of the Proteſtantes is groūded euidently vpon the word of God, which commaundeth all men (without exception of any perſon) to obay the Prince vnder whoſe Dominion they dwell, not only for feare of his ſword, but alſo for conſcience ſake. Theſe be the words of S. Paule, who ſpeaketh generally: Rom. 13.1.5. & Tit. 3.1. Let euery man be ſubiect to the higher powers, for there is no power but of God, and the authorities that be, are ordayned of God, and therefore we ought not to be ſubiect for fear of diſpleaſure only, but for conſcience ſake alſo.

And hereupon S. Chriſoſtome ſaith that this rule is ſo generall, that there is neither Apoſtle, nor Euangeliſt, nor Biſhop, nor other perſon, that is exempted from the obedience of the Prince. And likewiſe S. Peter ſpeaking to al Chriſtians, and to al Gods choſen flock, ſayth thus:1. Pet. 2.15 Submitte your ſelues to all ordinance of man for the loue of God, whether it be to the king as to the chief, or to the gouernors as to thoſe which be ſent and oppointed by the Prince to puniſh malefactors, and to prayſe the well doers.

And the reaſon why euery one ought to yeald obedience to ye Prince, is, becauſe the charge and eſtate which Princes take vpon them, is of God: For, the Scripture doth call Princes Gods, becauſe they are the Lieuetenants of God. Deut. 1.16. Pſal 82.1. 1. Pet. 2.17. And therfore next after God, we ought to feare and honor the Prince, as ſayeth S. Peter: Feare God and honor the king.

And as Salomon doth alſo teach vs, Prou. 24.21. ſaying: My Sonne, feare the Lord and the king. And it is to be noted that in theſe textes, the king is put next after god, as his Lieuetenant preſenting God himſelfe. And we ought not onely to honor and feare the prince: but alſo to pray to God for him, and for all thoſe which are in authoritie vnder him, yt their gouernment may be in peace and tranquility, and that we may liue vnder their obedience in the ſeruing of God with all godlines and goodnes. Theſe be the very wordes of S. Paule: 1. Tim. 2.1. I warne you therfore that before all other thinges, you make interceſsions, prayers, ſupplications, and thankeſgeuinge, for all men, and ſpecially for kings, and for al ſuch as are in authoritie vnder them, that we may leade a quyet and a peaceable life in all godlines and honesty: For that is acceptable before God our Sauiour.

And it is not for any man, not only to exempt himſelfe from obaying the prince, but alſo to deny to pay him tribute, Math. 17.27. & 22.21. ſeeing that our lord Ieſus Chriſt did pay it, and hath commaunded to pay it. S. Paule doth alſo witnes the ſame thing, ſaying yt the duty of conſcience commaundeth vs to pay tribute to princes, becauſe they be the miniſters of God, and ſerue thereunto. Therfore geue vnto euery mā (ſayth he) that which is due vnto hym. Rom. 13.5.6.7. Tribute to whome tribute belongeth, cuſtome to whō cuſtome pertaineth: duty to whom duety belongeth, and honor to whom honor is due. To be ſhort, next after God, wee owe to the Prince all obedience, honour and feare: neither ought wee to thinke it ſtraunge, that God ſhoulde haue the cheefe preheminence, ſeeing that the prince is but his miniſter and ſeruant, and that the Liefetenant ought not to goe before him which putteth him in office, nor the ſeruant before the maſter. And that was the cauſe why Daniell ſaid ſo boldly vnto the king Darius, Dan. 6.2 • that he had made no fault in diſobaying his commaundement, which he could not haue obayed, without offending both God and his own conſcience.

Alſo it was for the ſelfeſame cauſe, that the obedience which the people of Iſraell did yeald vnto their king Ieroboham, (which cauſed Calues of golde to be made, and commanded the people to honor them) is condemned by the word of God. For in matters of Religion we ought to hold the generall rule which S. Peter teacheth, ſaying: We must rather obay God than man. Act. 4 20. The reaſon hereof is the ſame that is alleadged by S. Paule: 1. Cor. 7.23. namely That we be redeemed or bought with the precious bloud of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, which is a thing of ſo great and excellent price, that we ought not to turne away from the ſaluation which he hath purchaſed vs, for any thing in all the world.

The Pope and his clergy ought to be in ſubiection to Princes.We haue heretofore alledged ſome of the decretall Epiſtles of the Popes Gelaſyus, Innocēt the third, and Bomface the eight, by yt which they haue done their indeuour to thruſt down emperours, kinges, and other Princes far vnderneath them: but the auncient Canons ſpeake farre otherwiſe, for by them, euen the Pope himſelfe (whenſoeuer he cōmitteth any fault) ought to be corrected and puniſhed by the Emperour, as Pope Leo the fourth auoweth and confeſſeth in his epiſtle written to the Emperor Lewes, c. Nos fi incompetenter • . q. 7. which epiſtle is made canonicall. If we haue done (ſayth he) any thing which wee ought not, or haue not performed the equity of the law towards your ſubiects, we are ready to amend our fault, by the iudgement of your ſelfe, or of your commiſſioners: for if we which ſhould correct the faultes of other men, do worſſe then they: we be not the children of the trueth, but (which thing I ſpeake with great grief) we be maſters of error, more thā others. Wherfore, we moſt hūbly beſech your maieſties clemency, to vouchſafe to ſend hither ſome commiſſioners of yours, ſuch as feare God, to informe you of our behauiour and to make as diligent inquiſition thereof, as if your imperiall maieſtie were here preſent in proper perſon: and to ſearch out the trueth by peecemeale, not onely of the thinges afore mentioned, but alſo of all other matters which may haue bene reported vnto you: So as by that meanes al things may be determined by lawfull examinatian of the caſe, and nothing remayne to be diſcuſſed and decided hereafter. By which Canon it appeareth playnely, that the Emperour of Rome hath power and authoritye to inquire of ye miſbehauiour and miſdealings of the pope, and that he may by lawful iudgement, condemne and puniſh him when he doth amiſſe. We do alſo read in S. Gregory Greg. Epiſt. lib. 4. epiſt. 29. lib. 5. epist. 163. lib 6. epiſt. 194 lib. 7. epiſt. 114 120. 126. lib 8. epist. 2. lib. 9. epiſt. 60. (who is eſteemed for one of the beſt Popes) that in his epiſtle which he wrote to the kings of fran̄ce of Englād, and of the weſterngothes, he did alwaies call them his children. But when the wrate to the Emperor which raygned in his tyme, whoſe name was Mawrice, hee called him his Lord, and ſpake very humbly vnto him, as vnto hym that was his ſoueraygne, declaring that he did, and would obay the ſayd Emperors moſt mylde commaundementes, (for thoſe be his termes that he vſeth. There are other Canons alſo, by the which all power of Soueraintye is attributed vnto princes, as well ouer the lay people, as ouer the clergye, and ouer the goodes both of the one and of the other. Theſe be ye very wordes of the Canon.c. Tributum 13. q. 8. S. Peter in fiſhing found tribute in the mouth of a fiſh, becauſe that the church ought to pay tribute of ſuch outward good as are ſene to al mē. And the caſe ſo ſtandeth, that for his tribute he was commaunded to pay, not all the whole fiſh which he had caught in fiſhing, but onely the peece of ſiluer which he had founde in the mouth of the fiſh which he had caught, becauſe the church it ſelfe or the preheminence of the place, ought not to be geuen to Emperours, and Kinges, nor to be put in ſubiection to their power. But ſurely (as I ſayd before) that which was found in the mouth of the fiſh, is commaunded to be geuen for the tribute of Peter and of the Lord, becauſe wee ought to pay tribute vnto princes, of the outwarde goods of the church, according to the auncient cuſtome, to the end they may mayntayne & defend vs in good peace and quietnes.

By which canon it appereth, that princes may as well rayſe tribute vpon men of the Church, as vpon ye lay people, although they may not take authority in deuine matters, further than to cauſe obedience to be geuen to the commaundements of God, as it is ſayd in an other Cannon in expreſſe wordes. c. Imperatores diſt. 9. Princes cā not bind mē to lawes that are agaynſt Gods commandements. When Emperors make wicked lawes to maintayne falſhood agaynſt the trueth, it ſerueth to trye the true beleuers, who are crowned with martirdom for perſeuering in the truth. But when they make good lawes and edictes to mayntayne the truth agaynſte the falſhood, the perſecutors are ſtrickē in fear by it, and ſuch as vnderſtand the truth do amend themſelues. Whoſoeuer therefore, doth refuſe to obay the edictes of the Emperoures and princes that mayntayne the true doctrine, doe procure themſelues great puniſhment: but as many as refuſe to obay the edicts made agaynſt the will of God, winne to themſelues great reward. Eor euer ſince the tyme of the prophets, all kinges are blamed, which haue not prohibited, and rooted out from amongſt Gods people, all ſuch thinges as haue bene ſet vppe agaynſt his commaundements. And theſe which haue prohibited thē and rooted them out, are highly prayſed aboue al others. Nabuchodonoſor being an Idolater, did make a trecherous proclamation, that all men ſhould worſhip his Image. But thoſe which refuſed to obay the vngodly law, dealt faythfully and holyly. With this Canon agreeth an other canon taken out of S. Auguſtine, who in expounding the texte of S. Paule, (where it is ſaid) that he which reſiſteth the Prince reſiſteth the ordinance of God,C. Qui reſi •• et. 11. q. 3. ſpeaketh in theſe termes. He that reſiſteth the higher power, doth reſiſt the ordinance of God. Yea, but what if he commaund vnlawfull thinges? truly in that caſe thou muſt not obay him. Conſider the degrees euen of mens lawes. If the ordinary iudge commaund a thing, he ough to be obayed, but not if the gouernour command the contrary. And in this caſe thou deſpiſeſt not the inferior maieſtrate, but of the two thou choſeſt rather to obay the ſuperior, wher in, the inferior maieſtrate ought not too find himſelfe greued, for that his ſuperior is preferred before him. Moreouer, If the gouernour commaunde one thing, and the Prince an other: or rather, if the Prince commaund one thing, and God commaund the contrary, what will you ſay to that? God is the higheſt power, O my ſoueraine Lord, I beſeech you to pardon me, you may cauſe me to bee put in priſon, but god hath power to put me in hell fire. In this caſe thou muſt arme thy ſelfe with the buckler of fayth, whereby thou ſhalt be able to beat back all the firy dartes of the deuill.

Now then, theſe Canons maynetaine the doctrine of the Proteſtants, which affirme that next vnder God, we ought to yeeld all obedience to the Prince, yea although he were an Infidell or a Runeagate as Iulian the Apoſtata was, of whom the canō ſpeaketh thus:C. Iulianuſ. 11. q. 3 Albeit that Iulian the Emperour was an Apoſtota or backſlider: yet had he chriſten ſouldiers that ſerued vnder him, whom whenſoeuer he commā ded to march forward in battaile for the defence of the common weale, they obayed him. But when he commaunded them to marche agaynſt the Chriſtians, thē they acknowledged the Emperour of heauen.

And in good ſoothe,The Pope can geue agene away benefyces. ſo little is the Pope in abled by the auncient Canons, to bereaue kinges and princes of their Realmes and principalities, that he cannot ſo much as geue away a Biſhopricke in any Realme, without the conſent of the pruste vnder whoſe dominion the ſame is, as it appeareth by an Epiſtle of Pope Leo the fourth ſent to the Emperours, Lotharius and Lewes, by the which he doth intreat thē to conſent to beſtow the Biſhopricke of Rets vpon one named Colon. Theſe be the very wordes of the Canon. Seing the church of Rets, c. Reatina. &c. Lectis. diſt. 65. hath bene ſo lōg tyme without a Shepheard, it is requiſite that it ſhould bee ayded by your maieſties authority, and maintained by the power of your gouernement. Wherfore after our moſt hūble ſalutatiō vnto you, we beſeech your clemency to vouchſafe to graunt the gouernement of the ſayed church vnto Colon your humble deacon, that by your maieſties licence, we may (with Gods helpe) conſecrate him Byſhop of the ſame. And if it ſtād not with your liking that he ſhould be Biſhop of that church, then we beſeech your highneſſe that he may haue the Churche of Tuſculan which is now vacant, ſo that being by vs conſecrated Byſhop, he may geue thankes to almighty God and to your jmperiall maieſty.

And it is not to be doubted, but ye both in the time of the ſame Pope Leo, and before his tyme alſo, it was the ordinary cuſtome, not to receiue any Byſhop, without the conſent of the prince, vnder whoſe dominion the biſhoprick was. According whereunto it is ſayd thus in an other canon ſpeaking of ye ſame matter in theſe termes Foraſmuch as we know that the church of God cannot be maintained without Shepheardes: we beſeech your maieſtye (as we are bound to do) to vouchſafe of your imperiall wiſedome, (according to the cuſtome in all auncient time obſerued) to geue vs licēce by your maieſties letters patentes to prouide one, and we will therein obay your will and (by Gods helpe) conſecrate him that ſhal be choſen

To be ſhort, not onely theſe foreſayd canons, but alſo many others do witnes vnto vs, that nother any Byſhoprick, nor yet the Papacy it ſelfe, may be geuen to any without conſent of the Prince: ſo farre off is the Pope frō hauing authority aboue ye Prince. And whoſoeuer will read S. Gregory (eſpecially in the Epiſtle which hee wrote to Mawrice the Emperoure) ſhall finde that he doth often tymes geue the Emperoure thanks for prouiding ſuch & ſuch a church of a good and meete ſhepheard,Epiſt. lib. 4. epiſt. 29. & lib. 6. epiſt. 170. and how he declareth in diuers places, yt hee is and will, be obedient to the lawes and cō maundementes of the Emperoure, as we haue towched here before.

❧ Of the authoritie of the Pope and of the ſucceſsion, and diſcipline in the order of the cleargy. The xi. Chapter.

THe Romiſh Catholickes hold opinion, that the Pope is the ſupreme head, chiefe Shepheard, and vniuerſall gouernor of all the churches of Chiſtendome: as vicar generall of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt. And this doctrine they build vpon a likelihood of great conueniency, that Ieſus Chriſt which is in heauen, ſhould haue a liuetenant here below vpon earth, to pardon the ſinnes of the repentant, & to prouide Curats and Shepheardes for the perticuler churches when they happen to be vacant, and to make lawes and Canons to rule all chriſtē dome in matters of religion & eccleſiaſtical pollicy. They ſay alſo, that this authority ouer all the churches of the world was geuē to S. Peter the firſt pope of Rome, and ſo conſequently to to his ſucceſſors, for becauſe our Lord Ieſus Chriſt ſayd vnto him. Mat. 16.18 Thou art Peeter, and vpon this rocke will I build my church, and the gates of hell ſhall haue no power agaynst it: And I will geue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, and whom ſoeuer thou bindeſt vpon earth, he ſhall bee bound in heauen, and whomſoeuer thou loſeſt vpon earth ſhabbe loſed in heauen.

But contrarywiſe the Proteſtants affirme,Chriſt hath no need of any Lieuetenant or vicar General on earth. that Ieſus Chriſt alone is the ſupreme head, chiefe ſhepheard, and vniuerſall gouernor of the vniuerſall Church whiche is diſparſed throughout the world, and that when he went vp into heauē, he did not appoint any vickar or liuetennant to keepe his place, nother in deede was it needefull. For he that is abſēt himſelfe hath need of a liuetenant: but as for him, he is neuer abſent from his church, but is and alwayes will be with it by his ſpirite & deuine power, vnto the end of the world: So as to ſay that Chriſt hath neede of a liuetē naunt vpō yearth, as though he could not execute his office vpon yearth for all his being in heauen, is as much as to bereue him of his Godhead, which of it owne nature hath no leſſe power and abilitie on earth and in hell, then in heauen where his manhode is reſident. Wherof it inſeweth (according to our firſt maxime) that the doctrine of the Proteſtantes in this poynte, is better thē the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholicke, becauſe the honor that belongeth to Ieſus Chriſt, is better yelded vnto him by that, then by the other. Lykewiſe ye doctrine of the proteſtantes is much better grounded vpon the word of God, then the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholicks.

For S. Paule doth teach vs, that Chriſt is the head of the church, not a head ſeparated or ſet away frō it, but ſurely knit and ioyned faſt vnto it, with all manner of faſtninges & knittinges that a well vnited and well cō pacted bodye ſhould haue. Theſe be his wordes: Ephe. 4.15. To thend that by following the truth with charitie, wee ſhould in all poyntes atteyne to full growth in him which is our head, that is to ſay in Chriſt, vnto whome the whole bodye being throughly knitted and faſtned together, by all manner of faſtninges that may furniſh it out, doth take bodilye increaſe of the power that worketh within it, according to the capacitye of euery mēber, to the full perfecting vp of it ſelf in loue. By which wordes euery man may eaſely iudge, that S. Paule ment to portray out vnto vs the great and ſingular cōiunctiō of the head, (which is Chriſt) vnto his church, in that he ſayth, that he is knit, and faſtened to the ſame, by all manner of faſtenings requiſite to the full furniſhing out of a bodye.

And in an other place he ſayth likewiſe, that Chriſt is the head of the church, working all thinges fully in all the members of his bodye, which is the church. Whereupon it followeth very well, that we ought to haue no other head in the church, to execute and performe the office of Chriſt, foraſmuch as the ſayd performance is reſeruid to Chriſt him ſelfe.

Theſe be the very wordes of S. paule: Ephe. 1.22. And he hath put all thinges vnder his feete, & ſet him aboue all things to be the hed of the church, which is his bodye, and the ful furniſhing out of him, who furniſheth out all thinges fully in all men. Alſo in an other text of S. Paule, it is well declared, that yt church needeth not a liuetenant to hold the place of Ieſus Chriſt her hed.

For he ſayth yt lyke as the huſband, is the hed of his wife: ſo is Chriſt alſo ye hed of his church. And were it meet yt a wife ſhould haue a nother man in her huſbandes ſtead? would not men ſay that the wyfe which would needs haue another man to ſupply her huſbāds roome, were a whore? yes, and euē in lyke wiſe the chaſt and honeſtminded church ought to content herſelfe with her hed which is Chriſt, who is well inough able to gouerne the ſame, without a liuetenant, ſpecially ſeing it ſhould be but ill gouerned by ſuch liuetennants as the moſt part of the Popes haue bene.

Eph. 5.23. This is the very text of S. Paule: For the huſband is the hed of the wyfe, euen as Chriſt is the hed of the Church, who is alſo the preſeruer of hir bodye. Therfore, as the church is ſubiect vnto Chriſt, ſo lykewiſe let women be ſubiect to their huſbandes. Moreouer when S. Paule maketh reckening of the diuers offices which are in the Church, he ſaith that for the gathering together and building vp of the ſame, Chriſt hath ordayned Apoſtles, Prophets, Euangeliſtes, Shepherds, and Teachers: and not that he hath appointed a Pope or an vniuerſall Shepheard to haue ſupremacie ouer the vniuerſal Church, which is diſperſed throughout all the world. And yet it is very certain that S. Paule would not haue forgotten to haue ſpoaken of him, yea and to haue reckned him in the firſt place, if Ieſus Chriſt had ordayned that there ſhould haue bene a pope in his church, to haue bene his lieutenāt. Theſe be the very wordes of S. Paul Therefore he hath appoynted ſome to be Appostles, ſome to be Prophets, Eph. 4.11. ſome to be Euangeliſts, ſome to be Shepheards, & ſome to be Teachers, to gather together the Sayntes through their working in the miniſtery, and to build vp the body of Chriſt. And ſo it appeareth by this text, that there needeth no pope for the building vp of ye church nor for ye work of the miniſtery, but that ye offices before named by S. Paule are ſufficient for yt purpoſe.

And as touching the text of Saint Mathew before alleadged, whereon the Romiſh Cotholickes doe build theyr doctrine concerning the Pope, ſaying that Ieſus Chryſt hath builded his Church vpon S. Peeter the firſt Pope, and geuen him all power ouer the vniuerſall Church. The Proteſtances aunſwere, that the Petra that is to ſay the rocke which is ſpoken of there, is the fayth whereby S. Peter had moſt ſtoutly confeſſed that Ieſus was that Chriſt, the ſonne of the liuing God. For S. Paule doth teach vs, Ephe. 2.20. that Ieſus Chriſt is the head corner ſtone whereon we ought to build. And S. Peter himſelfe doth witnes,1. pet. 2.5. that the true beleuers, (which haue their fayth builded vpon this corner ſtone chriſt) are as liuing ſtones, conched and cemented together vpon it, to fyniſh vp the building of the lords church. And as for ye authority which Ieſus Chriſt gaue vnto Peter, as it is ſayd in the ſame text: They ſayd alſo that he gaue the like to all the reſt of his Apoſtles, as S. Iohn witneſſeth.

Ioh. 20.23.So as it cannot be inferred vpon this text, that S. Peter was ordained to be the onely Soueraygn gouernor of the Chriſtian Church, any more then the reſt of the Apoſtles. And in an other place S. Paule doth wel declare that S. Peter had no more authority then the other Apoſtles: for hee putteth himſelfe in the ſame degree of apoſtleſhip that Peter was. And whē he reckneth vp the chiefeſt Apoſtles, he reckneth firſt S. Iames, then Saynt Peter, and in the third place S. Iohn, wherein he had greatly ouerſhot him ſelfe (which cannot be ſayd without blaming the holy ghoſt) if the ſaying of the Romiſh Catholickes be trew, who affirme that S. Peter was the Prince of the Apoſtles and had ſoueraygne authority ouer them, and ouer the whole vniuerſall church. Theſe be the uery wordes of S. Paule: Gal. 2.8.9. For he which hath wrought by peter, in the office of Apoſtleſhip among the circumciſed, hath like wiſe wrought by me among the Gentiles, and Iames, Cephas, and Iohn, who are esteemed to be the pillers, haue knowne the grace which was geuen me. Neither doth S. Peeter in his Epiſtles, name himſelfe Pope or prince of Apoſtles, or head of the church, or Chriſts vickar, but ſimply, an Apoſtle as the others. And when his companions did geue him charge to go preach in Samaria, he was ſo far of from pretēding to haue any princely authority ouer them: that he obayd them without gayneſeing, as it is written in the Actes of the Apoſtles. Act. 8.14. And therefore it appeareth playnelye by all theſe ſayings, that the doctrine of the proteſtantes is better grounded vpon the word of God, then the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholickes, and conſequently that it is the moſt auncient and true, according to our ſecond Maxime.

Let vs now come to the Canons. Truely when I read theſe Canons, which I wil reherſe hereafter: I maruel that pope Engenie the third (who authoriſed the decres of Gratian and commanded that they ſhould be openly red in the vniuerſities) procured not the vtter defacing & diſſanulling of all the auncient Canons there gathered together, ſeing they be ſo derectly contrary to the doctrine and authority of the popes.The name Pope ſignified in olde tyme a Father, & now a Prince. But it was the prouidence and will of God, that it ſhould ſo be. Now then you muſt firſt of all vnderſtand, that the auncient doctors of the church do oftē vſe this name of pope, which ſignifyeth, a father, and in aunciēt time, was indifferently vſed to all Biſhoppes aſwell meane as great. But in the end, the Boſhop of Rome appropriated the ſame to himſelfe alone, and from that tyme forth, this name of pope hath euer bene taken, (as it is ſtill in theſe dayes) not for a father but for a ſupreme head and vniuerſall Biſhop of all the Chriſtian churches of the world: which title of vniuerſall is reproued by all the auncient Canons, & ſo conſequently the eſtate which the pope of Rome doth take vpon him at this preſent, is condemned: For it is well knowne that he nameth himſelfe the vniuerſall Shepheard or Biſhop, and that he chalengeth authority ouer all churches and councels. Now harken to the very words of a Canō which putteth him to his neckverſe. Let no Patriarke at any tyme vſe the name of vniuerſall. c. Nullus. c. ecce. diſt. 99. For the Patriarke, which nameth himſelfe vniuerſall, taketh the name of Patriarke away from all others. But Godforbid that any of the faythfull ſhould chalendge honor to himſelfe, to the derogation of his brethren, be it neuer ſo little. Wherefore we beſech you of your charity, let none of you from henceforth in his letters, geue the title of vniuerſall, to any man any more leaſt ye take away the title due vnto your ſelues by attributing the ſame vnduely vnto orhers. The next Canon following doth ſing the ſame ſong, which ought to be of ſo much ye more force among the Romiſh Catholicks for that it is taken out of an Epiſtle of S. Gregory ſēt to the patriark of Allexandria: Thus therefore doth he ſay in expreſſe wordes. Behold euen in the very preface of your letters which you wrote vnto me, you go about to caſt the proud name of vniuerſal pope vpon me, euen vpon me (I ſay) who haue forbiddē other men to vſe it. Wherefore I beſech your holines, euen of your curteſy, to do ſo no more, for you take from your ſelfe to geue to an other, without cauſe why. I ſeek not to aduaunce my ſelfe in tytles but in manners: neither thinke I that I ought to purchaſe honour to my ſelfe, with the loſſe of the honour of my brothers, for my honor is to honor the vniuerſall church, and to behaue my ſelfe vprightly towardes my brethren. And I thinke my ſelfe then moſt honored, whē euery of them hath his due honour yelded vnto him. But if your holines name me the vniuerſall pope: then in attributing the whole vnto me, ther is nothing left to others: which God forbid wherefore let vs driue away theſe termes farre from vs, which inflame vs with vanity, and hurt charity. The reaſon of theſe Canons is very euident: namely, for that it is impoſſible for one man to gouerne the vniuerſall church, and to be Byſhop of the whole world, ſeeing that euen they which are beſt able, do finde themſelues greatly combred in the gouerning of one onely Byſhoprick well. Beſides this the title of vniuerſal Biſhop, is to ſtately and proud to be matched with the true Shepheardes of gods church, which ought to walke in humility, voyd of al pride and ambition. The ſame thing is verified by a canō in theſe expres words Whoſoeuer deſireth ſupremacy vpon earth, ſhall finde confuſion in heauen. C. Vlt. diſt. 40. Supremacy aboue others is to be eſchued. And he that ſpeaketh of primacie, ſhall not be nūbred amongeſt the ſeruātes of God. Let euery body therefore ſtudy, not how he may ſeem greater thē others, but by what means he may moſt imbaſe himſelfe. For hee is not the moſt righteous, which amongſt men is moſt honored: but he is moſt honorable, which is moſt righteous Hereunto agreeth well the Canon which ſayth that all churches are equall in authoritye, and that the church of Rome hath no ſuperiority ouer other churches, This Canon is takē out of S. Ierom, and ſayth thus. We ought not to think that there is any ods between the church of rome & the churches of any other place of the world. c. Legimus. diſt. 93. In Fraunce, England, Affrik, Perſia, the Eaſt, and the Indies, and all the Barbarous nations do honor Chriſt, and obſerue one rule of truth. If regard bee to bee had of authority: the world is greater then the City of Rome. Whereſoeuer there is a Byſhop, All Biſhops are of equall authority. be it at Rome be it at Eugubiū, be it at Conſtantinople, be it at Rhegium be it at Allexādria, be it at Thebes, or be it at Garmace: it is all of one worthines & of one ſelfſame degree of prieſthood. The greatnes of Riches, or the meaneſſe of pouerty, ſetteth not a Biſhop in higher or lower degree. To bee ſhort, all of them be the ſucceſſors of the Apoſtles.

Now then it appeareth plainly by theſe Canons, that the pope (who in all his bulles doth name himſelfe the Biſhop of Rome) is no greater than another meane Biſhop, & that neither he, nor the Church of Rome, can claime to themſelues any authoritie ouer other Biſhops and Churches, otherwiſe than by tiranny and vſurpation.

And truely, beſides the forealleaged Canons taken out of S. Gregory, Greg. epiſt. lib. 4. ep. 76. & 78. who ſo will reade his epiſtle, ſhal find that he vtterly deteſted this title of vniuerſall Shepheard or Biſhop from his hart, as a wicked title not meete for any but for Antichriſt or for his forerunner. In one of his Epiſtles he complaineth greatly to the Emperor Maurice, that Iohn Biſhop of Conſtantinople did trouble the Church of God, by ſeeking to vſurpe the title of vniuerſall Biſhop. For (to the intent ye may vnderſtand the very roote and originall beginning of this diſcourſe) you muſt conſider that in thoſe daies, and long time before, Conſtantinople was called new Rome, and the other in Italy was called olde Rome. And becauſe the Emperor of Rome did moſt commonly keep his reſidence at new Rome, and olde Rome was at that time greatly vexed with the barbarous Gothes, & Lumbards which warred vpon Italy and deſtroyed it: without doubt the new Rome was then a more flouriſhing Citie, and in higher eſtimation than olde Rome, or any other Citie in all the wholl Empire. Wherupon the ſaid Biſhop Iohn being of an ambitious diſpoſitiō, and minding to aduance himſelfe by the dignitie of the Citie whereof he was biſhop, began to preach and perſuade the people and diuers of the biſhops, that like as the Emperor extended his dominion ouer all the prouinces and countreys of the Empire: euen ſo the Biſhoppe of Rome (that is to ſay of new Rome) which was then in more eſtimation than old Rome, ought to extend his power and autooritie ouer all the prouinces and countreys of Chriſtendome.

And truly this Biſhop Iohn did ſo much by his continuall trauell, that he cauſed him ſelfe to be proclaymed vniuerſal Biſhop in a certain Sinode or Counſell, wheragainſt S. Gregory (who was then biſhop of old Rome) did ſet himſelfe very manfullye. And therefore writing againe to the ſame Emperor Maurice, he ſaith amongſt other thinges there written, that the name of vniuerſal Biſhop is a title of pride and pompe, which troubleth the church, the lawes, and the ſinodes, and the commaundements of Chriſt: And that S. Peter neuer was, ne neuer called himſelfe vniuerſall Apoſtle. And that it was the Emperors duty, (if he meant that God ſhould long preſerue his empire) to cut of that ſore and to bridle the diſeaſe by his authoritie, if it could not otherwiſe be healed. Afterward he addeth theſe words worthy to be noted. If any man (ſaith he) doe attribute vnto himſelfe the name of vniuerſall Biſhop in the church, S. Gregory whom the Catholicks take for an Archpope, condemneth the authority of Popes. what will al honeſt men iudge of him? For the eſtat of the vniuerſall Church muſt nedes fall (which God forbid) if he fall which is called the vniuerſall Biſhop. Therfore let this blaſphemous name be baniſhed from the harts of all Chriſtians, whereby the honor of all Prieſtes is taken away, and wrongfully vſurped by one alone.

And in the Epiſtle following, S. Gregory maketh his mone to the Empreſſe Conſtance, that the ſaid Emperor Maurice her huſband went about to perſwade him to leaue of his ſetting of himſelfe againſt it, which I cannot doe (ſaith he) for I defend the cauſe of the Goſpell, and the Canons, and the truth of equitie and humilitie. And it is to greeuous & intollerable a thing that the ſayd Iohn our fellow brother and biſhop, ſhould ſeeke to haue the name of biſhop to himſelf alone. But what other thing doth he geue vs to vnderſtand by this his pride, but that the time of Antichriſt draweth neare? For he followeth the ſteps of the wicked feend, who deſpiſing ye ioy which he had in common amongſt the legions of other Aungels, dyd ſeeke to ſet himſelfe in ye hygheſt roome, to raigne as ſoueraigne all alone,

And in an other Epiſtle, the ſame S. Gregory, anſwering to ye whiche the ſayd Emperour Maurice had written vnto him, which was that hee ought not to bee ſo preciſely wedded to his own will for the terme of vniuerſall Biſhop, for ſuch ſtrife about termes hinder the vnion and peace of the church: did diſproue his reaſons with very good grace,Ep. lib. 6. ep. 194. ſaying thus: But I beſeech your maieſtie of your goodnes, to conſider that of words fondly ſpoken ſome doe no harme at all, & other ſome doe great harme. As for example, when Antichriſt ſhall come and call himſelfe God, that ſpeech is very fond: neuertheles as it is fonde, ſo is it alſo very pernicious. If you looke no further thā to the wordes, there are but two ſillables: but if you way the meaning of the wordes, it is the full importance of all iniquitie. And I dare boldlye ſay vnto you, that whoſoeuer calleth himſelfe, or cauſeth himſelfe to be called the vniuerſal prieſt, the ſame partie through his vaingloryouſnes, is the foreronner of Antichriſt, becauſe that by his pride, he exalteth himſelfe aboue all others. I beſech you therefore of your good zeale to Godward, to commaund that no cauſe of offence be geuen by taking vp ſuch a fond title. See how S. Gregorye declareth and denowceth him to be the foreronner of Antichriſt, which doth name himſelfe vniuerſall Byſhop, foraſmuch as he taketh vpon him the aucthoritye of all other Byſhops, as wel neere all the Popes of Rome haue done, which haue bene ſince his time. And yet to confirme this his ſentence better, I wil adde the warning which he gaue by his letters to the Byſhops of Greece, to be well ware that they gaue not the title of vniuerſall Byſhop, to Siriacke Byſhop of Conſtantinople next ſucceſſor of the ſaid Iohn after his deceaſe:Epist. lib. 7. epiſt. 69. good brethren (quoth he) yee ſhall vnderſtand, that the late Iohn, (who not long ſince was prelate,) Paſſing the bondes of modeſtie, and of the meaſure of his calling, did wrongfully in a Synode vſurpe the proud and peſtilent title of Oycumenicall (that is to ſay vniuerſall) Byſhop agaynſt God and the Church, and to the deſpight & derogatiō of the whole order of Preeſthode. Wherupon wee wrote twiſe vnto him, that he ſhould not omit any thing, which might concerne the peace of the Church, exhorting him to leaue that proud name, and to ſubmit his hart to the humilitye, which our Lord and maſter hath taught vs. Whereof foraſmuch as he held ſcorne, we haue vſed the lyke admonitions vnto our brother Siriacke, his ſucceſſor. But ſith wee ſee that Antichriſt the enemy of mankinde, beginneth to ſhew himſelfe opēly by his foreronners in this latter tyme: and that the preeſtes themſelues, (which ought to reſiſt him by their holy & humblelyfe,) be the partyes that ſerue him for his foreronners, by intitling thēſelues with his proud name of vniuerſall: I beſeech yee, yea and charge ye, that none of you at any tyme, receyue, admit, write, allow written, or ſubſcribe vnto that title: But that as becommeth the ſeruauntes of the almighty God,) euery of you keepe himſelfe pure and cleare from this venemous infection, without yelding of him ſelfe, to the deceitfull craftines of the enemy: for ſurely that title tendeth to no other end, but to the hurt, and diuiſion of the Church, and to the ſlaunder of you all, as I haue ſayd before: becauſe that if he onely (as he imagineth) is the vniuerſall Byſhop, it followeth that you be no Byſhops. There are yet diuers other like ſayings, in the writings of S. Gregory, which I could here alleadge, but theſe which I haue here before ſet downe, may ſuffice (in mine opinion) to declare and ſhew vnto the Romiſh Catholicks by the authority of that god doctor (whom they themſelues take to haue beene one of the greateſt & worthieſt of all the Popes, in reſpect whereof they haue ſurnamed him the great S. Gregory) that the name and office of ye Pope (which is nothing elſe but an vniuerſall and ſupreme Byſhop or ſhepheard ouer all other Byſhops and Prieſtes,) is condemned as the name and office of Antichriſt or of his forerunner, and as a title and eſtate full of pride, iniury, diuiſion, and contempt of Gods commaundemēts, and of the holy decrees and counſels which haue bene holde before that tyme.

That S. paul and S. Peter were equall in degree.But now that we haue made S. Gregory to fight ſufficiētly againſt ye popes that were his ſucceſſors, let vs returne to our Canons, to ſhew that S. Peter was neuer pope, (that is to ſay prince or ſoueraine ouer the Apoſtles:) I will only alleadge one Canon, which ſaith that S. Paule and S. Peter were equal, yea euen at the ſame time that they were both at Rome, and that the one was no way greater than the other: whereof it followeth, that S. Peter was no more pope than was S. Paule. Now S. Paule was neuer pope, nor euer reputed ſo to be, by the very maintayners of the popedome themſelves. For theſe be the very words of the Canon, taken out of S. Ambroſe. c. Beate. 2. q. 7. S. Peter and S. Paule haue preheminence aboue all other Apoſtles, by ſpeciall prerogatiue. But yet is it vncertayne whether of them two were preferred before the other. For I think that they were both equall in deſerts, & likewiſe in their deathes and paſsions: and alſo that they liued in like deuotion of faith and finally, came Both together to the glory of martirdome.

And I beleue that it hapned not with out ſome cauſe, that they both ſuffered martirdome in one day, in one place, and vnder one perſecuter, for they ſuffered in one day, that they might goe together in company to Chriſt: and in one place, to the end that Rome ſhould not want either of them both, & vnder one perſecuter, that both of them might be partakers of one cruelty. The day therefore was ordayned for their deſert, the place for their glory, and the perſecuter for their vertue. And they both ſuffered martirdome at Rome the ſoueraign Lady and head of all nations, to the end that where the head of ſuperſtition was, there ſhould reſt the head of holines: & where the princes of the Gentils dwelt, there ſhould remayn the Princes of the Church.

By which Canon it may eaſely be iudged,S. Peter was neuer head of the Church. that S. Peter was in nothing to be preferred before S. Paule, & that both were equal in all reſpects, which ſheweth plainly that S. Peter was neuer head of the Church, neither in reſpect of nature, nor in reſpect of miniſtration. For if he had been, thē ſhould as much haue been ſayd of S. Paul, according to the Canon. And ſo by conſequence, we ſhould ſay that ye Church had then two heads like a monſter, a thing that were to abſurde & ſtrange. I know wel that ſuch as imagine the gouernment of the Church to be like the gouernment of a kingdome,The Lordly gouernemēt of the churche diſproued by the auncient Canons. doe thinke it meete that there ſhould be one ſupreme head and gouerner, and that the ſame ſhould haue Cardinals as great Princes of his court, & Archbiſhops ſomewhat in lower degree than the Cardinals, and Biſhops as inferiors to the Archbiſhops, and ſo conſequently Abbots, Priors, Channons, and Curats, ech in degree vnder other. And in good ſooth, this order of holy gouernment hath a fayre outward ſhew, but there is one thing that marreth all, which is, that it hath no foundation in the word of God, which doth not teach that there is any inequalitie amongeſt the Shepheards, but that they ought to gouern their Churches with one common conſent by Gods word, making aſſemblies or meetings, (which are cō monly called Sinodes or Councels) for the ſame purpoſe, if need require. And moreouer that they ought to ſubmit themſelues to the Ciuill Magiſtrate. And the very Canons themſelues doe agree herewith, (ſpecially one Canon which is taken out of S. Iherom,) ſeeing, that in the time of the primitiue Church there was no difference betwixt a prieſt or an elder, and a biſhop: and that the Church was then gouerned by the common councell of the elders.

Let vs heare the very words of the Canon.c. Olim. diſt. 95. In olde time an Elder and a Biſhop were all one thing, till ſciſmes and parttakings crept into Religion by the deuils inſpiration, and that folke began to ſay, I hold of Paule, and I of Apollo, and I of Cephas. Vntill this time the Churches were gouerned by common aduice of the Elders. But after that euery man began to brag of his own diſciples whom he had baptiſed, and not of Chriſt, then it was ordayned that in euery Church one of the Elders ſhould haue authoritie ouer the reſt, to take away the ſeede of ſcizme. Wherefore like as the Prieſts know that by the cuſtome of the Church, they be put in ſubiection to the party that is ſet in authoritie ouer them: So let the biſhops know alſo that wheras they themſelues are of more authoritie than the Prieſt, it is not by the ordynance of God, but by cuſtome, and that they ought to gouerne the Church by common aduiſe.

Which Canon in very truth is very notable, ſpecially for that it doth euidently ſhew, that all the degrees and dignities (which are infinite at this day in the Church of Rome) are not grounded vpon the expreſſe ordinance of God, but only vpon the poſitiue law of cuſtome, for looke what the Canon ſpeaketh of Biſhops, is much more by all reaſon to be ſpoken of Cardinals, Patriarches, Archbiſhops and other dignities, ſeeing that the office of a Biſhop (wherof the holy Scripture maketh mention) was inſtituted long time before the dignities of the Cardinals and the others. And hereupon it followeth, that men ſhould not make ſo great reckning of any of theſe great and pompous dignities, which are founded but onely vpon cuſtome, which ought not to be of any (or at leaſt wiſe of very litle) authoritie in the Church of God, as ſhalbe declared more at large in the laſt chapter of this booke.

The Pope had no prerogatiue aboue the generall counſels in old tyme.As touching the reſidue, if it be alleaged that the Biſhop of Rome had in olde time, and ſtill ought to haue cheefe authoritie and preheminence, at the leaſt wiſe in the aſſemblies of coū cels and Sinodes: the anſwere is, that he hath nothing to doe with the matter: for the Eccleſiaſtical hiſtories and the acts of the auncient councels,Hiſt. trip. lib. 2. cap. 1. (as that of Nice, holden in the time of Conſtantine the Emperor) doe witneſſe vnto vs, that the Biſhoppe of Rome was ſo far of from ouerruling ye coū cels, that he tooke his place in ſitting but as fourth in degree, (which is a good way offe from the firſt and cheef place) as he did at the generall councell of Nice.

But foraſmuch as in this point of the Popes Supremacie,The forged donation fathered vp on Conſtantine. the Romiſh Catholicks (& chiefly the Canoniſts) doe maintaine the authoritie of the Pope, by meanes of a donation and of certaine prerogatiues which they affirme to haue been graunted vnto the Pope by the Emperor Conſtantine the great. I will here a litle examine the truth of the matter. I ſay therfore that this donation and graunt of prerogatiues, c. Conſtantius. diſt. 96 inregiſtred by Gratian in his decrees, is a thing inuented of pleaſure and altogether falſe, and that it neither is like nor poſsible, that the Emperor Conſtantine did at any time make ſuch a pretended gifte or graūt of prerogatiues, as may eaſely be perceiued by the hiſtories of his time.

And for proofe of this matter, ye muſt firſt vnderſtand, that in their ſayd ſurmiſed donation, they make the Emperor Conſtantine to ſay within foure dayes after he was baptiſed, that he wold haue all the Biſhops and Prieſtes of the Romayn Empire, to acknowledge and hold the Biſhop of Rome for their head, in like ſort as the iudges of a Realme doe holde their king: and that he ſhould haue greater authoritie than the Emperor himſelfe: Geuing vnto Silueſter the vniuerſall Pope and to his ſucceſſors, his Imperiall Pallace of Lateran which is at Rome, and the Citie of Rome it ſelfe, with al the Prouinces, Places, and Cities of Italy, and all the weſt part of the Empire, together with the Imperiall Crown of pure golde, inriched with precious ſtones, his Scepter, his mantell of Purple, and his other Imperiall Robes, and the Imperiall dignitie of commaunding the men of warre, with all other things concerning the glory & maieſtie of the Empire. Geuing alſo to others of the Romain Cleargie, the dignitie, preheminēce and authoritie of Senators, Lords of the Empire, and Conſuls: willing them to ride on horſeback with white footeclothes, apparrayled like Senators, to the end that the Cleargie ſhould be furniſhed with the like titles of honor in all poynts, as the Lordes and men of warre of the Imperiall Court were.

Alſo they make the ſame Emperor to acknowledge himſelf to be Pope Silueſtars Footeman or Lackay in holding his ſtirrop and his bridle when he moū ted on horſeback. And moreouer to declare that he would remoue his Imperial ſeate to the Citie of Bizance, which he was thē purpoſed to builde and to name it after his own name (that is to ſay) Conſtantinople, to geue place to the Pope, becauſe it was vnmeet that where the ſeate of the Prieſtly kingdome, and of the ſupreme head of chriſten Religion was ſet by the Emperor of heauen: there alſo ſhould be ſet the ſeate of the Emperor of the earth. And therfore that he willed and commaunded that the ſame donation ſhould ſtand in force, and be inuiolablye obſerued vntill the ende of the world, beſeeching and adiuring all the Emperors, Lords of eſtate, Princes, Senators, and People that ſhould come after him, euen before the dreadfull iudgement ſeate of God, neuer to breake the ſame vpon payne of euerlaſting damnation. And to haue both S. Peter and S. Paule their enemies, both in this world and in the world to come, and to be burned and conſumed in the deepe pit of hell, amongſt the deuils and the vngodly folke. And the date of this pretenſed donation is this. Geuen at Rome, the third of the Kalends of April, in the yere of the fourth Conſulſhip of Conſtantine Auguſtus. And alſo in the fourth Conſulſhip ot Gallicanus.

This in few words is the whole ſūme of the pretended donation made by the Emperor to the Pope and to the Cleargie of Rome. Wherupō the doctors of the Ciuill Law take maruailous paines in diſcuſſing whether it be auaileable or not, and whether Conſtantine might ſo greatly diminiſh the Empire, ſeeing that (ſay they) the title of Auguſtus is geuen vnto him, to the intent he ſhould increaſe, and not diminiſh the Empire: And whether he could geue greater authoritie to the Pope, than he himſelfe had, ſeeing that by the rules of the law, no mā can graunt to another more right than he hath in himſelfe: And whether he could force or conſtraine his ſucceſſors to obſerue this donation, conſidering that by the Ciuill Law, like againſt like hath no power.

Theſe doctors (ſay I) haue taken great paynes to reſolue this queſtion and diuers ſuch like vpon that matter: but all in vaine,The diſproofe of the donation by the very donation it ſelfe. for it ought firſt to be prooued that there was ſuch a gifte made, before they diſputed whether it be lawfull and auaileable or not. But we may eaſely gather by the hiſtories, that it is but a ſurmiſed and a forged graunt, and that there was neuer any ſuch: But the holy order of the Cleargie hath alwayes taken it to be a holy kinde of fraude, to enter vpon the goods of the lay people by ſuch meanes.

Therfore to reſolue the ſayd dout by the hiſtory, you muſt vnderſtand, that this donation is reported to haue beene graunted in the time of Conſtantines fourth Conſulſhip after his baptiſme,Pomponius laetus. in Cō ſtantine & Licinius. Euſeb. lib. 9 cap. vlt. trip hiſt. lib. 1. cap. 8.9. Oroſius. lib. 7 cap. 28. as if they had been both at one time, when as thoſe times were farre aſunder. For his fourth Conſulſhip was in the yeare of our Lord three hundred and eighteene, and his baptiſme was more than twenty yeares after: and therfore the diuerſitie of the times doth diſcouer the falſenes of the donation.

Beſides this, it could not be done in any of both thoſe times, for afore the time of his baptiſme Pope Silueſter was already dead, as the hiſtories do well proue, which doe witneſſe, that for the great deſire which Conſtantine had to be baptiſed in the Riuer of Iordaine, in Iury, he deferred his Chriſtning (by reaſon of the great affayres wherwith he was continually kepte occupied) vntill the latter ende of his life, at which time perceiuing himſelfe to be very ill at eaſe & out of all hope of being able to trauaile into Iury to be baptiſed in the Riuer of Iordaine, he cauſed himſelfe to be chriſtened in Nicomedia.

And therfore this pretended graūt, could not be made by conſtantine after his Baptiſme (as the donation it ſelfe doth beare men in hand) to pope Silueſter who was dead before that tyme. Neither could it be done in the tyme of conſtantines fourth conſulſhip: For at that tyme (and moe than ten yeres after) he had a fellow in the Empire named Licinius who held the Eaſt part of the Empire, and Conſtantine himſelfe held the weſt partes, according to the cuſtome of the Romain Empire then receiued, which was to haue two Emperors at once (as were Diocleſian and Maximian, and alſo Galerius Maximinus, and Conſtantius Chorus) the one commaunding in the Eaſt parts, and the other in the Weſt.Euſeb. lib. eccl. hiſt. 8. cap. 16. & Pom. lpaetus in vitis horum Imperatorum. And therof (as ſome thinke) did grow the cuſtome of paynting the Imperiall Eagle with two heads. Now then in aſmuch as Licinius remayning at that time in the Eaſt countreys as in his own parte of gouernement, was a Heathen man and a deadly enemy to Conſtantine who was a Chriſtian: It followeth in reaſon, that if Conſtantine ſhould haue geuen vp the Empire of the Weſt to the Pope, he could not haue made his account to haue remoued his Imperiall ſeate by and by into the Eaſt, (for he had reckned without his hoaſt) but it would haue behooued him firſt to haue put down Licinius, ere he could aſſure himſelfe of the Empire of the Eaſt, as in deed he did afterward by force of armes: But that was more than ten yeares after his fourth Conſulſhippe. But who would thinke Constantine to haue been ſuch a foole, as to ſpoyl himſelfe of the Weſt Empire to geue it to the Pope, and to content himſelfe with the Eaſt Empire, which he had not, nor could aſſure himſelfe to haue, conſidering how vncertaine the iſſue of waar is.

Moreouer about the ſame time of Constantines fourth Conſulſhip, there was Ciuill warres in Rome betwixt Conſtantine himſelf and Maxentius, who had ſet vp himſelfe as an vſurper in the Citie of Rome, through the ayde of the Pretorian Soldiars. By reaſon whereof, conſidering that Maxentius was a great enemy to the Chriſtians, and had on his ſide an infinite number of the greateſt men within the Citie: It doth well appeare that that time was vtterly vnmeet for Conſtantine to aduance Pope Siluester and the Romaine Clergie ſo greatly as this pretended donation would make vs beleeue.

And truely in the very ſame yeres of this fourth Conſulſhip, the Senate of Rome did canoniſe and inrowle among the number of the Gods, the Emperor Diocleſian who dyed at that time and had reſigned vp the Empire, about a ten yeres before.

Now then ſeeing that the Senate was at that time in ſo great authority as to canoniſe Diocleſian (the greateſt enemie and perſecuter of the Chriſtians that euer was) in deſpite of Conſtantine being then Emperor. Conſul, and a Chriſtian? I leaue it to your diſcretions, to cōſider how they wold haue ſuffered the thing which this pretended donation ſpeaketh of, namely, that Siluester ſhould haue been ſet vp as ſoueraigne Lord ouer the Senators themſelues, and ouer all the Weſt Empire: and that the reſt of the Clergie ſhould haue been made fellow like and equall with the Senators, Conſuls, & States of the Empire. Surely they would no more haue ſuffered it, than the Preſidents and Councellars of our Parliament would nowadaies abide to haue a miniſter of the Goſpell ſet ouer thē to controll them. Or the ouerſeear of a Conſiſtory to be made fellow with them.

And yet furthermore the hiſtory doth witnes vnto vs that this Conſtā tine the great, did leaue vnto his ſōne Constantine for his part the Realmes 〈2 pages missing〉 ſuch ordinances doe burthen mennes conſciences, and they that obay them, doe ſeeme rather to play the Iewes, than to vſe the liberty of Chriſtians. Theſe be the very words of a Canon taken out of S. Auguſtine: c. Olim. diſt 12. Vndoutedly I am of opinion that the traditions of the Church ought to be cut of, as ſoone as oportunity may fitly ſerue thereunto. For although it appeare not that they are contrary to the faith: yet notwithſtanding the ſlauiſh burthen of them doth oppreſſe Religion, which God of his mercy hath apointed to be free with the celebration of few Sacramentes, and thoſe very cleare: In ſo much that the ſtate of the Iewes is more tollerable thā the obſeruation of ſo many traditions. For though they know not the time of their libertie, yet doe they not ſubmitte themſelues to any Sacramentes at the preſumptious and fantaſticall appointment of man.

Which Cnnon doth well declare how much they be wedded to their own affection, which in theſe dayes doe kindle coales in all places, and condemne all thoſe of hereſie, which doe leaue the traditions of men, to betake themſelues to the word of God. For with what coūtenance dare they call it hereſie, not to beleeue in the inuentions of Popes, ſeeing that euen their own Canons doe wil vs to forſake the traditions of men? If this be hereſie then ought they to burne their Canon Law.

Moreouer, it is very eaſie to be proued by their own Canons, that al the decrees and ordinaunces of the Popes, are either ſuperfluous or wicked. For if they agree & accord with yt word of god, they are ſuperfluous, becauſe it ought to ſuffiſe vs to obſerue ye ordināces of god, which haue no need to be ratified and authoriſed new againe by men. And if they be contrary or repugnant to the ordinances of God, then ought they to be reiected as wicked, as the auncient Canones themſelues doe witnes. Theſe be the very words of an auncient Canon attributed to Pope Vrbane: c. Sunt quidam. Ye muſt vnderſtand that the Pope of Rome may wel make new ordinances in ſuch things as the Euangeliſtes and Prophetes haue not ſpoaken of, c. contra. 25. q. 1. But in the matters that are openly reſolued by the Lord himſelf, or by his Apoſtles, or by the auncient Fathers that followed next vnto them, the Pope of Rome cannot make any law at all, but ought rather to maintain that which is already ordayned, yea euē with ſpending of his bloud and his life. For, if he ſhould take vpon him (which God forbid) to deſtroy that which the Apoſtles and Prophets haue taught, in ſo doing he ſhould ſhew himſelfe to doe amiſſe, & not to geue ſound iudgement.

Vpon this Cannon it is worthy to be noted, that the Popes authority extēdeth not ſo farre, as to deale with any thing which the Doctors, & aunciēt fathers of ye Church haue taught, as it is farther auouched and proued by the Cannon following, attributed to Pope Zoſimus whiche ſayth thus: As touching the ſtatutes of the fathers, the authoritie of the Seate may neyther ordaine any thing contrary to them, nor chaunge any thing in them: for antiquitie ought to be inuiolably rooted amōg vs, as beyng honorable by the decrees of the fathers, By which Cannons of Pope Vrban and Pope Zoſimus, it doth playnely appeere, that the auncient Cannons, (ſuch as thoſe be whiche we haue alleaged in this book to confute the errors of the Romiſh church) ought to be of greater authoritie, than the decrees, and ordinaunces of the latter Popes of our dayes, & of their councels, which haue no power to diſanul or altar any thing in ye ſtatutes, and doctrine of the auncient fathers. And as touching the authority, which the Pope attributeth vnto hym ſelfe,The Popes auchority in damning of mens ſoules c. Si papa. diſt. 4 0. concerning power to dampne ſoules, and to ſend them into hell by great troopes, without beyng lawfull for any man to ſay vnto him, why doeſt thou ſo: and to excommunicate, outlawe, and accurſe whome he liſteth: a man may beat down all theſe hornes of hys with this vnanſwerable argument taken out of his owne Canons, that ſuch as are true members of Chriſt and of hys Church, cannot be condempned nor put out of the Church by any kinde of excomunication, enterditing or accurſing, & that if any faythful Chriſtian happen to be wrongfully excōmunicated or accurſſed by ye Pope, or by any other prieſt: yet notwithſtanding hee is neuer the more out of the Church, but remayneth alwaies a member of the ſame.

Theſe be the very wordes of a canon touching that poynt:c. Cum aliquis. 2. 4. q. 4 When any man departeth from the truth, from the feare of God, from the fayth, and from Charitie, truely, truely thē goeth he out of the compas of the Church. But contrariwiſe, if any man be excommunicated and thruſt out of the Church, by vniuſt Iudgement, it is certayne that if hee were not gone out afore, (that is to ſay, if he haue not done any thing that deſerued it) he is not hurt by ſuch excōmunication, for often times he which is driuē out remayneth ſtill within, & he that ſeemeth to be within, is neuertheleſſe without.

This Cannon teacheth vs a very good, and holy doctrine: which is to hould and retayne the pure doctrine of the truth, the feare of God, fayth & charitie, & then not to feare ye excommunications or thunderbolts of the Popes, or Biſhoppes (the which in theſe dayes they do rather vſe againſt ſuch as will not allow their errors, than againſt wicked liuers and ſuch as giue occaſion of offence) becauſe no man is able to put vs out of Gods Church, if we caſt not out our ſelues through our vices. Now, if vices and errors be the thinges which driue a man out of the Church of God, are there in theſe dayes any people in the whole world which are more out of the Church than thoſe which think to driue out others?

There remaine yet two pointes to treate of, touching this matter,A perſonall ſucceſſion in the order of clergy. namelye, the perſonall ſucceſſion amongſt thoſe of the Romain Clergy, (wherof they doe ſo greatly brag thē ſelues againſt the Proteſtantes) and their diſcipline. As touching the firſt point, they ſay they haue (as it were) a lineall ſucceſſion from age to age, of Biſhops and Shepheards from the Primitiue Church, and therefore that they be the true Shepheards: & that by the contrary reaſon, the Miniſters of the goſpell which haue had no ſuch ſucceſſion, be falſe Shepheards. But this matter of ſucceſſion is very eaſie to be anſwered. For if you looke well into the hiſtories of the Popes, and conferre them with the canons both of late yeres and of olde time, you ſhal finde that the moſt part of the Popes and Biſhops came in at the window, and not at the dore. And that they haue been intruders and vſurpers, & not lawfull ſucceſſors.

And to begin at the beginning, the canons doe teach vs (as truth is) that Biſhopricks and Eccleſiaſticall offices ought to be beſtowed by lawfull election, and that it is not lawfull for Biſhops and Shepheards to appoint in their latter dayes who ſhall ſucceede them, but only to geue their opinion to their Churches, concerning ſuch as they deeme in their conſciences to be moſt meete to ſucceede them. Thus ſaith a Canon taken out of the Counſell of Antioch.e. Epiſcopo. c. vnde. 8. q. 1. It is not lawful for a Biſhop to chooſe or appoint who ſhall be his Succeſſor, though he be neere his death: and whatſoeuer he doth in that caſe, is nothing, nor nothinge worth.

That the Popes are intruders of the Papacy.By which Canon it followeth, that Pope Clement (whom they vouch to be the Succeſſor of S. Peter) was no lawfull Pope. For there is another Canon which ſaith (if it be worthy to be beleued) that S. Peter drawing nie the end of his life, tooke S. Clement by the hand, and betooke vnto him the Church of Rome, chooſing him to be his ſucceſſor. Alſo Pope Damaſus (who was about the yere of our Lord 371. in the time of the Emperor Valentiniā ) was made Biſhop or Pope of Rome by great hurliburlies, wherein there were a hundred and ſeuen and thirty men ſlaine in the ſtreetes as Marcillinus doth witnes.Am. Marcellus. lib. 27. Io. ſtella venetus. & Platina in vitis Pontificum.

Pope Iohn the eightth being a woman (and therfore not capable of the Popedome) was borne in England, & held the Papacie about two yeres and a halfe. Pope Silueſter the ſecond was a great Negromanſer, and came to be Pope by the help of the deuill, to whom he gaue both body and ſoule (as it is written in his hiſtory) and he raigned foure yeares and certaine Monethes. Pope Silueſter the third was made Pope by tumults and factions: For in thoſe dayes (as ſayeth the hiſtory) the popedome was growen to ſuch a ſtate, that it was geuen to him that would geue moſt for it, or which made moſt frends and fauour. Pope Boniface the eightth was made Pope by faction and bribery, hauing firſt by ſuttle practiſes gotten the reſignation of his predeceſſor Pope Celeſtine a man of a ſimple Wit, whom he cauſed to be ſtraitly ſhut vp in priſon, where he dyed for grief of mind when he ſaw himſelf ſo deceiued and il handeled. Wherupon it was ſayd by this Boniface, (a good witneſſe of his calling) that he entered into the Popedome like a fox, raigned like a Lion, and died like a dog: for he dyed mad. Pope Iohn the four and twentieth vſurped the Papacie by force and violence, and maintayned himſelfe in it by the ſame meanes, and was found to erre in the Chriſtian faith in moe than in fortie Articles: ſo holy was his holines.

To be ſhort, the hiſtories of the popes are full of the wicked dealings and practiſes which the Popes did vſe to attaine to that degree. Now therefore I aſke you whether theſe ought to be called lawfull ſucceſſors of S. Peter, and whether thoſe Biſhoppes which were conſecrated by them, were lawfully called or not, or ought to be reputed the lawfull ſucceſſors of ye primitiue church, & whether the Curates and other Prieſtes that were promoted to holy order and to benefices by ſuch Biſhops, may be reckned as lawfull ſucceſſors of the Shepheards and Elders of the Primitiue Church. It is very ceataine that they were not:c. Cum. in cunctis. c. Bona c. Quisquis Extr. de Electione. For then were the Canons vntrue, which ſay that in all prouiſions for perſons meete for Benefices, there ought to be a lawfull election, wherein conſideration is to be had of the fitnes of the parties age which is to be choſen, and of the grauitie of his manners, and of his learning: and that as many as haue voyces in the election, ſhould be heard, vpon paine of making the election of no force, and that the party be denoū ced as vnworthy and vnmeet to haue a benefice, which is furthered or preferred therunto by the fauor or power of the world. Neither are ſuch diueliſh ſeruings, inforcementes, ſubtilties, and fauors to be called lawfull vocations: but intruſions, inuations, vſurpations, and wicked and damnable practiſes.c. Eaquae. 1. q. 3. Ci. c. cum eſſent extr. de Simō &c cum deteſtabile Extra. The Canons alſo doe confirme it to be Simonie, to geue mony or ought els to be promoted to Orders, or to be prouided of a Benefice or to obtayn a benefice in recompence of any temporall ſeruice.

And that al aduowſions and preſē tations made by Popes or Biſhops in way of Simonye, be naught and of no valure or authoritie. Now I leaue it to al people of any diſcretion, to cō clude how the Biſhops & the prieſtes of theſe dayes, may be called the lawfull ſucceſſors of thoſe of the primatiue Church. For ſhall a man find any which geueth no mony for his orders or for the bulles of hys benefice? Are not the Biſhoprickes, Abbyes, Pryoryes, and other Benefices geuen away now adayes and of long tyme agoe, in recompence of temporall ſeruice, yea and ſometime for ſuch vnworthy & vile ſeruices as deſerue rather puniſhement than recompence? And ſeeing that the Popes and Byſhops thēſelues clymbe vp into their high degrees by Symonye, muſt it not needes be, yt the collations which they make in beſtowing the benefices of the patronages vpō other inferior prieſtes, are Simonicall, and ſo conſequently voyd according to the foreſayd Canons?

If the Romiſh Catholickes deny this, they muſt alſo diſauow their own Canons, and deny the ſonne to haue light. And therefore the Romiſh Clergy are farre from the lawful and continuall ſucceſſiō of the Shepherds and Prieſts of the primatiue Church, wherein they imagine themſelues to to remayn. For ſure, Brybery, Simonie, and ſuch other like practiſes, are not the doore whereby they ought to enter into the ſucceſſion of the auncient ſhepheardes and Elders, as they doe. But they ought to enter by lawful election made by calling vpon the name of God, after dew examination of the party that is to be promotid, & that he be found meet for that charge: who beyng ſo choſen, muſt thenceforth haue the tokens of the auncient Shepheardes, whiche are, to preach Gods word purely, to miniſter the Sacraments, to mayntayn good diſcipline, and to viſite and comfort the ſicke, as the Shepheardes of the Proteſtantes do.

Affor the diſcipline of the Biſhops and the reſt of the Romiſh Clergie,The diſcipline & mā ners of the Clergy. It is ſo corrupted & marde, that their lyfe, doynges, and behauiour, are directly contrary to the auncient Cannons. For firſt, neither the Biſhopricks nor any other benefices ought in any wiſe to be geuen to ſuch as ſue and make meanes for them, but rather to ſuch as ſhunne the hauing of them. Theſe are the very words of a Cannon taken out of S. Gregory.

In your writinges you ſaye you haue greatly ſought quietnes: c. In ſcripturis. 8. q. 1. But yet by the ſame you declare, that you are come lawfully to the office of a ſhepheard: for like as that office ought to be denyed to ſuch as do greedely ſeeke it, ſo ought it to be geuen to ſuch as do ſhun it. And (as it is written) let no man vſurpe aucthoritie, but tary the Lordes calling, as Aaron did.

But who is he that ſeeth not that benefices are at this day geuē to ſuch as hunt for them, and to ſuch as runne beſt: ſo as it is ſayd in common prouerbs,What manner of perſons ought to haue benefices. that horſes run for benefices, and Aſſes catch them. Let vs now ſee what kinde of folk they be, to whome (by the auncient Cannons) Biſhoprickes and other benefices ought to be geuen. Theſe be the wordes of a Cannon taken out of S. Iherom. Albeit then that the Lord had geuen his cō maundement and election for the ſetting vp of a Prince: c. Licet ergo 8. q. 1. yet neuertheles the congregation is called together about it. The preſēce of the people therfore is requiſit at the chooſing of a prieſt that euery body may know and be aſſured that ſuch a one is choſen to the degree of prieſthoode, as is moſt excellent amongeſt the people, beſt learned, moſt holy, and moſt notable in all vertue: that when the people haue yealded him this record, there may remaine no ſcruple or occaſion to reuoke the election.

And another Canon ſayeth thus:c. Si Epiſcopus. diſt. 23. He whom men would make a Biſhop, ought firſt to be examined, whether he be of nature, wiſe and diſcreet, milde of behauiour, chaſt of conuerſation, ſober, vigilant, of good foreſight in his own affaires, lowly, gentle to ſpeak vnto, mercifull, learned, well inſtructed in the law of the Lord, ſharpwitted, and of good vnderſtanding in the ſence of the Scriptures, exerciſed in the doctrine of the Church. And (aboue all things,) ſuch a one as holdeth ſimply the Articles and grounds of the faith.

And in another Canon are well deſcribed at large, yt behauiors wherunto the Prieſtes framed themſelues in auncient time, according to the rule of the auncient Fathers.c. His igitur diſt. 23. Now then (ſaith the Canon) ſuch as are ſeparated from the common conuerſation of the world, are commaunded by the lawes of the Fathers of olde time, to abſtain from pleaſures of the world, to abſent themſelues from commō playes & gamings, and from the pompe of common feaſtes and banquets to be ſober and ſhamefaſt in their priuate behauiour, to geue them ſelues from vſury and vnhoneſt gayn, to ſeeke to deceiue no man, to ſhunne the loue of mony as the roote of all vices, to eſchue worldly buſineſſes and offices, to accept no degree of honor through ambition, to receiue no giftes or preſentes for the beſtowing of Gods benefites, to flee from all falſe practiſes and conſpiracies, to ſhun hatred, enuy and backbyting, to keep their eyes from wandring, their tongs from walking, their geſture from looſenes and wantonnes, to yeald proofe of modeſtie and ſhamefaſtnes by the plainneſſe of their geſture and apparraile, to abhorre all villanous words and works, vtterly to refraine the company of widowes and maydens, to admitte no women to dwell with them, except they be very neere of kinne to them, to indeuer to mayntayne the chaſtitie of their bodyes, or els to binde themſelues in mariage, (howbeit but onely once) to obay their Elders, to forbeare to vaunt themſelues with bragging and boaſting, and finally to apply themſelues continually to the reading of the Chriſten doctrine, and to the exerciſe of Pſalmes, Hymnes, and ſongs, for ſuch ought they to be which intend to geue themſelues to the ſeruing of God: that by their laboring to get knowledge to themſelues, they may miniſter the doctrine of grace to the people.

Truely here be many good conditions and vertues. And if the prieſts of theſe dayes, which are ſo greatly in loue with ye tenths of worldly goods, had but a tenth part of theſe vertues, the world ſhould not be ſo corrupted as it is. But euery body ſeeth, that now a dayes men of quite contrary conditions are aduaunced to the Benefices & Offices of the Church. For a father that hath many children, doth not ſeeke to preferre that ſonne of his into the miniſtery which is moſt gentle and vertuous, but him which is moſt vntoward and vnfit. And thereof grow the extreeme abuſes, corruptions, and ignorance that is among the Cleargie.

And as in olde tyme the teachers,Prieſtes ought to be Preachers. and Shepheardes were learned men: ſo did they imploy thēſelues to teach others, and they that did not ſo, were reputed not onely vnworthy of theyr chardge and vocatiō, but alſo worthy to be abhorred of euery man. Thus ſpeaketh a Canon thereof.

c. Vlt. diſt. 43. The ſowing abroad of the heauenly ſeede is commaunded vs: Curſed be we if we hold our peace. Which thing, ſeing that the veſſel of election doth feare and cry out at: how much more ought we little ones to be afeard? Wherfore, as it is a great fault in the Shepheards, to cōceale the truth which they ought to publiſhe abroad: ſo is it no ſmall daunger (God ſheeld it) to ſuch as deſpiſe their doctrin which they ought to obay.

And an other Cannon taken out of the counſell of Tollero, doth ſhew that the whole duety of Prieſtes conſiſteth in ſtuding the Scriptures, & in preaching them to the people.c. Ignorantia. diſt. 38. Ignorannce the mother of all errors (ſayth the Canon) is to be eſchewed in any wiſe by prieſtes, whoſe duety it is, to preach the worde of God vnto the people. The prieſtes are admoniſhed by Paule the Apoſtle writing vnto Timothie, to read the holy Scriptures. Be diligent (ſayth he) in reading, in exhorting, and in teaching: and continue alwayes in the ſame. Let Prieſtes be cunning in the holy Scriptures and Cannons, and let all then labour be in preaching and teaching; and let them edifie all men, as wel by knowledge of fayth, as by redreſſe of maners.

But where be nowe theſe Shepheardes, whiche geue themſelues to preaching, ſhall you finde one ſuch amongeſt twentye of your Prieſtes? There are none that meddle with preaching, ſaue a few monkes, and their ſo doing is contrary to the profeſſion of monkery: For by the Canōs (as we haue ſhewed before) it is not lawfull for monkes to preach. And as for redreſſe of māners, and examples of good workes: where is it to be found? Not amongſt the Curats and Prieſtes of this time, who (for the moſt part) are full of ignorāce, which being (as the Canon ſaith) the mother of all errors, hath layd her belly among them, and (by their meanes,) hath brought forth all the abuſes, errors, and corruptions that be in the world, ſo as men cannot abide any reformation or amendment.

Furthermore in old time, biſhops and other Eccleſiaſticall perſons,What the talke and communication of Clegimē ought to be. had none other ordinary talke and communication, (no not euen at their feaſtes and banquets) but of pointes of the Scripture, according to a Canon made in the third Councel of Tolleto, which ſaith thus: Becauſe that moſt commonly there is nothing but telling of idle tales at the table: c. Pro reuerentia. diſt. 44. therefore (for the reuerence of God and Prieſtes) the holy and vniuerſall councell decreeth that Prieſtes ſhall vſe to reade ſome parte of the holy Scriptures at their meales. For by that meanes the ſoule may wel be edefied, and vnprofitable fables layd aſide.

I doe aſke now, ſhall ye finde this Canon well practiſed and obſerued in theſe dayes? No: but ye ſhall find the cleane contrary, as euery man doth ſee and know.

What Byſhops ought to be.The Biſhops and Paſtors of olde time, tooke not the ſtate of a Biſhop to be a degree of honor and dignitie, but a chardge of great waight & painfulnes: but they eſteemed it to be an honorable thing in a Paſtor, to be learned & of good knowledge. Harken what the canons doe ſpeak therof.c. Qui epiſcopatum. 8. q. 1. He that deſirerh a Biſhoprick, deſireth a good work. By theſe wordes the Apoſtle meant to teach vs what a Biſhoprick is: namely, that it is a title of worke and not of worſhip. For it is a greeke word, which ſignifieth that he to whom the charge of a Biſhoprick is cō mitted, is as an ouerſeer of all ſuch as are committed to his chardge, and that he ought to haue a care of them.

And another Canon ſayth thus:c. Viliſſimus 1. q. 1. That man is to be counted moſt vile, which is in higheſt degree of honor, if he doe not alſo excell all others in knowledge and holines.

Nay contrariwiſe in theſe dayes euery man ſeeth that to be a Biſhop,A deſcriptiō of a Popiſh praelats prieſthood. is a title of honor and dignitie, voyd of all other chardge than to make good cheere, and to keep a Biſhoply table, cauſing a kinde of ſeruice to be ſayd in the Church by ſome chapline of his for faſhion ſake. But to be a man of knowledge, of good life, and of playn meaning, is a vile and a diſdainfull thing. The Biſhops thēſelues laugh ſuch people to ſcorne, and cannot abide to haue them about them.

Touching eccleſiaſticall goods (for the which our Clergy men contend in theſe dayes with tooth and nayle) let vs ſee a litle how the men of olde time did vſe them,The vſe of church goodes. and how they ought to be vſed by the auncient Canons. Firſt of all according to theſe Canons, they ought not to poſſeſſe any lands, nor any other temporall goods, but onely the tithes and offrings. Theſe are the very words of a Canon taken out of S. Iherome: c. Clericus. 12. q. 1. The Churchman ought to ſhew himſelfe to be ſuch a one as poſſeſſeth the Lord, and is poſſeſſed of the Lord. He that poſſeſſeth the Lord and ſayeth with the Prophet, the Lord is my porcion, can poſſeſſe nothing but the Lord. And if he poſſeſſe any other thing, the Lord will not be his porcion. As for example, if he poſſeſſe ſiluer, gold, lands, or moueables, the Lord diſdaineth to be his porcion amongſt theſe things. Alſo if I be the porcion of the Lord, and the meeteline of his heritage, I haue no part with the other tribes, but (as a Leuite & Prieſt) I liue of the tenths and ſeruing at the altar: I am found by the offerings of the altar: hauing my food and clothing, I content me therwith, and naked I follow the naked croſſe.

Now I do aſke of you how wel this Canon is performed in theſe dayes? Haue not the clergy men all the beſt & goodlieſt poſſeſſions, rentes, and reuenewes that are to be found, ouer and beſides their tithes & offerings? If the caſe concerne the demaunding of tithes, they can ſkil to ſay that they belong to them, as to thoſe that hold the place of the Leuites, to whom (by the old law of Moyſes) the tenthes ought to belong. But if it bee put to them that they ought not to poſſes any landes or temperall inheritaunce, as indeed the leuites did not, becauſe it was forbidden them by the law: They will not then be Leuites anye longer, nor ſay that they repreſented them. It is not amiſſe to cōſtrue it to moſt aduantage, that they may bee gathering on all handes thereby. As touching tithes and offerings,How the goods of the Church ought to be vſed. let vs now ſee how the biſhops and prieſts did vſe the tenthes in old tymes, and how they ought to vſe them now, according to the canons. That is, that they owght to deuide the reuenew of the tenthes and offeringes, into foure partes: Whereof one fourth part was to be geuen to the Byſhop, to mayntayne him & his family, that he might keepe hoſpitality for ſtraungers: an other fourth part was to goe to the prieſtes and clergy of his Church: an other fourth part was to be beſtowed vpon the poore: and the laſt fourth part was to be imploied in the repairing of his churches. Harken to the expres words of a canon taken out of S. Gelaſius, which ſayth thus.c. Quatuor, &c. Mos. eſt. 12. q. 2. All the reuenewes and offerings of the Church, ought to be deuided into foure partes, if the value thereof will beare it, (as is found to haue bene decreed long agoe,) Whereof one part belongeth to the Byſhop, an other to the Clarkes, the thyrd to the poore, and the fourth is to be imployed in building. And an other Canō ſpeaketh thus. It is the cuſtome of the Apoſtolicke Seate, to commaunde the new made Byſhopes to deuide all the reuenewes of his Biſhopricke into foure partes: the one part for himſelfe and hys family, and to the keeping of hoſpitality, an other for the clergy, the third part for the poore, and the fourth for the repayring of Churches.

Thus you ſee how the tenths and offerings were beſtowed in old time. But in theſe dayes the diſtribution & imployment of them is farre otherwiſe, for the Prieſts vſe the partition of the Lyon, taking all to themſelues, and leauing no part to the poore. And yet haue we ſeene euen in our time, that theſe auncient Canons haue bin ſet in force againe by the ſtatutes of Orleance, in the raign of the late king Charles the ninth, in the yeare 1561. for there is a branch of that ſtatute, which ſaith that the fourth part of the tenths ſhall be diſtributed to the poore of euery Countrey where they are leuyed. But the Clergiemen haue ſo wel handled the matter by ſetting themſelues againſt it, & by their appeales that the ſaid branch could neuer yet be put in execution, nor attaine any effect at all, ſo charitable are they towards the poore. And yet by the auncient Canons the tenths are named the tributes of the poore.Tithes are the tribute of the poore. And therefore thoſe which doe not pay their tithes well, be counted gilty of the death of the poore, which die for want and neceſſitie. How much more gilty then are they which can ſo well exacte the tenthes, & keep all to themſelues, and geue naught to the poore? Let vs harken (I pray you) how the canons doe thunder againſt ſuch kind of people as doe withhold the goods of the needy.c. Decema. 16. q. 1. The tenths (ſaith the Canon) are the tributes of needy ſoules, ſo that if thou payeſt wel thy tithes thou ſhalt not only receaue aboundance of fruites, but alſo health of body and ſoule. He that payeth them not, is an vſurper of other mennes goods. And looke how many poore folke doe die for want of ſuſtenance in the place where he dwelleth, of ſo many murders ſhall he be gilty before the ſeate of the eternall iudge, for conuerting of the thinges to his own vſe, which are appointed for the poore.

And ſurely the Church of old time could ſo ill away with ſuch an abuſe in the Clergie, as is the withholding of the goods of the poore, that it wold neuer haue ſuffered it. But contrariwiſe (by the auncient Canons) the Biſhops and the reſt of the Clergie, ſhould haue been conſtrayned to ſuccor the poore and needy with the gold and ſiluer of the Church, and to imploy it rather in this work of charity, than in making of faire buildings and in repayring of Churches. Theſe are the words of a Canon taken out of S. Ambroſe: c. Aurum. 12 q. 2. The Church hath gold, not to hoord it vp, but to diſtribute it to the needy. To what end ſhould a man keepe that, which ſerueth him to no purpoſe. Do we not know what a great quantitie of gold and ſiluer the Aſſiriens tooke out of the temple of the Lorde? were it not much better that the prieſtes ſhould beſtowe it to the releefe of the poore and needy, than that the wicked enemye ſhould ſpoyle it and carry it away? will not the Lord ſay vnto yov, wherefore haue ye ſuffered ſo many needy folke to dye for hūgar? For thou hadſt gold wherwith thou mighteſt haue bought them meate: wherefore haſt thou ſuffered ſo many Captiues to be led into bondage, and to be killed by the enemy for lack of beyng redeemed? It had bene much better for thee to haue ſaued the veſſels of lyfe, then the veſſels of mettall. Thou ſhalt not know what to aunſwere vnto this, for what wilt thou ſay? That thou waſt afrayd leaſt the Tēple of God ſhould not haue bene well garniſhed? I ſay vnto thee, that the Sacramentes haue no neede of gould. The thinges which are not to be boughte for golde, are neuer the more acceptable for the golds ſake. The redemption of Captiues is the ornament of holy thinges. And truely theſe are the precious veſſels, which do ſaue mens ſoules from death.

That is the true treaſor of the Lord, which couereth that whiche his bloud hath couered. And the next Canō following taken out of S. Iherom, c. Gloria. 12. q. 2. ſayth thus. The glory and reputation of a Biſhop, is to pinch himſelfe to inrich the poore, and it is a ſhame for a Prieſt to ſeeke riches to himſelfe. Many build vp the walles, and in the mean while do pul downe the pillors of the Churche. The marble gliſtereth, the Lampe ſhyneth, and the aulter is garniſhed with precious ſtones, but of all this while, there is no account made of the ſeruaūts of god. To receiue the goodes which ought to be diſtributed to the poore, and to be deſirous to keepe them vnſpent, is a poynt of to great forecaſt, or els of to great fearfulnes, but to conuert any part of it to a mans owne vſe, is a fault whiche paſſeth the crueltie of the greateſt theeues of the worlde.

Marke this definitiue ſentence, which this good doctor S. Ierom hath pronunced agaynſt ſuch as withhold the goodes of the poore, and beſtow them to their own vſe Oh good lord, howe full of ſuche theeues is this world at this day, which are cōdēned by this ſentence of S Ierom. At leaſtwiſe the moſt part of my maſters of ye Clergy, can not waſh their handes of this crime of deteining and vſurping the goodes of the poore, except they will deny the Canons heretofore alleadged, which are grounded vpon al reaſon and equity, and haue bene holily obſerued in the primatiue church. I doubt not but that many of the clergy will thinke this little diſcourſe of tyme which I haue made touching their diſcipline,They that conceale the truth mainteyne error. very hard and greuous. But I beſeech them to ſuffer their affections to geue place to the truth. Their owne Canons ſhal ſerue me for a lawfull defence and excuſe in this caſe. For by them we be taught, neuer to conceale the truth, but bouldly to ſpeake it vpon payne to be accounted oppreſſors of the ſame, and allowers of error. Theſe are the wordes of a canon of Pope Innocentes. The errour which men do not reſiſt, c. Error. diſt 83. ſeemeth to bee allowed. And the trueth which is not defended, is oppreſſed. If a man neglect to reſiſt the vnruly, it is as good as a mayntayning & bolſtering of them: neither can the party be excuſed of ſuſpition of ſecret ſociety, which neglecteth to withſtand the crime that is manifeſt.

There is alſo another canon which ſayth thus:c. Facientie dist. 83. That party is gilty of the fact, which is careles to correct the thing that he may amend. For it is written, that not only thoſe are partakers of the miſdeede which commit it, but alſo they that conſent thereunto. And he that condemneth ſuch as goe aſtray, ſheweth himſelfe to hate their miſdoinges: and he leaueth no gap for himſelfe to leape out at, which challengeth thoſe that ſtart out of the way.

By which canon we ought all of vs to learne, not to winke at vices and miſdealings. And therefore my mayſters of ye clergy, may (if it pleaſe thē) make themſelues a wholeſome medicine of the things which I haue ſpoken heretofore concerning their manners and diſcipline. And like as they ſpare not to exclaime againſt the Proteſtants (howbeit wrongfully) that they are the cauſe of the ciuill trobles in Fraunce, and ſo conſequently of the corruptions and diſorders that are bred of them: So ſet them bethinke themſelues a litle of their own doeings, and they ſhall finde by the Canons which I haue alleadged heretofore, that in their own orders there are as many abuſes and corruptions as poſſibly can be. But now that I haue ſpoaken ſufficiently of the Pope, and of the Romiſh Clergie, let vs now enter into theire Purgatory.

❧ Of Purgatorye. The xii. chapter.

THe Romain Catholicks doe hold opinion, that there is a certaine place within the earth which is not altogether ſo low as hell, whether the ſoules of the good Chriſtians which are dead, doe goe to purge them of their ſinnes by tormentes of fire and other rigorous paynes: and that euery deadly ſinne ſhould, by deſart, haue ſeuen yeares of purgation, if the term of yeares were not ſhortned by maſſes, ſuffrages, and pardons. And for this cauſe they doe hold opinion, that it is needfull to cauſe a great number of maſſes and ſuffrages to be ſayd for them that be dead, and to the ſame end to geue legacies and foundacions of Obites to maſſeprieſts and chauntryprieſts, and to make good prouiſion of pardons, ſpecially in the time of the great Iubileis and Croyſſeys, which they ſell very good cheape.

And in very truth this doctrine of Purgatory hath exceedingly inriched the Cleargie,Purgatory the inricher of the Clergye. yea more than any other thing. For there dyed not ſo poore a wretch which gaue not ſome legacie to the prieſt, (yea often times euen the beſt thing they had) to haue them ſing maſſes for the caſe of their ſoules, and to ſhorten the time of their abode in purgatory. And hereunto were al ſick folke perſwaded by their Confeſſors, which would make great difficultye & nicenes to geue them abſolution, except they would promiſe to geue one thing or other to the church.

And the better to draw them hereunto, they made them beleue that for euery mortall ſinne, their ſoules ſhold remain (as is ſaid) ſeuen yeares in the paynes of purgatory, which would be an infinite time, if it were not ſhortened by maſſes. For, ſay they, although that God doe in this world, pardon the ſinnes of all ſuch as confeſſe them to the prieſt and make ſatiſfaction, yet doth he remit but the ſinne only, and not the payne, ſo as we muſt needes goe to purgacory to ſuffer paynes for al the ſinnes which we haue committed in all our life time: Which paines are ſo great, as greater are not poſſible. For (ſay they) there is as greate difference betwixt the fire of purgatory and the fire of this world, as is betwixt a burning coale & the breath of a mannes mouth. By reaſon wherof the poore world had ſo great feare and conceit of this hote fire of purgatory, and of the infinite time which they ſhould be fayn to remaine there, accounting ſeuen yeares for euery mortall ſinne which was committed in a mannes life time, that euery man gaue vnto the Prieſtes, as much as they would craue, to the end that their time in purgatory might be ſhortned. But contrary to this doctrine, the Proteſtantes doe hold opinion that we haue no other purgatory than the bloud of our Lord Ieſus Ghriſt, which waſheth away and clenſeth all mens ſinnes which beleue in him. And they ſay that his precious bloud is more then ſufficient to wipe out all our ſinnes, without hauing neede to be purged by any fier. And that our ſauiour doth not clenſe vs by halfes, but throughly altogether, and we ſhould doe him wrong and iniury, to beleue that we haue need of any other kinde of clenſing, than of that which he him ſelfe maketh, in iuſtifying vs by bearing our iniquities, and by wyping away our ſinnes and blemiſhes: And that it is a mockery to ſay that God doth pardon our ſinnes, and not the payn due for ſinne: as if you wold ſay, he forgeueth vs the dets that we doe owe him, but not the payment of the dettes: for he will haue that ſtill.

And now (to ſay the truth) all men may eaſily iudge that this doctrine is better thā the doctrine of the Romiſh Catholickes, according to our firſt rule, becauſe that by the ſame, Chriſt our Redeemer is moſt honored, foraſmuche as he is acknowledged to be the only and whole purger of our iniquities, and our true and only Attonementmaker and Iuſtifyer.

And aſfor the holy ſcripture, that doth teach vs that the faythfull and choſen of God do dye vnto the Lord and that thoſe which dye vnto ye Lord are very happy, & do go into the place of reſt. Theſe are the expreſſe wordes of S. Iohn. Happy are they which from this time forth do dye to the Lord: Apoc. 14.13. for they do reſt from their labors. And for thoſe which dye not to the Lord, foraſmuch as they be none of his, nor members of the body of the true church whereof chriſt is the head: it is certayne that there is no ſaluation for them. And therefore it is in vayne to imagine a purgatory, either for the one, or for the other. For as many as die to the lord, go preſently to reſt & not into purgatory. And thoſe which doe not dye to the Lord, do go into euerlaſting payn (not into purgatorye) and there is no ſaluation for them. And as for the text taken out of the booke of the Machabees, which alloweth prayer for the dead,2. Machab. 12.43. & 15.39. and ſo by conſequence purgatory alſo: The Proteſtantes ſay that it ought to be houlden for a certayn and vndoubted rule, that we ought not to build any article or fayth vpon the bookes called Apocripha, of which nū ber this booke of the Machabyes is one: inſomuch as the Author thereof that wrate it, confeſſeth that he may perchaunce haue ouerſhot himſelfe, and that he hath written in ſimple ſtile, and that he was not of ſkill to write any better: which is an vnmeete kinde of ſpeech for the holy Ghoſt, who can not erre nor hath any neede to be excuſed for ſpeaking in a baſe ſtile: for when he liſteth he ſpeaketh in a higher ſtile than the excellenteſt Orators that ouer were in the world.

And as touching the text where it is ſayes: that the ſinne againſt the holy Ghoſt is not pardoned, neither in this world, Mat. 12.32 nor in the would to come. (Whereupon the Romiſh Catholicks doe inferre, following the interpretation of S. Gregory) that then the other ſinnes are forgeuen in the other world, and ſo by conſequence, that there muſt nedes be a purgatory: the proteſtantes affirme that to be an ill concluſion. For in ſo ſaying our Lord Ieſus Chriſt mente nothing elſe, but that ye ſinne againſte the holy Ghoſt ſhal neuer be forgeuē. S. Oregory himſelf (as we will declare hereafter) doth not ſay that all other ſinnes ſauing the ſinne agaynſt the holy Ghoſt, ſhall be pardoned in the world to come: but onely that the ſmaleſt ſort of ſinnes which are called veniall ſinnes, ſhalbe then forgeuen. Let vs now come to the Canons.

Prayer for the dead is diſproued.There are two peeces of Canons in the decrees of Graecian, which may eaſely quench and confound purgatory. For by the one it is ſayd that in this world one of vs may wel be helped by the prayers of another: But when we depart from hence to appeare before the ſeate of Chriſt, euery man muſt beare his own burthē, and then the prayers of Saints which are in paradiſe will nothing auaile vs, and much leſſe will the prayers of mē of this world ſtand vs in any ſteade. Theſe are the wordes of the Canon.c. Inpraeſenti. 13. q. 2. In this preſent world we know we may helpe one another with our prayers and good aduice: but when we come before the iudgement ſeate of Chriſt, then neyther Iob. nor Daniell, nor Noe, can pray for any, but euery man ſhall then beare his own burthen.

The other Canon ſayth that neither the biſhops nor the Apoſtles can aſſoyle the dead of their ſinnes: Wherupon it followeth yt men haue bought the Popes pardons in vaine, for the redeeming of thoſe which are ſayd to haue been in Purgatory. Theſe are the very words of the ſaid Canon taken out of the decrees of Pope Gelaſius: c. 2. 24, q. 2. We reade that Chriſt hath rayſed the dead to life: But we read not that euer he releaſed any of thoſe which were dead in ſinne. And he who only had the power to doe it, hath geuen this principall commaundement to S. Peter, ſaying: That which thou vnbindeſt vpon earth, ſhall be vnbound in heauen, and that which thou bindest vpon earth ſhall be bound in heauen. He ſayth vpon earth, but he neuer ſayd that he which is departed bound by ſin, ſhalbe releaſed.

Which Canon doth well ſhew, that the power to vnbinde doth not ſtretch ſo farre as to hell, nor ſo farre as to the pretended Purgatory, but only to the earth: and that the Popes of late yeares haue gone about to extend the boundes of their territories to farre, in commaunding the angels (as they doe by their bulles of pardons) to goe fetch the ſoules of ſuch out of purgatory, as the Popes themſelues liſted to name, for they haue no cōmaundement that reacheth either higher or lower than the earth.

Whence prayer for the deade commeth.It is true that for ground of this doctrine of Purgatory, they alleadge that the cuſtome of praying for the dead hath been allowed and receaued now of long time, euen from the time of the primitiue Church. But it doth not therby follow, but that an error is an error, although it be neuer ſo old.c. Cum Marthae. vlt. ext de celebr. miſſa. Moreouer (as Pope Innocent the third doth witnes) many of the auncient Fathers haue beleeued, that the glory of thoſe which are in Paradiſe, might ſtill grow greater vntil the day of iudgement, and ſo by conſequence they did imagine that it was lawfull to pray to god for the increaſe of their glorifying.

De Ciuit. Dei. lib. 2. c. 24. S. Auguſtine alſo wryteth (how be it that he alloweth not the opinion) that ſome auncient Fathers haue imagined, that to pray for the damned ſort, might doe them good, not to exempt them from eternall payne, but to moderate their tormēts. And therfore although that this kinde of praying for the dead were ſufferable, (as in deede it is not) ſeeing it hath no foundation in the word of God, yet cannot Purgatory be grounded therupon, foraſmuch as the praying of the Fathers of olde time, was either for thoſe which were happy in Paradiſe, for that their glory and bleſſedneſſe might increaſe, or for thoſe which were damned, that their payne might be diminiſhed, and not for any which they beleeued to haue bin lodged in Purgatory. For in thoſe dayes they knew not yet what was meante by Purgatory, nor where Purgatory ſtoode. For it is but a late inuention of the new deſcriptions of hell.

The famoſeſt doctor that euer ſpake of Purgatory, is S. Gregory: Dialog. 4. c. 39. who notwithſtanding, ſpeaketh after ſuch a faſhion, that he ſeemeth to make no great reckning of the matter, For he ſayeth that none but veniall ſinnes may be purged by the fire of Purgatory, the deadly ſins cānot:The ſmale power of Purgatory in clenſing mens ſinnes So that by this reckning the paines & torments of this pretended Purgatory, haue no more power to purge, than hath the ſimple holy water: whereunto they doe likewiſe attribute the vertue of clenſing, and of waſhing away of mennes veniall ſinnes. Theſe are the very words of S. Gregory.

Such as a man departeth hence, ſuch is he preſented in the day of iudgement. But yet we muſt beleue that before the iudgemēt, there is a fire of purgation for certayne degrees of ſinnes, becauſe the truth ſayth, that if any mā haue blaſphemed the holy Ghoſt, his ſinnes ſhall not be forgeuen, neither in this world nor in the world to come. By which wordes it is geuen vs to vnderſtand, that there are ſome ſinnes which may be pardoned in this world, and ſome in the world to come. For that which is denied in one ſinne, is graunted in an other by conſequent interpretation. But yet (as I haue ſayd) you muſt vnderſtand this to be ſpoken of the leaſte ſinnes, as the ſpeaking many idle wordes, to much laughter, to great carefulnes for a mans owne family (which is a ſinne that can hardly be ſhū ned euen of ſuche as know beſt how to keepe thēſelues from ſinning) or to erre in poyntes which are of no great importance, or to be ignorant of thē. Al which ſinnes make a mans burthen the heuier euē after death, if they be not pardoned in his life tyme.

Vpon this text and vpon the interpretation which S. Gregory hath made of it, (howbeit amiſſe, as I haue ſayd before in the text of the holy ſcripture which ſayth that ye ſinne againſt the holy Ghoſte is not pardoned in this world nor in the world to come) the Romiſh Catholicks, or rather the Scholemen and ſophiſters haue altogether builded and founded their purgatory. And they are not contented yt onely veniall ſinnes ſhould there bee purged, (as S. Gregory would:) but they will needes haue it to ſerue for the doing away of deadly ſinnes alſo, either by remayning there the full time of ſeuen yeares for euery deadly ſinne, or elſe by redeeming or ſhortening that long ſeaſon, by the celebrating and founding of Maſſes and other ſuffrages. Which addition of the Sophiſters hath maruelouſly inriched ye kitchins of ye clergy & mōkes, and brought great aboundance of water to their milles, which had neuer happened to them, if purgatorye had ſerued but onely to purge veniall ſinnes, according to the aforeſayd opiniō of S. Gregory. for the good people of chriſtendome had rather to haue purged themſelues from thoſe ſinnes with holy water (which did no harme to thoſe that ſprinckled themſelues therewith) then by the fyer of purgatory which is affirmed to be extremely burning and ſcalding hot, or by the founding of maſſes and Obits, which were farre deerer then was the holy water. So as purgatorye had bene brought to nothing, as a waſt and barren ſoyle, if men had held themſelues to the onely ſayings of S. Gregory. Thus may you ſee how the poore world hath bene abuſed, by the inuētors and practiſors of ſuch holy deceytes.

¶ Of the exception of preſcription. The xiii. chapter.

HEtherto I thinke I haue made it to appeare playnely enough, that the Romiſh Catholickes are not ſo well groundes as they imagine, in ye poynts of religion which they would mayntayne agaynſt the proteſtantes, Now therfore let them blame the reformed religion aſmuch as them liſteth and report it to be new, full of errors and hereſies, and contrary to the word of God: and finally let them deface it as much as ſhal pleaſe them. For when it cōmeth to ye vpſhot, their haſty headines and their wilfull fordeeming through the corruptnes of their affections, ſhall neuer bring to paſſe, but that truth ſhall alwayes be truth, and darcknes be darcknes. Do what they can to the vttermoſt, yet will the trueth continue alwayes to ſtrong for them, in the iudgement of the wiſeſt ſort. I know well that thoſe which thinke themſelues to haue the beſt braynes, and to be of greateſt inſight in all matters, are the perſons that vtter their opinions ſo boldly in this controuerſy of Religion, ſaying that the reformed Religion (which they tearme new) is a ſauage Religion, fond and full of follies and errors: and they will needes be beleeued in the matter vpō their bare word, without proouing any part of that which they ſpeake.

But as thoſe kinde of people are commonly ignorant and malicious, and moreouer poſſeſſed with ambition and beaſtlines: ſo doth it appeare that their mouthes are euer ſtil open, euen when their ouerarrogant ignorance is beaten down by good reaſons and allegations. And when they haue done all that they can, for their laſt refuge they are fayne to runne to the exception of preſcription, ſaying, that the Romiſh Religion hath been receaued and obſerued in Fraunce euer ſince the firſt ſetting vp of ye kingdome, euen ſince the great king Clowis, who was the firſt Chriſtian king, and that it is not like that God would leaue the world ſo long time (which is more than a thouſand yeares) in error and ignorance.Preſcriptiō can bear no ſway in matters concerning God & Religion.

But what if it be denyed that their Religion (ſuch as it is this preſēt) was obſerued in the time of Clowis, or of Charlemayn, or of many other kings of Fraunce which haue beene ſince that time? How would they prooue that which they haue ſayd? And if the contrary be proued to them by wrytings of auncyent Biſhops and Doctors of Fraunce, by the which it doth appeere that in this Realme in olde time they did hold the ſame Religion, or uery neare the ſame, which the Proteſtants doe in theſe dayes, what will they anſwere then? And were it not alſo very eaſie to proue by the Hiſtoriographers which haue written the liues of the Popes, and alſo by the decrees of the Popes themſelues, that the moſt part of their ceremonies and traditions (whereof at this day they make more account than of Gods word) haue bin inuented and brought into the Church by the Popes of later times, long ſince Charlemayn? And therefore they which ſayd that the Romiſh Religion (ſuch as it is at this preſent) hath been obſerued in Fraūce euer ſince the beginning of the kingdome there, doe greatly miſtake their markes, and cannot verify their ſaying, but the contrarye is eaſie to be prooued.

But let vs put the caſe (how be it without graunting it) that the thing which they ſay is true, and that this Romiſh Religion is of the vttermoſt antiquitie that can be. Muſt the truth of God therfore forgoe his right, by the exception of preſcription? Noe truely. For if by the Ciuill law there be no prrſcription agaynſt a king, how much leſſe then, may it be againſt the king of kinges? And put the caſe again (without graunting it) that preſcription ought to take place againſt God: yet were it not reaſon (thinke you) to recken the lapſe of time according to Gods meaſuring thereof? Now it is certayn, that with God, a thouſand, yea and twelue hundred thouſand yeares, are no more than an hower, or a quarter of an hower, and therfore by the lapſe of ſo litle ſpace of time, preſcription can take no aduantage. But all men of ſound iudgemēt will alwayes graūt that as time doth not change the truth into vntruth, nor vntruth into truth: So alſo of conſequence we muſt not admit a Religiō for true and good, vnder colour that it hath indured long time, ſeeing that the exception of preſcription is not to be admitted in ſuch caces.

For els if the Romiſh Catholickes will needes ſticke to the Iudgement of preſcription for the allowance of a Religion: then muſt they make good the religion of Mahomet, which hath already laſted aboue a thouſād yeres, which thing I am ſure that none of them will doe, how paſſionate ſoeuer they be otherwiſe. And if it be demaū ded wherefore god hath ſo long tyme ſuffered ye error of Mahomet amōgſt the Turkes, Perſians, Arrabians, Sirians, & the other Eſterne and Southern people of Aſia and Affrica, among whom the Apoſtles and diſciples of Ieſus Chriſt preached the Goſpell and plā ted ſo many fayre Churches: there is no other anſwere to be made vnto it. but that god hath done it by his ſecret iudgement, wherof we are ignorant. Full well we know that he hath done it for good and a iuſt cauſe, & to good purpoſe, becauſe he doth nothing but that which is good and iuſt. But it doth not become vs to ſearch any deeper for the perticuler cauſes which haue moued him ſo to doe, neither ought we to be inquiſitiue of his priuities and ſecret di • g • mentes. The ſame alſo is to be anſwered, to ſuch as ſay that it is not likely yt God would ſuffer the people of Chriſtendome to erre, ſo long as ſince the maſſe hath had his full ſcope. For (to be ſhort) ſeing that God is the truth it ſelfe and yt his word is true: it is much better to yeld God his due honor by ſticking onely to his word, then to refort to cuſtome and preſcription of time, to authoriſe the traditions of mē. Math. 5.21. Ieſus Chriſt himſelfe doth teach vs playnely enough, that we ought to reiect the traditions of men, although they be neuer ſo auncient, and groūded vpon preſcription of time out of minde, and that we ought alwayes to haue recourſe back to the pure word of God, which ſhal laſt for euer, notwithſtanding al cuſtomes & preſcriptiōs which are agaynſt it. For in reprouing the traditiōs of the Phariſies which had then bene receiued & allowed of long time, he exhorteth his diſciples to caſt them of, and to returne back agayne to the pure word of God, and to the naturall meaning thereof ſaying: you haue heard how it was ſayd to the mē of old time &c.

As for the auncient Canons, they are ſo cleare and expreſſe in this caſe, as is poſſible & therfore it ſhall ſuffice me to tranſlate them here ſimply. Theſe be the very wordes of ye Canō.c. Mala. c ſi conſuetudinem. c. Fruſtra. c. Conſuetudo. c. ſi ſolus. diſt. 8. The perilous effects of euill cuſtome. An ill cuſtome is no les to be reiected & ſhunned, then a peſtilent infection, becauſe that if it be not the ſooner plucked vp the wicked do ſerue their turne with it as it were by right of priuiledge: inſomuch that the ſundry diſorders and dyuers vſurpatiōs which are not repreſſed out of hand begin anon after to be receiued for lawes, and are alwayes obſerued as priuiledges.

By which Canon wee may well note the pernicious effectes of ill cuſtomes, which cauſe vs to receiue vice in ſteade of vertue, and euill in ſteade of good: wherof our miſerable world hath to many examples, as well in cauſes of Religion as in matters of pollicie and law. For in theſe dayes men defend nothing more earneſtly, than the abuſes and errors which are in all eſtates, vnder pretence that they haue taken root by long cuſtome and contynuance of time, which haue ſuffered them to paſſe in force of lawes and Priuileges.

Another Canon taken out of ſaint Gregory ſayth thus:Al cuſtome muſt giue place to trueth. If a man happen to obiect cuſtome againſt vs, we muſt conſider what the Lord ſayth: I am the way (ſaith he) the truth and the life. He doth not ſay I am cuſtome. And truely (as ſayeth S. Ciprian) all cuſtome although it be neuer ſo auncient, adde receiued, ought to be ſet aſide in reſpect of the truth, & all cuſtome which is contrarye to the truth ought to be aboliſhed.

There is yet another Canon which ſingeth thus: In vayne do they alledge cuſtome, which are ouercome by reaſon as though cuſtome were of greater force then the truth. Or as though in ſpirituall thinges we ſhould not follow that which hath bene reuealed by the holy Ghoſt. Certaynly it is a true thing, that reaſon and truth are to be preferred before cuſtome. But if cuſtome be confirmed by the truth, it ought to be conſtātly kept and retayned.

There is yet another Canō which ſpeaketh fitly of this matter, takē out of S. Ciprian, ſaying thus: The cuſtome that is crept into any place, ought to be no impediment but that the truth ſhold be preferred and get the vpper hand: for cuſtome without truth is nothing els but a geuing of contynuaunce vnto error. Wherfore let vs leaue the error, & follow the truth: knowing that in Eſdras, truth getteth the vpper hand, according as it is written, Truth preuayleth and getteth the maſtery, and lyueth for euer, and ſhall indure world without end.

To come to an end, I wil adde this one Canon & no more: For I ſhould not haue done very ſoone, if I would rehearſe all the Canones that are to purpoſe touching this matter. And thus ſayth this Canon: If only Chriſt ought to be heard, then muſt we not depend vpon the thinges which other men that haue been before our time, haue thought meete to be done, but rather vpon that which Chriſt hath done, who is before all. For we ought not to folow the cuſtome of men, but the truth of God, ſpecially ſeeing that he ſaith by the mouth of Eſay the Prophet, In vayn doe they honor me, by teaching the commaundements and doctrines of men.

And in very deede this Cannon ſhould make the whole rable of the Canoniſtes, Decretiſtes Sarboniſts, Sophiſtes, and others which handell the bookes of the Romiſh diuinity, to bluſh for ſhame, that they ſhould ſtrayne them ſelues to vphold the doctrines which haue bene apparātly inuented by men. For this one Cannon doth arregne them and cōdemne them, al in few wordes.

Now to come to an end of this treatiſe,An exhortation vnto peace. I pray the Romiſh Catholikes to vouchſafe, to looke aduiſedly into the poynes hertofore by me diſcuſſed: and to examine and ponder them throughly and without paſſion, if it be poſſible. For in ſo doing I am ſure, that as many as haue any naturall diſcreſſion in them, ſhall find that the Religiō of the Proteſtants, is a farre other thing then they haue hitherto taken it to be, or than it hath bine borne them in hand to be. And when they ſhall perceaue that the ſayd Religion (at the leaſt) is neither wicked, nor hereticall, nor new (as euen the moſt ſimple may eaſely diſcern by the points before treated of) it may be a iuſt occaſion for them (if they be not ſtrangely bereft of their right wittes) to incline to liue henceforth in peace and concord, with the profeſſors of the ſayd Religion.

And herewithall I beſeech them to haue earneſt conſideration of twoo thinges. The one is, that without a good peace and concord betwixt the Catholicks and the Proteſtants, the ſtate of the Realme of Fraunce will not only run wholy to ruine, but alſo come to vtter vndoing and deſtruction. And he that ſeeth not this, is very groſſe & ignorant. For Ciuill warres (when they contynue) do neuer bring forth other effectes, than the changes and deſtructions of common weales, vnles ſome good and vertuous men that are louers of the common weale, doe fortune to preuent ſuch vnhappy and euil deſtinies, by procuring ſome good and reaſonable pacification, as the hiſtories do yeald vs infinite examples therof.

The other thing to be conſidered of is this. That euery perticular perſon ought to bethink himſelfe that he hath a ſoule to ſaue, and that he ought to ſeeke the way of his ſaluation. For to what purpoſe ſerueth it to haue gotten honor, glory, riches, and other contentments of the world, to him that followeth the way of damnation to his own wretched ſoule? Now he that is determined to ſeeke the ſaluation of his ſoule, will he ſay that he is contented to beleeue as his Curate doth beleeue? Such reſolution were to fooliſh and beaſtly. Or will it ſuffice him to ſay that he will liue as his Predeceſſors haue done, and follow cuſtome? That were alſo a wronge way; and is already condemned by the Canones heretofore alleadged. Then ought we to determine with our ſelues to follow the truth, and to imbrace the true doctrine of Chriſt Ieſus but lord & Sauior, or elſe we ſhall neuer attayn to ſaluation. And when we be thus reſolued, we muſt take heed that our paſſions doe not blinde the eyes of our vnderſtāding, & cauſe vs to take blacke for white. For if we ſay ſtil, we haue bene led and brought vp in this Religiō, my father & grand fathers? (which were good men) haue died in the ſame, I haue borne Arms and ventred my life to mayntayne it, it were not now for my honor to follow the Religion agaynſt which I haue fought, I am of the opiniō that there is no ill in the religion that I hould, I am now to olde to learne any other, and ſuch other trifling excuſes: we do greatly deceaue our ſelues, for they are nothing auaileable before god, with whom we may not dally in this ſort. For ſuch ſhiftes of deſcant ſerue to no other ond, but to trifle our mindes, and to lull them a ſleep in ignorance and darckenes, that they may haue no ſkill of their ſaluation when they depart this world. What is then to be done that we may come into the path of ſaluation? we muſt ſeek the truth. And where ſhall we find it? euē there whether Chriſt did ſend vs whē he ſayd ſearch the Scriptures.

The father of all mercy, who hath created and made vs for of his owne glory and honor ſake, geue vs all ſuch grace, that being inlightened by hys holy ſpirit, we may be well edified in the pure doctrine of Ieſus Chriſt hys ſonne our Sauiour, to the ende that being true Chriſtians in name and effect, we may liue in good vnitye peace, brotherly and chriſtianly loue together in his holy ſeruice.

Amen.